more nitty gritty

[Mr 4 styles]

Sigh....and I promised my wife I wouldn't run for president.. Of USA dance that is.


I agree with Larinda except that there needs to be no restrictions on the judges from either side

 

[stash]

But why MUST they share judges? Can you find a reason that supports the phrase "NDCA and UsaDance MUST share judges"?

I don't think they must share judges, but must they be restrictive? Feel free to correct me, but wouldn't it provide more jobs for judges if they were free to choose which competitions if there were no restrictions on which competitions they were or were not allowed to judge?

I don't mind there being two organizations, I think that's great. What I don't like is the way they go about "competing" against each other. Again, we are only seeing 2 biased sides of the story, so I don't pretend to know exactly what's going on, but it appears childish to me.

 

[Mr 4 styles]

NDCA DJ??? The Ndca employs him trains him and provides the salary, benefits,and ample retirement plan? Of course not. He is an independent contractor who took a gig and should be able to take any gig he wishes.

This is like Taylor swift snd Katy perry fighting over backup dancers. They can dance for whom they please so long as they don't breach a contract

 

[Mr 4 styles]

I see larindas point and I hope her theory bears out. USA dance also needs to not be under the wdsf thumb either imo.

Who knows.... Perhaps it will end up better for all

And USA dance will be around for way more than five years BD

 

[Cal]

Right and the NDCA registered DJs signed a contract. End of story there.

Are they employment contracts, though?

 

[Bailamosdance]

They neither must nor must'nt. It is all just wants and opinions.



But the fact is...
Look at who is djng on the east coast for Usadance and the collegiate network. What did he have before the split, before an NDCA dj left UsaDance and Collegiate and handed over the work to him? What did he have prior to 2015? What did he have in 2015 and now into 2016?

Look at who was judging and Usadance Nationals this year? What kind of judging work did most of those people have BEFORE the split.

Nothing. Yet they all have jobs now! Most of the judges choose UsaDance because they because they couldn't find work with the NDCA, it is so bottlenecked. And certainly almost all of them were not judging/djing a competition of prestige like a Nationals! The officials are better off now than they were before. Ask them yourself if they want to go back to the way it was before when the judges had 0 and the dj had 2 gigs a year to work.

My goodness there is enough work for everyone. Really. Why must all of it funnel through the NDCA first? NDCA letting go of UsaDance was one of the best things for UsaD and the officials who choose that org. They get all that work without having to stand in line for YEARS behind senior officials who aren't going away anytime soon.

How long do you think UsaD wanted to be beholden and under NDCA's thumb anyway since they were already making plans to start certifying/creating and using their own judges before the split. NDCA just surprised them and called them out on it publicly before they were ready.

Well said and very true! I hope that usa dance stops trying to make this a 'controversy' and its members as soldiers in their war.

 

[s2k]

But why MUST they share judges? Can you find a solid non-debatable reason that supports the phrase "NDCA and UsaDance MUST share judges"?

Look at who was judging and Usadance Nationals this year? What kind of judging work did most of those people have BEFORE the split. Nothing. Yet they all have jobs now! ...And certainly almost all of them were not judging/djing a competition of prestige like a Nationals!

Respectfully, as a competitor, I'd like "most of those people" on the judging panel to adjudicate the pros and RS a few times a year, all across the country; to judge the top pro-am couples at a variety of events of various sizes across the country. etc. These are the judges who know what's supposed to be happening in the style, who know what's the most up to date. Right?

But I don't see that in USADance - especially in the American styles. This is disappointing. WHY were those judges not being hired for events before the split? I'm all for increasing judging opportunity, but if the best, most trained judges remain with NCDA, then the VP of Dancesport for USA Dance should make some adjustments so we members of USA Dance have access to the best adjudicators across the nation too.

 

[Mr 4 styles]

USAdance requiring50 percent wdsf judges may not help the American style either. Don't know

 

[Bailamosdance]

I think that these are the biggest reasons why USA Dance will continue to lose competitive members, and their Nationals less and less important. That, and the fact that they simply cannot compete with a hotel comp as Nationals.

 

[Mr 4 styles]

What do you mean a hotel comp as nationals. Do you suggest a gym? And Ndca am nationals pale in numbers in the senior events and don't even have senior smooth or rhythm

So there is room for a new senior amateur championship ??

 

[Cal]

No one was ever PROMISED a job, ever. In either organization. Yet people knowingly signed the NDCA registration that specified what organizations they were allowed to judge. They have signed them for years and years and years...nothing new here. Except now people don't want uphold their end of the agreement. Can't see what is so hard to understand about that.

That's exactly the point: the registrations are not employment contracts. I asked because for someone to enforce an employment non-compete clause on a worker, it needs to be linked with an employment contract and certain other factors. I attended a seminar on this subject several months ago and had a chance to ask about this very kind of scenario. There were labor-and-employment attorneys conducting the seminar and their answer was quite different than yours.

 

[Dancing Irishman]

That's exactly the point: the registrations are not employment contracts. I asked because for someone to enforce an employment non-compete clause on a worker, it needs to be linked with an employment contract and certain other factors. I attended a seminar on this subject several months ago and had a chance to ask about this very kind of scenario. There were labor-and-employment attorneys conducting the seminar and their answer was quite different than yours.

Is this different than a non-compete though because, in effect, it's only a condition for continued "employment" with the NDCA, not a ban on working for a competitor within a time period following that "employment"? My understanding is that the judges who violate the clause are faced with the choice "pay $XXX or you can't judge NDCA again", not "because you did this, you owe $XXX no matter what."

My understanding is that some companies and/or professions could have prohibitions on moonlighting as SOP for employment without running into legal hurdles (or at least that was the plot of a scrubs episode so I naturally assume it applies to all doctors).

 

[raindance]

There is absolutely no right that anyone, inside UsaD, has to everything inside the NDCA, cultivated and grown within the NDCA system. And vice-versa. At this point each organization needs to see where it is lacking and fill those gaps to present a better product to their customers.

The thing that burns the dancers is, this is a matter of one organization working against another, unwilling to work together or share.

But in many ways dancers (including students, judges, DJs, teachers, and comp organizers) are a community. At least, it feels like that part of the time. That's a welcoming feeling.

When "ours is ours, go get your own" is the attitude (from either or both organizations, not calling you out, Larinda) then it sure doesn't feel like a community. It feels like merely a business where the dancers (students, competitors, and even the officials to some extent) are just the pawns, and the businesses don't even care enough about the dancers/client/workers to avoid making them feel that way. There is no community, and no welcoming feeling for participants. (Or, any community that exists does so in spite of the organizations, not because of them... individuals can still make you feel welcome, of course.)

 

[azntwice]

Of course you deserve a well respected and educated judging panel! And that is what UsaD is working towards. It just takes time to get everyone up to speed.

Any variety of reasons why judges may not have been hired by an NDCA competition. Personality conflicts is probably a big one for some of them. The organizers have to actually like working with you to invite you to judge their event! Some of them just haven't been hired because they arrived at their "judging career" after the bottleneck occurred and there was no way for them to get a foot in the door. Some of them never achieved anything of note in their competitive career and so have a harder time proving their worth as a judge. Either way they will now be trained and educated and cultivated. (And hopefully there will be more polished American Style judges too. That would make me very happy to see!)

I know that Larinda is trying to make the point that maybe the separation was a good thing and there are benefits to it and that USA Dance should not be mooching off NDCA etc. I acknowledge all those points. However, the effect of the separation is that what was previously a symbiotic relationship that benefited dancers and coaches has split due to politics, and one organization is attempting to restrict the rights to work of its members. Is it legal? Maybe -- they signed the paperwork, they knew what they were agreeing to when they became NDCA members. But is it right? I think the answer to that is much more gray. Does it truly benefit anyone except for those who create a monopoly by imposing and impeding the rights of others to dance and work freely?

 

[Bailamosdance]

Remember that it was USA Dance that stormed out of the NDCA. The current VP is also an employee of the WDSF, so there is a lot at stake besides the good of the amateurs.