USA Dance Suspended from NDCA

Official Release from USA Dance Inc. Regarding NDCA Suspension 7-13-11

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

TO: ALL MEMBERS OF USA DANCE, OUR ASSOCIATES, SUPPORTERS, AND MEMBERS OF THE DANCE COMMUNITY AT LARGE


FROM: President Lydia Scardina, On Behalf of USA Dance, Inc,

Official Release from USA Dance Inc. Regarding NDCA Suspension 7-13-11

USA Dance wishes to inform you about actions taken at the recent National Dance Council of America (NDCA) semi-annual meeting in Dallas on July 9, 2011 as it pertains to USA Dance, as well as the decisions made by the Governing Council of USA Dance in response to those actions.

USA Dance representatives present at the July 9 NDCA meeting were myself and our Vice President of DanceSport Ken Richards. Without any notice prior to arriving at the NDCA meeting, a demand was made by the NDCA that USA Dance immediately move the date and location of the World DanceSport Federation (WDSF) Adjudicators' Congress that USA Dance had previously scheduled to take place following the Ohio Star Ball in Columbus, Ohio on November 20, 2011. The stated reason for this demand was the recent NDCA policy that no WDSF event may be held in conjunction with an NDCA event. Please note that USA Dance is a member of the WDSF, which is the new name for the former IDSF, International DanceSport Federation. The WDSF has a membership of over 88 countries around the world, and it is recognized by the International Olympic Committee as the governing body for DanceSport worldwide.

USA Dance, as the official WDSF member in the U.S. had been designated as the organizer of the WDSF Adjudicators' Congress in this country. All judges who desire to judge WDSF competitions around the world are required every two years to attend a WDSF Adjudicators' Congress in order to maintain their current WDSF adjudicator's license.

It should also be noted that this Congress was to be held entirely at USA Dance expense after the conclusion of the Ohio Star Ball

During the NDCA meeting, USA Dance responded that it would need to consult with its Governing Council on the matter of the WDSF Congress and would be in a position to respond within a week. However, the NDCA demanded that USA Dance give immediate assurance that it would move the WDSF Adjudicator's Congress to a different date and time. When USA Dance again reiterated that it must first consult with its Governing Council of USA Dance, the NDCA moved to a vote to suspend USA Dance's membership in the NDCA without providing USA Dance representatives with the requested week's time or indeed any time at all for purposes of consultation. USA Dance abstained from this vote, which was passed by the other members of the NDCA without any further discussion of remedy, grievance procedures or time duration.

Unfortunately, the NDCA has suspended USA Dance's membership without following its own Constitution and By Laws. The By Laws of the NDCA state that in the event of a complaint against a member organization, the Secretary of the NDCA shall notify the president of the organization against whom a complaint has been filed by certified mail, who will then have an opportunity to respond. This procedure was not followed with regard to the action taken against USA Dance. No letter was sent to the president of USA Dance outlining the complaint, indicating the remedy sought and the action the NDCA was planning to take in the event of noncompliance. Had the NDCA followed its own By Laws, the USA Dance Governing Council would have had an opportunity to discuss the matter and formulate a reply, and the USA Dance representatives would have come to the NDCA meeting prepared to discuss it.

What happened instead was that the USA Dance representatives were placed in the untenable position of having to either immediately acquiesce to a course of action or face retribution. In fact, the action taken against USA Dance was not taken because USA Dance said it would not move the Congress, but because USA Dance expressed its desire to consult with the rest of its Governing Council before providing a response to the NDCA.

USA Dance is the National Governing Body for DanceSport in the United States, recognized by both the WDSF and the U.S. Olympic Committee. It has a long standing written agreement with the NDCA guaranteeing its full autonomy as the sole governing body of amateur ballroom dancing in the U.S. to the extent required by the USOC.

USA Dance is an all-volunteer, democratic organization that serves both DanceSport athletes and those professions that work with athletes, as well as social dancers and dance supporters who are members and affiliates of its 180 chapters nationwide. USA Dance members have a voice and a vote in their organization.

Furthermore, USA Dance has a clearly defined discipline and grievance procedure that is used to resolve issues in dispute among its members. It does not take preemptory action against individuals or bodies without following the proper established procedures, and always provides a fair and equitable opportunity for parties to respond before taking action.

Since our beginning, USA Dance has assisted athletes, judges and organizers who have faced disciplinary action by other bodies, so we take very seriously any action taken against our own organization. Therefore, when a demand is made to move an already announced and planned event that is four and a half months in the future, USA Dance will only consider such an action or change in a thoughtful, measured and deliberative manner, and not under threat of suspension.

USA Dance informed the NDCA that it would be calling for a meeting of its Governing Council, which represents the full membership of the organization. That teleconference was held Tuesday evening, July 12, 2011, at which time the matter in question was thoroughly discussed.

During that teleconference, the Governing Council of USA Dance unanimously made the following decisions:

1. Given the NDCA's move to immediately discipline, fine or otherwise punish judges, lecturers, organizers or other officials who participate in WDSF competitions or congresses, the Governing Council of USA Dance has determined that holding the planned WDSF adjudicators' Congress on November 20, 2011 in Columbus Ohio would not be productive at this time. Therefore, the Governing Council of USA Dance concluded that the WDSF Adjudicators' Congress should be postponed to another place and time where it can better serve those interested in obtaining a WDSF Adjudicators' License. The Governing Council believes it is the decision of each individual judge, holding a WDSF judging license or wishing to obtain one, to determine if, when and where they will participate in future WDSF Congresses, as such opportunities for participation exist in numerous places around the globe.

The Governing Council of USA Dance urges the NDCA to reconsider its actions to take punitive action against its own registrants, many of whom are respected friends and colleagues of both the NDCA and USA Dance, as this is not in the best interest of either organization. Such threat of action by the NDCA against dance professionals would only generate considerable unhappiness and ill will, and again USA Dance does not believe that this is in the best interest of all participants, who celebrate our country's wealth of opportunity, where individuals can participate openly and freely in activities of their choice.


2. Furthermore, the Governing Council of USA Dance has instructed that the NDCA be sent a letter outlining its belief that the NDCA actions taken to indefinitely suspend USA Dance were not consistent with the procedures governing the suspension of member organizations established within the NDCA Constitution, and, therefore, the suspension of USA Dance by the NDCA is considered null and void.
USA Dance recognizes that at such time as the NDCA wishes to suspend one of its member organizations, as stipulated by its own bylaws, it must first provide advance written notice and provide full opportunity for a proper response. Since that process was not followed with regard to the action brought against USA Dance, the vague and indefinite suspension period established and the possible ramifications of the actions that may flow from that suspension, USA Dance believes that it would be prudent for the NDCA to immediately rescind the suspension.

We are aware of the growing animosity which the NDCA holds toward the WDSF, and find it is most unfortunate that USA Dance has been caught in the middle of a battle it did not create and which it believes can and should be avoided. Whereas less than a year ago, the WDSF Adjudicators' Congress was held annually at the Embassy Ball, an NDCA-sanctioned event, and judges were able to attend freely and to judge WDSF competitions as well as all USA Dance competitions without fear of reprisal, now there are growing restrictions on judges, organizers and other officials and a growing attempt by the NDCA to restrict the ability of USA Dance to conduct the activities for which it was founded.

This is not in the best interest of DanceSport in the United States, and we sincerely hope that the NDCA will reconsider its strategy and pursue a more positive path that will help and not hinder the growth and further development of DanceSport in America.


Lydia Scardina, President
USA Dance Inc.

First of all, a well written response. Well done. It sounds like in the end they wish to work with the NDCA, which should be good for dancers in the USA. I have a feeling there may be some additional "background" that led up to this. While it might have been a surprise at the meeting, there surely had to be an awareness of potential for problems, and previous discussions to that end. Hopefully now there will be desire on the part of both parties to strengthen ourselves here in the United States versus allow external factors harm dancesport in the USA.

DanceMentor said:

First of all, a well written response. Well done. It sounds like in the end they wish to work with the NDCA, which should be good for dancers in the USA.

Click to expand...

Agree

SDsalsaguy said:

I would have to agree with Warren that most college teams and competitions in the USA have never been run under the YCN banner (and thus lack any connection to USA Dance). Likewise, the current move by the NDCA is unlikely to change the collegiate circuit... but the wording of the NDCA resolution certainly allows for sanctioning those (judges/DJs/etc.) working at any non-NDCA sanctioned event.

Click to expand...

Right. If it turns out that NDCA adjudicators are restricted from USA Dance events, they are likely to be restricted from college comps as well, since both types would then be non-NDCA sanctioned.

Akita said:

Quote from:
Official Release from USA Dance Inc. Regarding NDCA Suspension 7-13-11

USA Dance is an all-volunteer, democratic organization that serves both DanceSport athletes and those professions that work with athletes, as well as social dancers and dance supporters who are members and affiliates of its 180 chapters nationwide. USA Dance members have a voice and a vote in their organization.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that the social dancers and dance supporters are now mentioned as an afterthought. Where do those of us who compete just as a hobby or just for fun fit in? I don't consider myself to be an athlete. I don't understand why the organization that serves as an advocate for amateur dancers can lobby to allow full time paid teachers to compete against those who do it for a hobby and just for fun. I think it is only a small minority of people who know or even care about the Olympic debate, and all the suspension drama. Half of us who still attend USA Dance organized socials still call it USABDA, and are far removed from this discussion. These discussions hit them years down the road when we get to a competition final and find full time working teachers in the amateur heats, when others just train an hour or so a week and compete for fun. It's makes competing less fun. One would think an amateur advocate organization would prevent this from happening. Why is invlovement in the WDSF and the Olympics so necessary? If USA Dance has it's main focus on this, then there is a need for a new Amateur Association to lobby for the interests of those who dance for fun as true amateurs, who dance as a hobby.

Akita said:

hmmmm ...... for those dancing am/am, NDCA offers little/no competition. As NDCA events, I have 1 or 2 other am couples to dance against if I'm fortunate. At USA Dance events, it can easily be more than a dozen.

Click to expand...

Also, for senior 2 and 3 couples, IDSF comps in Europe offer a lot of competition: we are talking 70 to 90 couples. WDC hardly has any comps for these age categories.

Cavalier said:

It seems to me that the social dancers and dance supporters are now mentioned as an afterthought. Where do those of us who compete just as a hobby or just for fun fit in? I don't consider myself to be an athlete. I don't understand why the organization that serves as an advocate for amateur dancers can lobby to allow full time paid teachers to compete against those who do it for a hobby and just for fun. I think it is only a small minority of people who know or even care about the Olympic debate, and all the suspension drama. Half of us who still attend USA Dance organized socials still call it USABDA, and are far removed from this discussion. These discussions hit them years down the road when we get to a competition final and find full time working teachers in the amateur heats, when others just train an hour or so a week and compete for fun. It's makes competing less fun. One would think an amateur advocate organization would prevent this from happening. Why is invlovement in the WDSF and the Olympics so necessary? If USA Dance has it's main focus on this, then there is a need for a new Amateur Association to lobby for the interests of those who dance for fun as true amateurs, who dance as a hobby.

Click to expand...

I do not think there are any plans for pros to compete against am couples, my understanding, WDSF professional division is similar to WDC, pros compete agains pros and am couples compete against am couples. Im I mistaken?

jerseydancer said:

I do not think there are any plans for pros to compete against am couples, my understanding, WDSF professional division is similar to WDC, pros compete agains pros and am couples compete against am couples. Im I mistaken?

Click to expand...

I think what Cavalier means that AMs who gets paid to compete with his/her AM partner who is lower level than him/her. So the AM partner who gets paid does not dance for fun, but dance for making money like professional. It does not mean that professionals compete against amateurs technically, and I guess it wasn't the subject that people officially talk about, but it was known to a lot of people.

Larinda McRaven said:

The health insurance is really a non issue. Every person is totally free to secure their health insurance with or without a group. And being in a group does not exactly make it cheaper or easier than being an individual. Working for a studio that pays half of it for you and does all the calling and paperwork makes it cheaper and easier. But for a self employeed individual it really doesn't matter either way. You either jump through hoops to get or or you don't, but that has nothing to do with the NDCA or USADance.

Click to expand...

I wasn't suggesting that individual dancers are completely unable to obtain insurance. But I had in mind a SAG/Equity/Writers Guild of America kind of model, where a group plan could be offered to members.

Cavalier said:

It seems to me that the social dancers and dance supporters are now mentioned as an afterthought. Where do those of us who compete just as a hobby or just for fun fit in? I don't consider myself to be an athlete. I don't understand why the organization that serves as an advocate for amateur dancers can lobby to allow full time paid teachers to compete against those who do it for a hobby and just for fun. I think it is only a small minority of people who know or even care about the Olympic debate, and all the suspension drama. Half of us who still attend USA Dance organized socials still call it USABDA, and are far removed from this discussion. These discussions hit them years down the road when we get to a competition final and find full time working teachers in the amateur heats, when others just train an hour or so a week and compete for fun. It's makes competing less fun. One would think an amateur advocate organization would prevent this from happening. Why is invlovement in the WDSF and the Olympics so necessary? If USA Dance has it's main focus on this, then there is a need for a new Amateur Association to lobby for the interests of those who dance for fun as true amateurs, who dance as a hobby.

Click to expand...

Cavalier,

I am so glad to see somebody speaking for the social ballroom dancers. They pay dues, too. It is not all about competition, the Olympics, whatever. It is my belief that USA Dance needs to pay more attention to the social dancers. In return, a strong social dance contingency could support USA Dance through difficult times like these.

I have people asking me what on Earth is wrong with USA Dance. What is ND-whatever and what does this have to do with the world, because they thought this was a USA thing. I have friends asking me if this means their chapter dances are suspended. People do not read long e-mails like that, and they jump to the worst conclusions. This is a very bad time for USA Dance to shake the confidence of and/or confuse the social ballroom dance branch of their organization.

It seems obvious to me that the database should have been sorted. Send the wall of words to the professional and competitive membership. Send the social dancers something short and sweet like, “You may have heard that USA Dance had their membership suspended from an organization called the National Dance Council of America (NDCA). Rest assured that this does not "suspend" the activities of your local chapter. We appreciate your continued support of your local social dances. If you would like to read more, visit this link (link to wall of words)”

Yes, it's true many folks do not read what is sent to them, or 'imagine the worst', but that is an issue that they personally have (and probably exists in many other areas of their lives). The email from USA Dance, if you read it, was extremely articulate and explained the situation very well, IMHO. Issues that happen like this impact everyone in the organization in some way, and simplifying it might mean that an incomplete picture of the situation causes misunderstandings.

I'd rather have all the facts. You'd need to send out 10 different emails to all the different factions that are affected in different ways - social dancers who also compete, competitors, teachers (yes, pros can be USA Dance members), etc. Maybe (snark on!) we need to send out an email to everyone to ask them to actually read entire emails before commenting or assuming? (snark off)

Larinda McRaven said:

And I have spent the past two weeks speaking almost daily to my insurance broke to negotiate a plan for the PDF to offer insurance to dancers that are members. NDCA can't offer plans because dancers are not Members.... But we are members of PDF, if we choose and pay our dues. There are lots of glitches with getting the insurance up and running. And mostly it is because PDF (which is an association) doesn't hold that same FISCAL status as SAG (which is a union). They aren't equal. And If I do get the insurance up for everyone, it won't be the same or probably even any cheaper. And there for ... not even worth it.

Click to expand...

Thanks for elaborating...and thank YOU for the work you're doing. I take it AGMA is not an option?

For the self employed in Massachusetts, it used to be possible to get health insurance through the Massachusetts Businessman's Association that was considerably less expensive than getting insurance as an individual. I don't know if that's still true, and it still wasn't what I'd call cheap.

And the July 15, 2011 NDCA Press Release:

July 15, 2011

For Immediate Release:

National Dance Council of America:

It has been NDCA's intent not to enter into rhetoric and recrimination in regard to the suspension of its member USA Dance (USAD,) thus the releases put out by the Council have been short and purely factual. It would be hard to say the same of the most recent release from USAD, therefore it has become necessary to respond in some length to the misleading accusations published on Wednesday evening. However, first it should be said that, while the two associations have had their differences, NDCA has been a strong supporter of USAD since its inception by Normand Martin, and through many ups and downs in its fortunes over the years, as even a quick perusal of the association's history will clearly show.

The NDCA and its members are professional organizations; the members of the organizations are also professionals. Dancing is their livelihood, not their hobby: it is the way they pay their bills, raise and educate their children, and put food on their tables. Understandably then, their point of view may be somewhat different from that of an organization of self labeled 'volunteers' whose job security and quality of life does not depend on the business of dance or dancing. NDCA is happy to include among its registrants many amateur dancers; we value their participation and look forward to continuing to welcome them at NDCA competitions and championships.

Contrary to the statement made by USAD, NDCA has made no attempt to restrict the ability of USA Dance to conduct its activities; USA Dance is free to do what it decides to do. However, in the matter of the WDSF Congress USAD knowingly disregarded the rules of the NDCA, of which it is a member, and of which it had full knowledge. The published 2011 NDCA Rule Book contains a statement as follows: "NDCA organizers are not allowed to accept sanction or recognition from any other organization unless approval is given by the NDCA. It is the decision of this council that approval under this rule will not be given to IDSF sanctioned events for the foreseeable future."

On January 30, 2011, the USAD Dance Sport VP, Mr. Ken Richards, wrote to the president of NDCA regarding the IDSF congress, asking " ... will the NDCA object to another venue such as Ohio Star Ball? In other words does the new restriction only cover IDSF competitions?" The reference to "...another venue...." being a reference to the fact that IDSF Congresses have been held for the past 5 years at the Embassy Ball, as mentioned in the USAD Wednesday release. Indeed, the owners of the Embassy Ball have been extremely supportive of USA Dance, organizing and hosting these congresses for USAD at their own cost, supplying the venue and the services of Embassy expert judges to lecture, free of any charge to USAD. Further, Embassy Ball organized and completely sponsored the entire professional show of six couples for the USA Dance organized World Championship in Brooklyn last fall. Given that one of the owners of Embassy Ball is the NDCA president, these are hardly the actions of a professional organization intent on restricting USA Dance.

Mr. McDonald replied to Mr. Richards the same day, Jan 30, 2011, "At this point in time we are not prepared to have any of our NDCA organizers involved in any IDSF activity." A Judge's Congress is a sanctioned IDSF, now WDSF, activity where approval is given by IDSF/WDSF and is a required qualification for an IDSF/WDSF judge's license. Nothing further was heard from USAD about this matter. Evidently, a decision was taken to completely ignore this correspondence and move ahead without regard to, and in full knowledge of, how the professional organization felt, and in direct contradiction to NDCA's clearly stated position. NDCA learned of the congress through USAD's recent advertising.

Also contrary to the Wednesday release, NDCA has not moved "...to immediately discipline, fine or otherwise punish judges, lecturers, organizers or other officials who participate in WDSF competitions or congresses...." thereby inferring that the NDCA is the big bad guy. On the contrary, on Wednesday morning, several hours before this long USAD release was posted, NDCA put out a release telling its professionals that, despite USAD's suspension, they may continue to do following this action, exactly what they were doing before it, "to abide by the current 2011 Rule Book." USAD president, Ms Lydia Scardina, was sent a courtesy copy of this release prior to its posting, and therefore had full knowledge of this position before USAD's erroneous statements were posted. NDCA's Rule Book, as it relates to USA Dance and judges, has not changed in very many years.

Further, on Tuesday July 12, 2011, a full day before the USAD Wednesday release, in a conversation with one of the professionals contracted as a lecturer by USAD for the WDSF Congress, the NDCA president instructed that professional "to fulfill your contract with USAD." Once again then, the statements made by USAD demonstrate misleading rhetoric at best. NDCA counts among its registered professional judges a number that have chosen to become IDSF judges, who currently hold IDSF licenses, and who are current professional members of USA Dance. NDCA has made no statement regarding these licenses; it has stopped no one from becoming licensed by IDSF, and several of the NDCA officers hold, or have held, IDSF licenses.

For more that sixty three years, NDCA has worked diligently to promote ballroom dancing through its teachers, registrants, organizations, and competition organizers; for the past forty five years the NDCA has been a member of the World Dance Council, formerly ICBD. There have been many changes over the years in the transition of the International Council of Ballroom Dancers to World Dance Council, just as there have been many changes in the transition of the International Council of Amateur Dancers (ICAD) to the International Dance Sport Federation and, most recently, to World Dance Sport Federation, this is to be expected. The lines between professional and amateur have been blurred so as to be almost impossible to determine, but NDCA and WDC have always been the professional organizations, administering to the profession, and it is true that the NDCA leadership have tried to have world bodies stay out of USA affairs, stating strongly "Leave us alone!" and managing for a very long time to do just that, since WDC has never interfered in the NDCA's relationship with USA Dance or with NDCA business in America.

However, when IDSF became WDSF earlier this year, its change of name solidified its new position and vision of itself as an international body that now incorporates a professional division, that runs professional competitions, qualifies judges, and bans couples and judges from participating, not only in events in Europe, but now in the USA too. The world's leading amateur champions were banned from participating in the Grand Slam in the USA; judges contracted by USA Dance for the IDSF World Championships in Brooklyn were banned one week prior to the event, and were removed by USAD.

This professional division was formerly the International Professional Dance Sport Council. IPDSC was an independent and completely autonomous professional body, which intended to work in harmony with the IDSF. The NDCA was a member of the IPDSC under the registered name of 'Dance Sport America.' In October 2009, the IDSF completely absorbed the IPDSC into its main body, thereby making it the IDSF professional division: Dance Sport America resigned immediately, therefore to say that this current issue is one between NDCA and WDSF is untrue; NDCA has no relationship with WDSF. USA Dance is its member, with whom it has a relationship; its professional relationship is with WDC.

In closing, there is naturally a great deal more to this small history lesson than can be discussed here and there are always two sides to every story. NDCA recognizes that an atmosphere of mutual respect and cooperation should prevail in all its dealings with both its members and all other organizations, and had expected that USA Dance and NDCA would negotiate to iron out their differences in just such an atmosphere, not the current one of public pillorying with unfounded and misleading rhetoric as initiated by USA Dance with their Wednesday release.

Click to expand...

Warren J. Dew said:

For the self employed in Massachusetts, it used to be possible to get health insurance through the Massachusetts Businessman's Association that was considerably less expensive than getting insurance as an individual. I don't know if that's still true, and it still wasn't what I'd call cheap.

Click to expand...

Massachusetts now has at least one affordable option depending on what your annual income is, I believe. They started that when they made it a law that you have to have health insurance.