Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Recent USCA resolution says that "The Board, staff, coaches and HP athletes will not support, encourage or attend any functions or events (including but not limited to bonspiels) at non-member clubs...Any Board member, staff member, coach or HP athlete found to have supported, encouraged or attended any function or event at a non-member club may be asked to step down from that position which he/she holds."

USCA says the intent of this resolution is "to promote and protect the values and benefits of membership."

I am not hearing much support for USCA and this resolution at our club. What do you think?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 96

This resolution is not a complete surprise based on the political environment surrounding the USCA/USOC. And yes, I now consider the organization to be one in the same. I challenge anyone on this blog to refute that. In reality it likely doesn't affect too many clubs. I'm not sure what percentage of clubs that don't pay USCA/USOC dues, but its probably not that high. The resolution probably stems from a couple of incidents over the past year or two, where someone involved in the USCA/USOC helped a nonmember club with ice or clinic. It's a shame that it has got to that point, but not that surprising.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

For what it is worth, Chaska Curling Club is not a member of the USCA. Nonetheless, it was just fine with USCA to have Chaska host the USCA=sponsored College Curling Championship this past spring. However, it apparently was not so fine with USCA when USA and Norway curling teams played an exhibition match this fall at Chaska.

I think you might be surprised by how many clubs do not belong to USCA.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

So much for the long tradition of goodwill tours to Canada and Scotland. Any USA ladies on the Scot Tour next month a current USCA board member, staffer, coach, or HP player? I doubt a single one of the Scottish clubs they will spiel at are members of USCA. (Or is this ban only about clubs in the USA?)

Alice
Founder, IICC*

*See the Laurie Artiss ad pg. 36 in the latest USCA magazine.

Last edited by Alice on 10-27-16 at 02:11AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alice
So much for the long tradition of goodwill tours to Canada and Scotland. Any USA ladies on the Scot Tour next month a current USCA board member, staffer, coach, or HP player? I doubt a single one of the Scottish clubs they will spiel at are members of USCA. (Or is this ban only about clubs in the USA?)

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

I wish it was sarcasm.

http://www.teamusa.org/USA-Curling/...d-by-USCA-Board

While there is language about promoting future member club growth, it has nothing about overseas clubs or what's acceptable support of goodwill tours and very little detail about what are acceptable activities at non-member clubs *except* allowing only such activities only at clubs which are intending to become a member. At least there's a 30 day implementation delay to avoid having to fire anyone with non-member club commitments.

There's no prohibition about supporting curling "growth" events as long as they're not at non-member "clubs". So, if a group of curlers is just a "society" or "drinking fraternity" the current resolution would not necessarily apply now. But if they call themselves a "club" and are not subjected to all USCA and USOC rules, they'll be considered such dangerous things that USCA leaders must shun even friendly spiels with them as if they are lepers in Medieval times.

FWIW: If a club declines to join USCA it likely means its members don't need USCA support because they have other resources. If USCA leaders spiel with them or (gasp!) are members they will just keep themselves in the proverbial closet.

Last edited by Alice on 10-27-16 at 03:54PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2005
Location:
Posts: 59

USCA will still support international travel. Please do not assume or make a statement unless 100% clear. Ask your BOD representative or ask Mr. Lepping if not sure on what this resolution is stating.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2014
Location:
Posts: 3

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlky


This rule has to apply to only US clubs that dont pay dues. And as someone who pays dues and is a member of a dues paying club, I 1000% support this. Since my dues in effect help pay salaries and programs run by USCA, I dont like the idea of non-paying clubs getting benefits. Your clubs wants help, why should it get it is you dont pay.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

Diego,

Since when did the right to free speech die much less the Spirit of Curling which values so highly good fellowship? For the USCA to make non-member curling clubs pariahs for its leadership - even for friendly spiels on curlers' own time and dimes - how is that compatible with the Spirit, a rule which begins even the USCA rule book?

Alice

Last edited by Alice on 10-27-16 at 03:02PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2005
Location:
Posts: 59

Wow!

All I stated was if you had any questions, or unsure of what this resolution was all about, please try and contact your USCA BOD rep or contact Rich Lepping.

No freedoms were harmed in the making of this or any other email.

I try and gather the facts before making conclusions. What a concept.

Jon

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2005
Location:
Posts: 59

quote:

---

Originally posted by bensoder



What benefits are these clubs receiving but not paying for?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2014
Location:
Posts: 3

quote:

---

Originally posted by Diego


Bensoder, please contact your MN rep to USCA, Cindy or Nick. They can better explain. You can find their contact information on USCA website at

http://www.teamusa.org/USA-Curling/...s/Board-Members

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:

---

Originally posted by bensoder



What benefits are these clubs receiving but not paying for?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

Jon,

I'm sure you gathered the facts as did I. The USCA link to the resolution can be read by all.

The idea that we'd need a staff or board member to interpret that link is interesting such as the line of "may" be asked to resign one's leadership job or volunteer slot if a leader dares to spiel at non-member clubs or even "promotes" the shunned ones in any way. What happens to a staffer if they write a USCA magazine article and mention the Margarita Curling Club? (Ye Gods! They're spieling at the Denver CC this year: a card-carrying USCA member club hosting a non-member spiel!)

Maybe some USCA leaders might care to comment on the rather Orwellian Big Brother tone in that link? The calls for "unity", the desire for all curling clubs in the USA to be dues paying members for the sake of "business".... It just strikes me as if USCA wants to be a monopoly or the North Korean goverment. A one party system where citizens dare not express opinions unless they strictly tow the party line.

Alice

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2014
Location:
Posts: 3

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlky


The benefit is simply support from official staff. There is a monetary value associated with the time spent by USCA staff. That monetary value is paid for by dues. It seems reasonable that as such, that type of support is reserved for clubs that pay those dues, or for new growth opportunities. For established clubs that say no to dues to USCA, that is perfectly their right. As such, they need to accept that the consequence if that they lose support from USCA.

On a side note, this might be a myth, but it is my belief that as part of your agreement in joining the USCA that if you run a spiel all participants must be a member of USCA or equivalent (ie they can eb members of Curl Canada).

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:

---

Originally posted by bensoder


Are the non-USCA clubs asking for any of these benefits? What support is being given currently? You mentioned the monetary value associated with the time spent by the USCA staff. Do you have an example of this occurring?


As for the second part... Not true.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlky


The benefit is simply support from official staff. There is a monetary value associated with the time spent by USCA staff.


On a side note, this might be a myth, but it is my belief that as part of your agreement in joining the USCA that if you run a spiel all participants must be a member of USCA or equivalent (ie they can eb members of Curl Canada).

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlky


I have no evidence that they have asked for any of these benefits. As for an example... not sure. I'll throw out a hypothetical.

Lets say that there was a curling club called Curl Quahog that was a non dues paying club. Lets say that Craig Brown, who is a former Olympian, USCA board of directors member and HP funded curler (I know this is a separate pot), went and played in their spiel. Lets then say that Curl Quahog promoted this, took pictures, and used this to generate $10K in revenue.

A dues paying club might then think I bet we could generate some big money for our club if Craig Brown played in our spiel. And after some more thinking then wondered why did USCA allow one of their directors to play at a non-sanctioned club. If they are going to do that, lets rethink this, why are we paying dues? Curl Quahog got a $10K benefit, and we got nothing. I'm not sure that seems fair.

End the hypothetical.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:

---

Originally posted by dbsdbs


Funny but we talked about a similar situation at our USCA member club but we had a different opinion. We think it would be great if, as in your example, Craig Brown wants to curl in a bonspiel at a non-USCA club and that helps generate interest in that club. Craig Brown, or anybody else for that matter, should be able to do that at whichever club he wishes. Our USCA club has absolutely no problem with that idea. To suggest that he should be punished for that is simply ridiculous.

What if the money that was generated in your hypothetical were just what that club needs to keep the doors open. What if the club is struggling, trying to keep dues low to attract members and can hardly afford for forward a big chunk of their dues to the USCA? Would you really prefer that the USCA prevent folks from curling there and helping the club raise some much needed funds, even if doing so might mean the demise of that club?

Ah, the spirit of curling is alive and well.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2016
Location:
Posts: 33

Rich Lepping's editorial in the last US Curling News addressed this issue a bit and also mentioned the issue of "under reporting". I assume this refers to clubs only reporting some of its members to USCA, e.g., only those members who opt-in, only adults, or only those curlers who plan to play in USCA championships.

Does anybody know how much of a problem under-reporting is?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2009
Location:
Posts: 99

Here is another hypothetical:

Let�s say a new club in a large metro area, with potential for many members, leads the USCA on that it will become a member once open, and doesn�t. And during this whole process they used the USCA and its resources to buy rocks through the �rock program�, used its paid ice technicians to help design the floor and plant systems for optimum ice, and used the USCA staff and/or its contacts in general for any help it could garner to get itself going.

If you were the USCA at that point, would you not feel used and betrayed enough to implement a policy to protect its membership benefits? If the USCA just bends over and takes it at that point, it sets up a precedence that other clubs may follow and break their relationship with the USCA.

I guess I don't see the problem with said policy.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by dbsdbs
Recent USCA resolution says that "The Board, staff, coaches and HP athletes will not support, encourage or attend any functions or events (including but not limited to bonspiels) at non-member clubs...Any Board member, staff member, coach or HP athlete found to have supported, encouraged or attended any function or event at a non-member club may be asked to step down from that position which he/she holds."

USCA says the intent of this resolution is "to promote and protect the values and benefits of membership."

I am not hearing much support for USCA and this resolution at our club. What do you think?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:

---

Originally posted by curlky
Should a non-dues paying curling club get direct support in any form (financial or otherwise) from USCA which is funded by dues paying members? And lets ignore exceptions for the time being such as international good will or trying to start up a club.

If you accept a job/position, do you have to accept the contractual obligations of that job?

To me the first question is obvisouly no, and the second question is obviously yes. And I would love to hear an argument to disagree with this.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Framingham, MA
Posts: 15

As a non-profit professional as well, I concur that RockDoc speaks very wisely. Hopefully the powers that be will recognize the errors of their way and make swift adjustments.

__________________
KED-1

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

Agree as well with RockDoc, isn't it better to find out why they left and remedy the situation vs. alienating them even more? I would use those potential board members that are welcome in the club to build bridges to get them back.

Unfortunately there are a lot of clubs wondering what they get for their $30 a person from the USCA. That $5,000 or $8,000 annually over a period of years could easily determine if a club can stay open.

The USCA needs to be more understanding, this heavy handed crap doesn't present very well to the members still paying.

__________________
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire"-Winston Churchill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged