The key to any discipline procedures your local association might employ is having a very clear set of expectations for behavior and conduct. Those “rules” will be in line with your association’s goals or objectives and become the basis for disciplinary actions when the rules are broken. Those rules may be laid out in the form of association bylaws, a published code of expected conduct, or even something as simple as a “do-don’t” list in the context of an officials’ handbook. Along with the rules, the consequences for non-compliance should also be articulated. Until and unless your members have the opportunity to know what standards they’re expected to follow, any discipline meted out will be capricious and subject to dispute.

For all manners of discipline, and especially with adults, a model of progressive discipline appears to work best. Progressive discipline is characterized by using a tiered set of consequences designed to get your member’s attention so that he or she understands that a performance problem or opportunity for improvement exists, and understands that continued non-compliance will result in more severe consequences. The following is an example of such a progressive model. 

Verbal warning

Usually, the first tier of discipline is a verbal warning (“Hey, Jim … you missed that mandatory meeting last Tuesday. Remember there’s a make-up session this Wednesday.”). That amounts to an informal notification that something’s amiss — and provides a means to set things straight again.

Reprimand

The next level will be a written notification, clearly identified as a “letter of reprimand,” informing Sue that her annual dues payment is late. That is a formal notification that (a) becomes an association record, and (b) informs Sue that additional sanctions are possible if she doesn’t write a check soon.

Probation

The third level of discipline is the notification of probation, which is a predetermined period during which the member and his or her behavior/activity is scrutinized. Implicit in probation is an expectation of proper conduct and behavior and potentially escalating penalties. That is, during probation, what might have earned a verbal warning under normal circumstances may lead to harsher penalties. Rich has failed his rules test for two straight seasons and you’ve notified him that he’s been put on probation. You may set that up to limit scrutiny to Rich’s rules test score next year, or you might want to expand it to cover Rich’s adherence to all membership standards. Setting the example aside for a moment, a lot of that decision-making will depend upon the infraction. Regardless of how you might set up probation, your notification must inform Rich of exactly what’s expected and also inform him that failure to comply with terms of the probation will potentially result in more serious consequences.

A higher level of disciplinary consequence will be suspension, a temporary revocation of the rights and privileges of membership in your association. Often that will be equivalent to suspending the member’s opportunities to actually officiate. That revocation may be for a month, two months or an entire season depending on the violation of conduct.

Finally, when everything else has failed to correct the issue, the nuclear option —expulsion, which represents a permanent revocation of association membership and with it most likely, the ability to officiate games.

Depending on how your association is constituted, you may have other potential ways of dealing with members who have difficulty keeping up. Some associations place officials into classification levels reflecting experience, performance on tests, field observations, etc. For those, a potential way for dealing with issues of performance is demotion to a lower classification — either temporarily or permanently. That would come after attempts to work collaboratively with an under-performing member have failed. That is obviously more applicable to cases of inadequate performance at a specific level, rather than violation of bylaws. 

In order to make all of it real, and to make it functional, you might want to consider establishing a discipline committee, which will gather information related to the member and his/her transgressions, evaluate past history, investigate precedents and ultimately make recommendations to your executive committee (or other governing body) on proposed disciplinary action.

The following guiding principles for carrying out disciplinary action are adapted from University of California at San Francisco’s human resources department:

Maintain a professional manner by keeping the disciplinary process confidential between the association and the member.

Make a careful diagnosis of the problem to determine whether disciplinary action is appropriate 

Provide specific examples of performance discrepancies or rule violations so the member fully understands what needs correction.

Allow the member ample opportunity to explain so that you have all facts. 

Make sure discipline is the appropriate tool. Would coaching or formal evaluation be sufficient to get the member’s attention? 

When you take disciplinary action, make sure the punishment fits the crime.

Help your member improve performance by providing specific recommendations and requirements.

Communicate clearly so the member understands the consequences if performance or conduct does not improve. 

If your association desires to have an effective disciplinary procedure, all parties have important roles to play. The association through referendum has the overall responsibility of establishing bylaws. The governing body for the association will communicate rules to members, develop a system for enforcing them and, if desired, establish a disciplinary committee. That committee will be responsible for implementing and executing the discipline procedure, and for recommending action in specific cases brought before it. To the extent that all parties perform their roles effectively, the disciplinary procedure will be effective, well-communicated and understood, and there is a good chance that member non-compliance can be significantly reduced.

This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice.

The post Spell Out Your Discipline Procedures appeared first on Referee.com.

Unfortunately, officials are human beings and subject to the same flaws and foibles as anyone else. You’d like to think that while you might miss a call here and there, none of your brother or sister officials would ever cross the line that would require some sort of discipline, punishment or even expulsion. However, although the Tim Donaghys and other bad apples of the officiating barrel are few and far between, they do exist and associations need to be ready to deal with them appropriately.

The key to an effective code of conduct is to establish clear standards; ensure all members are informed of the standards and hold everyone equally accountable to those standards. The key to an effective enforcement mechanism is to establish a transparent process that allows for the member to be fully informed of what it is he or she is alleged to have done or failed to do and what consequences might result; provide the member an opportunity to tell his or her side of the story and designate an unbiased person or persons who will decide if the allegations are substantiated and what penalties should be imposed.

Standards and the enforcement mechanism must be part of your association’s bylaws.

Naturally, the standards and the enforcement mechanism need to be set out in writing and part of the association bylaws, particularly since most states require the bylaws to address how someone can join or be removed from an association. An attorney’s advice will be of great help in developing the proper language. In reviewing an association’s disciplinary action against a member, the courts will first focus on whether there were well-defined standards of conduct that gave the member adequate notice of what was acceptable behavior. They will then turn to see if the association had a fair process set forth for dealing with the problem and if it followed its own rules. Associations most commonly get in trouble by failing to set clear standards or by not following their own rules.

Obviously, the “punishment” needs to fit the “crime.” An official who misses a single game assignment would be treated differently than one who arrives drunk or curses a coach. Most groups have a relatively simple fine system for missed games, with the possibility of an appeal to the board or a committee. More serious offenses can lead to punishments ranging from heavier fines and suspensions to removal.

Some associations have discipline or ethics committees whose purpose is to address member misconduct. Others place that responsibility on the board. A separate committee has the advantage of at least appearing to be more neutral, since in most cases it will be the board recommending disciplinary action. In fact, the best practice is for all complaints against members to come through the board before being referred to the disciplinary committee.

If an official acts in a way that leads the board to conclude he or she should be sanctioned, it’s not going to be pretty. The official will be offended and angry at the allegation. If the board seeks to suspend or expel the official, it will be even worse because of what may be a significant financial impact in the form of lost games fees. That certainly ups the ante and increases the chances litigation will follow.

In order to maximize the association’s chances of prevailing, it should make sure its code of conduct and disciplinary process are clearly described in the bylaws and then meticulously follow its own rules.

This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice.

The post Set and Enforce Member Standards appeared first on Referee.com.

Nobody wants to think about disciplining a fellow official, but putting on a striped or blue shirt doesn’t make us less subject to human frailties than anybody else (even the coaches we regularly butt heads with). So, planning for what to do when an imperfection grows into a major problem is a necessary evil. In other words, it’s no fun to think about dealing with wayward members, but a responsible association must have a policy and procedure for discipline. That policy needs to be in writing in the bylaws, so that everyone understands the rules and no one can complain that you’re just making it up as you go along in order to throw him or her under the bus. 

One size does not always fit all when it comes to establishing a disciplinary program. The size of the group, the nature of the membership and even the sport may all play a role in defining the exact rules that should be adopted. 

For example, an NCAA D-I football officials’ group may want to have a different approach to discipline than a local group of recreation and junior high soccer officials. Nevertheless, there are some general principles that always apply. 

The discipline process really involves two steps. The first is to determine the actual facts. Just because an allegation is made does not mean it’s true. The second is to determine what corrective action is appropriate in light of the facts. In many instances, that is a much more difficult task, since it is so subjective. 

The fact-finding process should first allow for a neutral fact finder. It might be a member of the association who was previously identified and elected or appointed for a term. It might be a committee or an individual who is appointed to look into the specific allegation. The second thing the fact-finding process must provide is an opportunity for the official to be informed of the allegations against him or her and to tell his or her side of the story. Of course, the official is entitled to know not just the alleged facts, but the standard of conduct or performance he or she has violated. For that reason, it’s important that associations clearly state their standards of conduct in their bylaws.  

As long as the investigation process includes a neutral fact finder and an opportunity to respond, everything else can be adjusted, based on the severity of the case. In the example, it may be that the fact finder wants to talk to the other guys on the crew and the principal. Or perhaps the official wants to offer a statement from the cop who responded. 

The rule of reason applies and it’s important to have a fact finder who can make sure everyone gets heard but not let the process run amok and turn a simple dispute into a federal case.

Most of the time, the facts can be established with some degree of certainty. If the case turns into a he said-she said and the fact finder really can’t figure out what happened, the benefit of the doubt generally goes to the official. But remember, it is not a criminal case and we’re not talking about beyond a reasonable doubt. If the allegation is more likely true than not true, it should be considered established for the purposes of discipline. Only in a 50-50 just-can’t-tell case does the “tie” go to the official.

Once the facts are established, if they show a violation of the standards of conduct, the association must determine the appropriate corrective action. That might be done by or upon a recommendation from the fact finder. Typically, the board of directors will vote on any corrective measures. Obviously, any member of the board who might have a personal interest in the case should not take any part. 

The official should be offered an opportunity to be heard on the question of punishment also, although in most cases, he will have addressed that topic at the same time he made his case about the violation. The types of corrective actions available to the board might include reprimands, fines, suspensions, additional training, and dismissal. However, it’s very important that when and how they may be imposed is set out in the bylaws.

The primary factors that should control any association’s approach to discipline are to have a process that (1) provides fair notice to the accused official, (2) gives him or her a reasonable opportunity to respond, (3) has an impartial fact finder and decision maker, and (4) is set out in the bylaws. 

Dealing with allegations that an official did something seriously wrong is probably the most unpleasant part of association leadership. If you have a proper discipline plan in place, you won’t have to ask, “What do we do now?” You can say, “Well, Mr. Principal, I’m really sorry to hear that, but can honestly tell you we have a system in place that will allow us to quickly and fairly gather the facts and take any appropriate corrective action.”

This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice.

The post How to Develop a Discipline Program appeared first on Referee.com.