Background checks

[MRG9999]

 

 

Just for clarification, PIAA has required it of officials who became certified after 2007.  It is a once and done process.

 

Yes, the PIAA (Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association) is very strict on obtaining these checks. I think it is for the best of all parties.  You know who you are dealing with once these checks are completed.  These checks consist of FBI background and fingerprint checks, state child abuse background check, and state police criminal background check. True, it is not a fool proof system, but it gives you a little piece of mind knowing that the officials are subject to this.

 

 

Yes, PIAA is quite stringent on these checks due to the 2008 Pittsburgh Post gazette investigative article by Bill Moushey that revealed an embarrassing number of former and active PIAA officials who had convictions for a multitude of offenses......  child abuse,gun crimes, drug offenses, assaults, animal abuse, fraud, various forms of theft, crimes of falsity, drunken driving and auto accidents that caused deaths.

 

As a proud long-term PIAA official, I'm glad they cleaned the PIAA out of those officials.....I support the background check program.....

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/2008/09/14/Many-with-criminal-pasts-found-on-PIAA-s-roster-of-sports-referees/stories/200809140223#ixzz2nherb0X7

I have no qualms with submitting to a background check. The only question I ever had was why the PIAA never phased it in for officials who registered before 2007.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapa

 

 

If the officials who are / were active prior to 2008 have nothing to hide, then there should not have a problem.  That's my

[tjwoelfel13]

My league had one done on me when I first joined but since then they left me alone

[conbo61]

 

 

Just for clarification, PIAA has required it of officials who became certified after 2007.  It is a once and done process.

 

Yes, the PIAA (Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association) is very strict on obtaining these checks. I think it is for the best of all parties.  You know who you are dealing with once these checks are completed.  These checks consist of FBI background and fingerprint checks, state child abuse background check, and state police criminal background check. True, it is not a fool proof system, but it gives you a little piece of mind knowing that the officials are subject to this.

 

 

Yes, PIAA is quite stringent on these checks due to the 2008 Pittsburgh Post gazette investigative article by Bill Moushey that revealed an embarrassing number of former and active PIAA officials who had convictions for a multitude of offenses......  child abuse,gun crimes, drug offenses, assaults, animal abuse, fraud, various forms of theft, crimes of falsity, drunken driving and auto accidents that caused deaths.

 

As a proud long-term PIAA official, I'm glad they cleaned the PIAA out of those officials.....I support the background check program.....

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/2008/09/14/Many-with-criminal-pasts-found-on-PIAA-s-roster-of-sports-referees/stories/200809140223#ixzz2nherb0X7

I have no qualms with submitting to a background check. The only question I ever had was why the PIAA never phased it in for officials who registered before 2007.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapa

 

 

If the officials who are / were active prior to 2008 have nothing to hide, then there should not have a problem.  That's my

Again, I have no problem submitting to a background check and support its implementation. But the problem WAS with officials active prior to 2008.

I just it would make sense to phase it in for ALL officials.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[Jimurray]

No background checks here. The closest I've come is when a LL I was going to work for thought I was going to coach. That was fixed very quickly.

Larry

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

 

LL requires ANYONE with "repetitive contact" with the players to have a background check. It isn't just about coaches. If they excused you they are applying the requirement incorrectly.

I believe LL requires only a check of the national sex offender database. They greatly recommend a background check though.

 

LL requires the use of First Advantage(formally LexisNexis).

 

They require background checks.

 

Not "greatly recommend"

 

Require.

I was mistaken. They require a background check to insure no offenses against minors and a check of the National Sex Offender registry. The greatly recommend FIrst Advantage which covers both. But a league does not have to use it. The volunteer application has check boxes which state what checks were done, background, sex offender, or First Advantage. Obviously, if you don't check First Advantage you have to check the other two.

[Pete Peterson Sr]

My state has no background check for HS officials, although there has been talk of them being implemented. I am all for it. An official who works for me in the summer was convicted of  felony drug possession. He inquired as to whether he could join our HS association. I flatly told him "no".

[Rulekeep]

My state has no background check for HS officials, although there has been talk of them being implemented. I am all for it. An official who works for me in the summer was convicted of felony drug possession. He inquired as to whether he could join our HS association. I flatly told him "no".

I don't think that's fair. If he's served his punishment and been clean since then, and as long as he isn't bringing said drugs around the field, umpires, or players, he should been at least given a chance.

[Stan W.]

 

 

 

Just for clarification, PIAA has required it of officials who became certified after 2007.  It is a once and done process.

 

Yes, the PIAA (Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association) is very strict on obtaining these checks. I think it is for the best of all parties.  You know who you are dealing with once these checks are completed.  These checks consist of FBI background and fingerprint checks, state child abuse background check, and state police criminal background check. True, it is not a fool proof system, but it gives you a little piece of mind knowing that the officials are subject to this.

 

 

Yes, PIAA is quite stringent on these checks due to the 2008 Pittsburgh Post gazette investigative article by Bill Moushey that revealed an embarrassing number of former and active PIAA officials who had convictions for a multitude of offenses......  child abuse,gun crimes, drug offenses, assaults, animal abuse, fraud, various forms of theft, crimes of falsity, drunken driving and auto accidents that caused deaths.

 

As a proud long-term PIAA official, I'm glad they cleaned the PIAA out of those officials.....I support the background check program.....

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/2008/09/14/Many-with-criminal-pasts-found-on-PIAA-s-roster-of-sports-referees/stories/200809140223#ixzz2nherb0X7

I have no qualms with submitting to a background check. The only question I ever had was why the PIAA never phased it in for officials who registered before 2007.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapa

 

 

 

If the officials who are / were active prior to 2008 have nothing to hide, then there should not have a problem.  That's my

Again, I have no problem submitting to a background check and support its implementation. But the problem WAS with officials active prior to 2008.

I just it would make sense to phase it in for ALL officials.

Sent from my XT1080 using TapatalkI

 

t

I believe that the reason the pre-2008 officials were exempt was that list was background checked by the investigative journalist.....and those officials purged.......

[BT_Blue]

My state has no background check for HS officials, although there has been talk of them being implemented. I am all for it. An official who works for me in the summer was convicted of felony drug possession. He inquired as to whether he could join our HS association. I flatly told him "no".

I don't think that's fair. If he's served his punishment and been clean since then, and as long as he isn't bringing said drugs around the field, umpires, or players, he should been at least given a chance.

Fair or not that is the way it is. The State of Washington is the same way. ANY felony conviction on your record, you will not officiate state sanctioned sports. Thankfully for those in my area, Oregon is not as strict and they can just go across the river and work in that state.

[Rulekeep]

My state has no background check for HS officials, although there has been talk of them being implemented. I am all for it. An official who works for me in the summer was convicted of felony drug possession. He inquired as to whether he could join our HS association. I flatly told him "no".

I don't think that's fair. If he's served his punishment and been clean since then, and as long as he isn't bringing said drugs around the field, umpires, or players, he should been at least given a chance. Fair or not that is the way it is. The State of Washington is the same way. ANY felony conviction on your record, you will not officiate state sanctioned sports. Thankfully for those in my area, Oregon is not as strict and they can just go across the river and work in that state.

The JSA officials here don't undergo background checks, at least not vigorous ones, and neither do the LL blues under the age of sixteen. I know there actually are background checks up in Anchorage, but I think it's on that system I just mentioned. After a certain amount of time has passed since you finished parol and you haven't been convicted again, you can start again. This doesn't go for everything, like offenses against minors, but for things like drug possession or misconduct, etc, it's a year, I believe. Don't quote me on that, though.

[JaxRolo]

 

My state has no background check for HS officials, although there has been talk of them being implemented. I am all for it. An official who works for me in the summer was convicted of felony drug possession. He inquired as to whether he could join our HS association. I flatly told him "no".

I don't think that's fair. If he's served his punishment and been clean since then, and as long as he isn't bringing said drugs around the field, umpires, or players, he should been at least given a chance.

 

 

In Florida a HS association can not turn down a member that wants to join. It's up to FHSAA to decide if he is allowed to work HS games.

 

Also the association may decide not to give him any games. But he may still join.

[jjb]

The Leagues I work do BG checks, and I can't say as I blame them. They have to cover themselves. I don't pay for it, so it's OK with me.

[clawdad]

New York requires fingerprint clearance for sports officials.  New officials are given conditional clearance to work games until the final approval is given by the State Education Dept.  

[PonyUmpire]

My state has no background check for HS officials, although there has been talk of them being implemented. I am all for it. An official who works for me in the summer was convicted of  felony drug possession. He inquired as to whether he could join our HS association. I flatly told him "no".

 

Did you ask him for details?  "Felony drug possession" could mean anything.  In Alabama, for example, it could mean two convictions for the possession of marijuana.  As an assigner, I'd be inclined to give an "offender" like that a second chance.     

[Pete Peterson Sr]

 

My state has no background check for HS officials, although there has been talk of them being implemented. I am all for it. An official who works for me in the summer was convicted of  felony drug possession. He inquired as to whether he could join our HS association. I flatly told him "no".

 

Did you ask him for details?  "Felony drug possession" could mean anything.  In Alabama, for example, it could mean two convictions for the possession of marijuana.  As an assigner, I'd be inclined to give an "offender" like that a second chance.     

 

 

I didn't need to "ask for details", as I was already quite familiar with his case. A conviction for possession of Schedule 2/4 Controlled Substances (Oxycodone and Xanax without a prescription for either)  will prevent you from working HS baseball in this state. In Alabama, we kinda like to keep drug users away from children. That's just how we roll...

[BigUmpire]

my background is nobody's business

Wanna bet?

[th3]

No. I was kidding Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pete Peterson Sr]

No. I was kidding

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 Please learn the appropriate use of the sarcasm font. That is all.

[JaxRolo]

No. I was kidding Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please learn the appropriate use of the sarcasm font. That is all. You tell him Pete!!!