DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Simply TKD (Taekwondo)
HTML https://simplytkd.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Taekwondo in General
*****************************************************
#Post#: 483--------------------------------------------------
Validity of Selection Procedures Challenged
By: Ladytkd Date: December 17, 2014, 8:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Personal opinion here:
Discussion on one of the Facebook groups revolved around a
number issues but one that arose was that of the Selection
Procedures for the Pan Am Games. Even before USTU achieved NGB
status for Olympic Sports, USTU had Pan Am Status. Pan Am Games
are a big deal. Selection Processes are a big deal. USAT's
reputation on writing clear selection procedures with all
salient facts lacks credibility. Frankly, Selection Processes
generally contain numerous mistakes which have lead to
additional steps, Judicial proceedings and on and on.
Particularly when dealing with the Pan Am Games and the World
Championships, not to mention the Olympics, selection procedures
should be as perfect as possible because of the number of
litigations which have occurred over the years. Yet repeatedly
USAT cuts and pastes and makes mistakes; one of my favorites was
the staff not knowing how to print from the fax or maybe the one
where the wrong birth year which lead to the Open Team Trials
for Worlds to be held before the actual Worlds Team Trials.
I believe the Selection Procedures for the Pan Am team and the
Worlds Team are both invalid due to a major blunder on the part
of the USAT - athlete representation on the procedures.
Let's start with the cast of characters here to better
understand the issue:
Lynda Laurin - USOC AAC Rep who normally signs and reviews
Selection Procedures
Stephen Lambdin - USOC AAC Alternate and active athlete
Nia Abdallah - Olympic Silver Medallist and AAC Rep and Active
National Assistant Coach
Bruce Harris - CEO - supervises employees among other things
like selecting who gets to coach on international USAT team
trips.
Patrice Remarck - Head Coach - supervises coaches as well as
other tasks including selecting who gets to coach on
international USAT team trips. Also an employee of the USAT
supervised and hired by Bruce Harris
Patrick Wentland - High Performance Director - also involved in
selection of coaches for international trips and also an
employee hired by Bruce Harris and supervised by Bruce Harris.
On page 13 of the National Team Selection Procedures and on page
8 of the Pan Am Team Selection Procedures you will note that
both sets of procedures were signed by:
Bruce Harris
Patrice Remarck
Nia Abdallah
Patrick Wentland.
The procedures require if the USOC AAC Rep cannot sign, he/she
is to include a letter of explanation of why the USOC AAC Rep
has delegated the authority to the Alternate AAC Representative.
As far as I can see, this was done on the Pan Am procedures but
not the Worlds Procedures. Ms. Laurin was competing at Nationals
and this affected by the procedures so she rightfully recused
herself. No problem there.
Next up would be Mr. Lambdin who should have been next in line,
but he too is an active athlete and affected by the procedures,
so he recused himself. No problem there.
So we know why the CEO and his two employees developed and
approved the procedures, it's their jobs. So how did Nia
Abdallah get signing authority? Silver Medallist at the
Olympics. Good. AAC Representative. Good. So far so good.
Lauren Hamon is an AAC member, as are 8 other AAC
representatives including two Olympic Bronze medalists. USAT has
no written or posted procedure for a case where neither the USOC
Rep or the Alternate Rep can sign a procedure. Probably should
have one. So who appointed Nia? This really has nothing to do
with Nia whose accomplishments speak for themselves and all
about USAT. Did AAC vote? Did the BOD vote? No minutes showing
a vote allowing this. No procedures for this..... I was told,
but totally hearsay that Ms. Laurin appointed Ms. Abdallah.
I will even go with the fact that probably the rest of the AAC
Representatives are all active athletes and affected, although
Mr. Southwick is not affected, nor Ms Brand. I could leave it
here that there was no procedure nor is there anything giving
the USOC AAC Rep the right to appoint someone to sign selection
procedures on behalf of the athletes, but there is a much bigger
problem.
Enter - the USAT Code of Ethics and that sneaky Conflict of
Interest policy:
5.0 Conflicts of Interest
USAT defines a conflict of interest as any personal or financial
relationship that could influence or be perceived to influence
your objectivity when representing or conducting business for,
or on behalf of USAT. Conflicts of interest or the appearance of
a conflict of interest should be avoided. In some cases these
conflicts may be unavoidable. In those cases you must:
5.1 Disclose the interest to the USAT CEO who shall advise the
Board Chair and the Ethics Committee Chair; and
5.2 Recuse yourself from any formal or informal discussions
related to the relationship between USAT and the person or
matter; and
5.3 Abstain from voting and from seeking to influence the vote
related to the conflict of interest with a person or matter.
So what does this have to do with Ms. Abdallah developing,
approving and signing the Selection Procedures?
Among her other accomplishments and talents, Nia is a USAT
National Assistant Coach. She was a coach with the team that
went to Cali, Columbia before she signed these documents. A
little over a month after signing the procedures, she was also a
coach for the 1st Cadet Worlds in Azerbijan.
Coaches, whether Head Coach or High Performance Coach or
National Assistant Coaches are employees of USAT. I learned that
during the Askinas/Collins days. They are hired by the CEO,
they get paid by the USAT and they benefit from being in this
position. They get their airfare (usually), hotel rooms, food,
t-shirts etc.. all provided as part of the team. In addition to
the usual room and board, they get a daily stipend intended to
help cover income lost while assisting USAT as a coach. National
Coaching Positions are highly coveted and frankly allow said
coaches to go back to the home school and advertise their status
as a National Coach. Let's not forget the agreements that these
coaches had to sign after their appointment/hiring by USAT - the
ones that caused the list never to be posted of who did and who
did not get appointed/hired. One could argue since they get
1099'd at the end of the year, their status is actually
Independent Contractor, but frankly that doesn't pass the sniff
test. They do what USAT in the person of the CEO and Head Coach
tell them. They're forbidden to work for the competitors out
there - that is also in the code of ethics btw.
So allow me to spell it out for you. In addition to being AAC
Representative, Nia is a coach who depends on Bruce Harris,
Patrick Wentland and Patrice Remarck to appoint her to these
international events. Mr. Harris is her boss while she "works"
for USAT as is Mr. Remarck. She collects a check and a 1099 at
the end of the year, so this is also a material relationship.
(The stipend is not much admittedly) but what we have here is a
conflict of interest and a material one at that. Even should you
argue the materiality, there is definitely an appearance of
impropriety. See the Conflict of Interest Policy above.
The people who developed and put these selection procedures in
front of Nia are her bosses and employees of USAT. They
determine her status as a National Assistant Coach - they can
bounce her just as easily as they appointed her. They can fire
her. They can give her lousy assignments. So if they ask her to
sign on the dotted line - what goes through your mind, even if
you see issues with the procedures?
Just as Ms. Laurin and Mr. Lambdin had to recuse themselves from
signing and approving these procedures in order to protect the
athletes, so should have Ms. Abdallah. Whomever appointed Ms.
Abdallah should have been aware of the conflict of interest here
and looked elsewhere. I can understand Nia not knowing, after
all she was appointed by the USOC AAC Representative with the
full approval of her other three bosses.
So where does this leave the Selection Procedures for two of the
biggest and most prestigious teams the USAT produces? Not worth
the bandwidth they occupy IMHO. Since Ms. Abadallah had a
material conflict of interest, the athletes did not have proper
20% Athlete Representation. So anyone who wants to file a
complaint that the procedures hurt their athletes will be able
to take it to the Judicial Committee or AAA who will also
question the same thing I do - how was this substitution made?
where and what are the policies and who granted the authority?
And that means staff working on complaints instead of answering
calls and doing their real work. It means the cost of Judicial
Committee meetings, hearings, and all that involves.
Why couldn't this just be done correctly in the first place?
Maybe no one will challenge. Maybe several will. Why risk it
when there are so many qualified athletes who do not have this
conflict of interest issue would have been happy to step in?
Again, Nia is the victim here, maybe she should have know about
the Conflict of Interest policy but those who told here where to
sign on the dotted line should have known and stopped it right
there.
*The original piece on ladytkd.com has the links to all the
documents.
#Post#: 484--------------------------------------------------
Re: Validity of Selection Procedures Challenged
By: calit14 Date: December 18, 2014, 10:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for bringing this very important issue to light. The
last thing athletes want is favoritism and cronyism in the
selection process. It appears someone is not playing by the
rules at USAT. ???
*****************************************************