A friend and I are in a fascinating discussion that has reached a point where I’d like to get a couple of other experienced opinions.
The discussion revolves around the circumstances where a Chief TD could be removed, especially during a running tournament. My friend, a rather experienced Director, is of the opinion that the Affiliate can remove the TD during a running tournament. While I agree that the Affiliate, which hires or appoints the Chief TD to run their tournament, could “fire” the TD before the tournament, I am of the opinion that during the tournament the Affiliate does not have the authority to dismiss a TD. The President of FIFA doesn’t walk onto the pitch and fire the Referee during the UEFA Cup final.
Now if the Chief TD makes a bad call during a tournament, according to my understanding the player involved can make a claim. If they disagree with the TD’s ruling an Appeals Committee can be formed, or a USCF Special Referee can be called. These bodies can overrule the decision of a Chief TD. An Asst. TD cannot replace a Chief TD in a dispute. No one from the Affiliate can replace the Chief TD in a dispute. This is how I am interpreting the rules. My friend believes the Affiliate can replace the Chief TD during a tournament. What is the opinion here on the forum?
I came up with another scenario that bothered me. Say a Chief TD make a ruling that someone disagreed with. An Appeals Committee was formed. They reviewed the evidence and the decision and ruled AGAINST the Chief TD, but the Chief TD then refused to implement that ruling. My friend says that Appeals Committees can overrule individual decisions of TDs and normally I completely agree with this. But what if the TD gives the Appeals Committee the finger? What happens then? In my view (which I can’t quite document, I admit) would be that the Appeals Committee would then have the authority to appoint a new Chief TD, but I can’t go so far as to defend that view with documentation.
A Chief TD is an effectively an employee of the organizer (that is, the affiliate) and the organizer should be able to remove the Chief TD at any time, including mid-tournament. One can imagine numerous reasons why an organizer might be justified in doing so. For example, suppose the Chief TD is drunk. Suppose the organizer possesses evidence that the Chief TD is in collusion with a player. Possible scenarios are without end.
Whatever his reasons, the organizer may well have to answer for his decision to remove a Chief TD. He may be subject to complaints about his ethics if he removes a Chief TD for reasons that are suspect, such as to substitute his own opinion about the resolution of a dispute for that of the TD, especially if the Chief TD’s decision was within his discretion.
Another TD stepping in to assume the duties of a Chief TD who was removed inappropriately might also have some explaining to do.
When it comes to organizer vs chief TD, the pre-tournament contract (“pre-nup”, written or verbal) is important.
IMHO, a chief TD should insist, as part of the agreement, that the chief TD, not the organizer, makes all rulings and pairings, and cannot be overruled by the organizer. Meddling by the organizer into TD affairs is a far more likely problem than the extreme situation postulated at the top of this thread.
Then after the fact a complaint against the TD can be filed with USCF where, probably, the TDCC will make a ruling regarding the TD’s actions and impose whatever penalties it deems appropriate. This whole story is going to be very rare; therefore, there is no standard practice for dealing with it. Rules and regulations just can’t cover every possibility.
Tim,
First, I can recall a story on this forum from quite some time ago, about a TD who booted a player who also
happened to be the organizer of the tournament. The Organizer’s response was to immediately end the
tournament, and send everyone home. That is pretty effectively “firing” the TD. Second, local scholastics, I
have heard of organizers imposing “child sitting fees”, changing for whatever reason, the start time of the
tournament, the time control of specific rounds, etc. Then the choice to the chief td is either live with these
“changes” (which quite often violate the TLA), quit, or be replaced. This puts the chief td in a very tight
spot-- which is more important-- or causes more “harm” – going with the changes, or one way or the other,
walking out the door, meaning that most often, someone with less experience and expertise takes over??
Generally speaking, is not the first obligation to enforce the TLA, and as a secondary resort to find the least
harmful compromise?? You are right, these cases are quite rare, and thank goodness for that. But it just
seems to me that a MAJOR obligation to finish the event is present to those playing. Call it professionalism.
Naturally, it goes without saying that for an organizer to exercise these tactics on a chief td does lead to
terminal future relationships.
The USCF rates well over 7000 tournaments a year, and the best people can come up with are vague (hence unverifiable) recollections of events that supposedly happened years ago??
Thank you folks. I appreciate the people who chimed in.
I agree that the situation is rare, but it was part of a fascinating discussion that got to a point where didn’t have a good answer.
Brian, your thoughts on a Chief TD being replaced because he was drunk I particularly note because I wasn’t thinking along those types of lines at all.
The premise of the original post seems to be if a TD commits acts that are outrageous, egregious, outside the scope of the rules, neglect or his duties, or engages in malfeasance, then can he be removed. The acts cannot be trivial. They must be damaging to the organization that hired/selected that TD. Under those conditions, an affiliate would be be doing its members a disservice if it did not make a change. The affiliate can then bring the actions to the attention of the TDCC for further disposition.
All of this is hypothetical, and if there was a recent incident with details of gross malfeasance or dereliction, it would certainly have become a cause celebre. Fortunately, most TDs work very hard to give the players a good experience at tournaments, are patient beyond belief, and work to make sure that the players do not notice their efforts. I have heard of only one instance that happened many years ago where two TDs were removed from running a tournament. The head TD and his assistant paired the first round of a tournament and then retired to another room of the building with a bottle of Scotch. They were not seen for the rest of the day. The players, obviously concerned, enlisted a reluctant individual to do the pairings for rounds two and three. The next morning, the TDs returned to the tournament to be met by a club officer who dismissed the pair, who were also club officers, after a “discussion” of their behavior and performance. They had the temerity to ask to be paid. Bad move and with the wrong person. Subsequently, the pair apologized to the club board. No further action was taken, but the chastening was a wake-up call that there were standards of expected duty and performance to the tournament players and the affiliate club that TDs were expected to abide by. The TDs went on to direct further tournaments without a whiff of impropriety, or Scotch.
Presumably the TD would be fired for cause, of course, which could include incompetence as well as malfeasance or dereliction of duties.
Further, in the absence of extenuating circumstances, the organizer (and the players) have the right for the event to be held as advertised. A TD who does something like change the time control or round times without good reason (and hopefully only after consulting with both the players and the organizer) is asking for problems.
Right, lots of luck with all that. I recall once loosing the entire data file for the tournament when I first started
as a TD, trying to fill in for the regular guy. Some of the “fan” comments were along the line of " Well you are
not as good as ------- " At that point, great call, glad you realize this.
Under most circumstances I doubt this is true as worded. Legally the Chief TD is probably NOT an employee (which would create a host of issues, including whether the state labor laws apply) but is in fact an independent contractor.
So the ability to terminate the arrangement by either party and the compensation to be paid in the event of termination, would be determined by the contract. Consider the ability of the Chief TD to quit, for example, in case there is a family emergency.
In all likelihood, most TD contracts do not cover these contingencies. My guess is that some sort of “prudent man standard” would then apply. This is only a guess, and I’m not giving legal advice with any of this comment.
Over the years I’ve been chief TD, chief assistant, section chief, backroom chief, pairing TD and floor TD.
I’ve done about two dozen state K-8, more than a dozen state all-grade, around 8 master challenges, four National Opens, one Pan-Am more than two dozen scholastic nationals, a few St. Charles Opens, maybe 150-200 Chicagoland scholastics, almost a dozen CCA events, and dozens of club events.
The only times I’ve had an actual written, signed contract have been the scholastic nationals this century (and not even all of the ones early in the century).
I have had a lot of e-mails that would probably qualify as a firm commitment without being quite as formal as a contract, but most of the tournaments I’ve done have been through a verbal or more casual request for my services.
An appeals committee’s work is done once its decision is handed down. At that point, the chief organizer resumes complete control of, and responsibility for, an event. If a chief TD refuses to follow an instruction reached by, or with the consent of, the chief organizer, the chief organizer should immediately relieve the chief TD of his/her duties and report the matter to the USCF for potential further action.
The chief TD of an event, unless separately employed by the organizer, is not a de facto employee. At best, the chief TD could be called an independent contractor. Either the chief TD or the chief organizer can terminate the chief TD’s involvement at will. As Jeff Wiewel correctly notes, the USCF is probably the only organizer in the country who gets signed agreements with its TDs. On the other hand, I don’t think I was ever even emailed once about most events. Just a phone call or an in-person conversation was more than enough.
Having said all that…I have to think the OP’s scenario is extremely unlikely to ever come about. First, directors do what they do, because they enjoy it. (Don’t ask me why.) Behaving in such a manner as described in the OP’s scenario almost guarantees that they won’t direct again. Second, most directors and organizers (in those cases where said entities are not one and the same) see eye-to-eye on most everything - which is why the organizer has that particular chief TD on board in the first place, and entrusts that TD with running the tournament.
Like most things, events run smoother when there are existing prior relationships between organizers and those hired under whatever terms. Things generally devolve
to acid when either starts a “my way or the highway approach”
Anecdotally I recall an incident many years ago at a popular annual tournament. It was organized and sponsored for many years by an expert level duffer. This one particular year he was either unable to hire a TD or just decided to do it himself. He was not up to the task, being unable to handle the parings and constant questions that come a TD’s way. If I have the story right, after the first round, with the second round already late starting, several players approached another player who was an experienced TD and asked him to take over. He demurred as he did not think it proper to just take control. So the players then approached the TD with their complaints and either asked for or demanded that he step aside. He agreed if someone was available to do so. At that point, the experienced TD stepped forward, announced his withdrawal from the tournament, and stated that he was now the Tournament Director. A round of applause followed and the tournament proceeded to a satisfactory conclusion.
I really try to stay out of other folks tournaments when my kids or I play, but there was one in which at the
end, my daughter was told that she lost out on the prize money due to tiebreaks. The TD of record was
very amenable (fortunately), and from that point we formed a wonderful relationship to this day, and have
worked many events together. It is interesting that I have heard this same “interpretation” of the rules
re cash and tiebreaks from at least a handful of tds since then.
It appears to me that reality is a non-issue here.
I tried to present a case that may qualify for this topic in other topics.
It happened not long ago.
I was only a direct witness so it was not for me to present it to the USCF.
I only made note as to what happened.
The best response was, “I have extreme difficulty believing”.
And this is understandable. It does not want to be heard here.
Any USCF member may initiate an ethics complaint, so that is not a barrier. If you wish to lodge a complaint about something that happened at a USCF tournament, contact the Ethics Committee. You may review the procedures for doing so in the USCF Code of Ethics. Of particular interest will be Section 7.
Of course, you’ve previously claimed that USCF does not want to hear complaints or get feedback. I gave you sources of information that contradict said claim. If you chose not to use those sources before, I am not sure you will choose to use them now. But I can always hope.