The Disconnect between USA Swimming's membership and the National House of Delegates

There is clearly a disconnect with USA Swimming's membership and the folks that "represent" them at the National House of Delegates each fall.  I have a hard time believing that the membership has had any idea of the legislative choices that have been made on their behalf the last couple of falls.  With background checks and the new Athlete Protection Training we are doing our best to smother volunteerism as much as we possibly can.

Our delegates have been responding...no, they have been reacting to the bad behavior a couple of evil people.  They have been passing all sorts of legislation:

• Stepped up background checks
• Travel Policy Requirements and Recommendations
• Athlete Protection Training

Let me address these one at a time:

Background Checks -

I am in favor of these...for coaches.  Make them as rigorous as you can.  I want to make sure that each of us coaches deserves to be on deck.  I am against the background checks for volunteers.  Unless we are going to do background checks on every single person stepping into the pool area, then I see no point.  Anyone who steps into that pool could be child predator, but at least some of these people are being scrutinized constantly, officials and meet personel.  There is not an official that talks to one of my swimmers without being seen by me or one of my coaching staff (in fact, in our area, the DQ slips are delivered directly to the coaches).

Travel Policy Requirements and Recommendations -

I have written about these in an earlier post, "USA Swimming Travel Policy - Is it more than about protecting swimmers?".  I am against mandating policy.  USA Swimming knows nothing about the travel issues and costs for the smaller and more remote clubs.  USA Swimming should have issued a pamphlet, brochure, or flyer with a series of recommendations for Coach and Swimmer travel.  Each club/team is faced with unique issues when it comes to traveling.  It is ridiculous to think that an organization as big as USA Swimming could possibly know what is good for every situation and every club/team.

Athlete Protection Training -

This is the latest requirement brought upon us by our leadership.  In my blog post "Athlete Protection Training - the latest USA Swimming non-athlete membership requirement" I write a little about the impending requirement and the company with whom USA Swimming is "partnering",  Praesidium.  Again, I think this new requirement could be dealt with by disseminating the information via online video, printed brochure, etc.  But to make it a tested requirement will not help us in our quest to recruit or retain volunteers.  I suppose making coaches take it and test for it could be a requirement.  I am just not sure it is something that should be required for all non-athlete members.  I think they already have to jump through enough hoops to help our sport.

Now there are lots of ways to volunteer to help in our sport: timing, officiating, running the computer systems, hospitality, etc.  I will pick just one example for the purposes of my argument.  For the typical volunteer stroke and turn official to become certified they must:

• pay a $48 for non-athlete membership registration fee
• undergo about 5 hours of training at a clinic or through a home study program
• pass a stroke and turn officials test
• complete an apprenticeship of 6 sessions at 3 different meets  (about 20 hours)
• submit to a background screening at the cost of $39
• take the new online Athlete Protection Training course (about 1 hour) and test

So for a mere $87, approximately 26 hours of training/courses/etc, a background check, and 2 tests you can begin to volunteer to help your child compete in the great sport of swimming.  Is this what we want to be doing?  I already know that at least two of my club's best officials are considering hanging up the white shirts.

Now, I have been maligned by anonymous commenters who tell me that if I don't like the rules then do something about change them.  Fine, this year I am a delegate, representing Alaska Swimming, for the convention in Jacksonville this fall.  I want to encourage all of you who see things my way to join me there.  We need to make a change in these policies before it is too late, and we alienate so many of our volunteers that we can not operate.

Those of you who are like minded need to get involved in the governance of your LSC.  Become delegates to the National HOD.  Stand up and speak when these ridiculous legislative mandates are brought forward.  Don't be afraid to speak up.  We can't let fear govern our organization.  We have got to bring reason back to USA Swimming.  We can't let lawyers and fear of litigation lead us to making rules that are reactive and short-sided.

USA Swimming Travel Policy - Is it more than about protecting swimmers?

As a part of the recent LEAP Level 1 trials that Alaska Swimming has been undergoing, we have found it necessary to address the Team Travel Policy requirements as mandated by USA Swimming as of December 31, 2010.  One of the things that sticks out, and is somewhat problematic for smaller clubs is the requirement that "Regardless of gender, a coach shall not share a hotel room or other sleeping arrangement with an athlete (unless the coach is the parent, guardian, sibling, or spouse of that particular athlete)."

I understand the primary purpose of the requirement is to protect swimmers from potential sexual misconduct by the coaches, and to protect the coach from a crazy swimmer making false accusations.  In fact, USA Swimming goes so far as to recommend "Athletes should not ride in a coach’s vehicle without another adult present who is the same gender as the athlete, unless prior parental permission is obtained." and  "When athletes are age 12 & Under, chaperones and/or team managers may stay with athletes. Where chaperones/team managers are staying in a room with athletes, they should be the same gender as the athlete and written consent should be given by athlete’s parents (or legal guardian)."

This seems like it is getting a little extreme.  Imagine a scenario in which I have only two swimmers qualified for a meet like Nationals...one male, one female.  I would be required to have a female adult chaperone on the trip, just so that she can ride in the car with us.  I would be required to get 3 separate rooms.  I could not stay with my male athlete...but the chaperone would be able to stay with my female athlete.  How does that make any sense?  I mean I have to take a more stringent background check than the chaperone...right?  Some of these requirements and recommendations don't make much sense. (special note: since the writing of this blog post it has been made apparent to me that the chaperone and coach background checks are of the same stringency, my apologies for the inaccuracy).

The bottom line is that there are swimmers/families that I could trust to travel alone with their children.  In today's climate I would no longer even share a suite with a female athlete (though 20 years ago I did), although I would drive alone with them.  I would be willing to share a room with nearly any male swimmer (on a case by case basis) if, because of financial reasons, would not otherwise be able to afford the trip.  Of course none of this matters because USA Swimming does not allow it.

I feel like we have reacted to and then overreacted to the sexual misconduct scandals that have rocked our sport.  We need to have at least some trust...right?

And then there is the conspiracy theorist in me that thinks this is all part of a plot to sell more hotel rooms at the Marriot.  Seriously, think about it, in the scenario that I outlined above, I go from needing two hotel rooms to three...a 50% increase in revenue for Marriot.  It may be a bit of a reach, but at this point I wouldn't put it past Big Brother at USA Swimming.  Something to think about anyway.