Code of Conduct concern youth sport **OP deleted**

[wathe]

Thanks everyone.

 

Edited May 3 by wathe

[Drama Llama]

I agree with you 100%

[scholastica]

You are right. I hope you can diplomatically bring this to their attention.

[ScoutTN]

Definitely a violation.

[HomeAgain]

Definitely a violation.  The no-alcohol rule is usually mandated because parents+booze=a nasty combination for competitors, staff, and judges/refs.  Parents are often over the top and forget that it's youth competition, so when alcohol becomes involved the risks of a serious event becomes much, much greater.

I would be worried that they are putting their staff and judges/refs at risk of being attacked because of a parent who had too great a lapse in judgement.  There's no way I'd be comfortable with my kid near that situation -or in it, now that he's old enough to be on the staff side.

[Kuovonne]

Is the code of conduct written to apply to people even when they are not at an event of the organization? For example, would parents drinking alcohol in their own homes with their own minor children present be against the code of conduct? If so, the code of conduct is too restrictive and should be rewritten. 
 

I also wonder if the venue selling alcohol was something beyond the organization’s control. Even though the organization booked the venue, they may have no say in what the venue chooses to sell or not sell at concessions.
 

I think having a code of conduct that applies to spectators is problematic. I would not expect spectators to sign a code of conduct. 

[footballmom]

I agree it was a violation. If I envisioned my child continuing in the league, I would approach the board more from an opportunity for future planning / game planning perspective rather than expecting discipline action based on what has already taken place. Unless drunken behavior at the event led to inaccurate score keeping or unruly behavior that impacted the game play. 

[Mrs Tiggywinkle Again]

I also think it was a violation.

however, I have been involved in some conferences and other events where the group renting the facility didn’t have any control over what the vendors sold.  I would see if it was that kind of situation first, but I would say something.

[wathe]

51 minutes ago, Kuovonne said:

 

I also wonder if the venue selling alcohol was something beyond the organization’s control. Even though the organization booked the venue, they may have no say in what the venue chooses to sell or not sell at concessions.
 

I think having a code of conduct that applies to spectators is problematic. I would not expect spectators to sign a code of conduct. 

 

33 minutes ago, Mrs Tiggywinkle Again said:

 

however, I have been involved in some conferences and other events where the group renting the facility didn’t have any control over what the vendors sold.  I would see if it was that kind of situation first, but I would say something.

Re venue selling alcohol.  I think that this is probably what happened.  But, if that's the case, then this venue isn't appropriate for this org to use for youth events. 

Re CoC applying to spectators.  Spectators are pretty much all parents and sometimes extended family/friends.   All parents are required to sign off on the code of conduct and complete Respect in Sport training - so yes, CoC applies.   (If this were a ticketed event open to the public, with a designated spectator zone, then I agree that maybe CoC should not apply to spectators, but that's not the case here)

[Katy]

I bet that’s a venue decision, not an organization one

[rebcoola]

With that coc than yes

[Dmmetler]

Yes, but I've seen it happen before-in particular for specific venues. (I HATED competitions at Disney WWOS for that reason). The fact is, parents SHOULD refrain, even if the venue sells alcohol. They SHOULD be responsible for their children. They SHOULD support safeguarding for everyone's kids....but a lot of them don't. 

 

 

[KungFuPanda]

Is it a violation if the organization is housed in a place where their codes are superseded by those of the venue? They likely didn’t have the authority to shut down regular money-earning business at this sports complex. Forbidding their members to purchase may be a contractual violation.  I’m guessing the location itself was the best they could manage and a comparable no-alcohol arena wasn’t available to them on those dates. Planning large events in an offsite location comes with compromises that seldom make everyone happy.

[wathe]

This is a new venue for this org -- there are other, proven alternatives. 

I mean, by the letter of the CoC, the violation is by the adults who used alcohol at the event in the presence of minors, but the org set them up for failure by holding the event at a licensed venue that they must have known was going to be selling alcohol.

I should also note that the CoC specifies that it applies to org business, activities and events (so it would not extend to families at home etc).

Thoughts:  What if the concession was also selling other items that are legal for adults but not CoC compliant, like cannabis (legal here, with a shop on what seems like very corner)? Or the swag shop was selling items that are legal for adults  but clearly not CoC compliant (porn or fetish gear maybe?  IDK, seems ridiculous, but trying to think up a parallel).   If that were the case, I think that the org would decide that a venue wasn't a good fit.   So why is alcohol accepted?  Which bits of the CoC really matter and which bits don't?  

The org has demonstrated the CoC can be disregarded when it proves inconvenient, which is a very slippery slope.   That the crux of the issue, and that's what bothering me.

[Laura Corin]

1 hour ago, wathe said:

  So why is alcohol accepted?  Which bits of the CoC really matter and which bits don't?  

The org has demonstrated the CoC can be disregarded when it proves inconvenient, which is a very slippery slope.   That the crux of the issue, and that's what bothering me.

Perhaps not a slippery slope but a demonstration of attitudes to alcohol vs. the other examples.

A parallel is people's attitude to speeding.  It's very common to treat breaking the law by driving over the speed limit as in a different category from other law breaking.  It's not really really.

Alcohol is similarly normalised, unlike your other examples. It's not really really.

[wintermom]

I think you have grounds for a complaint. The league should definitely receive feedback about this violation in their own CoC. There are several things that the league could have done, such as sending out messages to participants and their families prior to the event that consumption of alcohol is not permitted during the tournament, and to refrain until after competion has stopped. Or the league could have chosen a different venue where alcohol was not sold. I think the latter would be a much better choice in the future. 

This alcohol situation is an issue not only for the active event in progress, but potentially for the set-up and take-down of equipment before and after the tournament, where youth are often encouraged to volunteer (and receive financial support) with these tasks. The youth should not be put in the position of having alcohol consumed in the facility during these times, either. 

 

Edited May 2 by wintermom

[KungFuPanda]

Are there any real, enforceable consequences to breaking this code? They can name it anything they want, but if it has no teeth or reliable methods of enforcement, then it’s really just a suggestion.  It’s not an actual law that anyone broke unless someone was intoxicated enough in public to get arrested. You can feel very strongly that it IS, or should be, a law but it’s just not. 
 

You can complain and await a response, but I doubt it’ll go anywhere in this situation. They’re not going to retroactively sanction parents who had a drink. The might do something going forward. It’s worth a shot. 

[wathe]

11 minutes ago, KungFuPanda said:

Are there any real, enforceable consequences to breaking this code? They can name it anything they want, but if it has no teeth or reliable methods of enforcement, then it’s really just a suggestion.  It’s not an actual law that anyone broke unless someone was intoxicated enough in public to get arrested. You can feel very strongly that it IS, or should be, a law but it’s just not. 
 

You can complain and await a response, but I doubt it’ll go anywhere in this situation. They’re not going to retroactively sanction parents who had a drink. The might do something going forward. It’s worth a shot. 

There is a very detailed discipline and complaints process.   Violations of CoC may lead to suspension or expulsion from the org, which in practice means suspension or expulsion from the sport.

[MEmama]

6 minutes ago, wathe said:

There is a very detailed discipline and complaints process.   Violations of CoC may lead to suspension or expulsion from the org, which in practice means suspension or expulsion from the sport.

That's par for course for any kid sports though. I've never seen it enforced; it's akin to the mostly empty middle school threat "act out one more time and it's going on your *permanent record!*" Real Ferris Bueller stuff, all bark no bite unless it's meaningful (and even then, it depends doesn't it?).  As long as the competing athletes weren't drinking, I don't understand the problem at.all. I've been to a zillion meets for lots of sports, and I wouldn't even notice a parent drinking a beer, nevermind feeling fussed about it. 

But sure, write an email and speak your mind. I wouldn't expect it to go anywhere, but you'll have stood up and done what you feel is right. There's power in that.

[wintermom]

55 minutes ago, wathe said:

There is a very detailed discipline and complaints process.   Violations of CoC may lead to suspension or expulsion from the org, which in practice means suspension or expulsion from the sport.

You know what's an additional annoyance about the league's willful violation of their own CoC, is that they probably required all parents and players to complete some kind of on-line training regarding ethics, behavioural standards, etc., and then they go and hold an event with alcohol being consumed court side. I know that Ontario [Sport] required a few different online training courses for parents and players over 18 to complete. While I have no issue with these requirements, there is an expectation that the league will organize their own provincial championships within the guidelines of their own Code of Conduct. 🤪 

Edited May 2 by wintermom

[wathe]

7 minutes ago, wintermom said:

You know what's an additional annoyance about the league's willful violation of their own CoC, is that they probably required all parents and players to complete some kind of on-line training regarding ethics, behavioural standards, etc., and then they go and hold an event with alcohol being consumed court side. I know that Ontario [Sport] required a few different online training courses for parents and players over 18 to complete. While I have no issue with these requirements, there is an expectation that the league will organize their own provincial championships within the guidelines of their own Code of Conduct. 🤪 

Yes, this exactly.  Parents had to do a Respect in Sport course in order to enrol their kid, and sign off on the CoC.  Then the org goes and demonstrates that the CoC can be disregarded when it proves to be inconvenient.   Serious about youth safety except when not.  It's a very bad look.

[bolt.]

It seems to me that many adults who signed that code of conduct may have compromised it, and also that the provision of alcohol for sale by the venue may have normalized those compromises and made them seem acceptable.

However, it would also be entirely possible for adults to have separated their actual acts of drinking from the direct presence of minors (ie drinking up in the stands, away from the players) and from the direct execution of their volunteer roles (ie drinking before or after, but not during the execution of their duties, and not being seriously intoxicated in a way that prevented them from being responsible in those roles).

It does very much depend on a person's good-faith interpretation of phrases like minors being "present" and "while participating" in an "event".

It's easy to take an all-or-nothing approach and say that the whole building (and the lack of meaningful separation) makes the minors "present" and the whole weekend is an "event" and that even simply watching from a spectators' space is "participating". But it's also true that perfectly reasonable people may have interpreted it another way.

Because it's an honour code, the organization is asking people to take these things from a perspective of honour and ethics -- a lens that means that their execution of those things is going to be both thoughtful and personal. (If they wanted to generate regulations, which would be applied according to terms and specifics, I think they could have done that.) So, to me, it's not as clear as it is to some of the other posters above.

And, while the organization definitely should have had some consideration for not making consuming alcohol openly at this event quite as attractive and normal-feeling of an option for parents -- it's ultimately a person who signs an honour code's responsibility to remember that they have done that, and to either adhere to their interpretation of it, or not. (Regardless of the provisions of the venue.)

[wathe]

4 minutes ago, bolt. said:

.

However, it would also be entirely possible for adults to have separated their actual acts of drinking from the direct presence of minors (ie drinking up in the stands, away from the players) and from the direct execution of their volunteer roles (ie drinking before or after, but not during the execution of their duties, and not being seriously intoxicated in a way that prevented them from being responsible in those roles).

 

Part of the problem here is that there was no separation.  No stands or really separate spectator space.  Spectators sat in a double row of chairs immediately courtside (spectators had to careful about how to place their feet and bags so as not to be physically on the court), x 24 courts in a big open space, with youth and adults all milling around together in the spaces between courts.  

If there were reasonable separation, I would be less concerned.  

[bolt.]

8 minutes ago, wathe said:

Part of the problem here is that there was no separation.  No stands or really separate spectator space.  Spectators sat in a double row of chairs immediately courtside (spectators had to careful about how to place their feet and bags so as not to be physically on the court), x 24 courts in a big open space, with youth and adults all milling around together in the spaces between courts.  

If there were reasonable separation, I would be less concerned.  

That makes sense. It might also make sense that some adults might have thought stepping away and/or turning their backs was enough 'separation' in their own judgement.

[wathe]

4 minutes ago, bolt. said:

That makes sense. It might also make sense that some adults might have thought stepping away and/or turning their backs was enough 'separation' in their own judgement.

No-one seemed to be doing that though.  I really think that parent thought drinking courtside, and while in contact with youth was fine (because the entire event venue was licensed and alcohol was being sold, so drinking must be OK).  I'd guess most parents had no idea this was even a code of conduct item -- I think it's likely that most sign off on it at the beginning of the season without really reading it.

I agree that by the letter of the CoC, each individual is responsible for their own behaviour and own CoC breach.   But I also think that the org isresponsible for nudging / creating an environment that normalized a prohibited behaviour.

[MEmama]

1 hour ago, wathe said:

Part of the problem here is that there was no separation.  No stands or really separate spectator space.  Spectators sat in a double row of chairs immediately courtside (spectators had to careful about how to place their feet and bags so as not to be physically on the court), x 24 courts in a big open space, with youth and adults all milling around together in the spaces between courts.  

If there were reasonable separation, I would be less concerned.  

Can I ask why? Were the minor athletes drinking or do you object to the alcohol being...present? I'm asking in good faith; I grew up and raised my kid in a culture where drinking responsibly is nbd, so I honestly don't understand the concern. 

It doesn't seem like bleachers would change the terms of the code of conduct, so I'm genuinely confused by your above statement about reasonable separation. Perhaps I've seen enough "codes of conduct" to know they are meaningless, but that doesn't mean a concerned parent shouldn't raise respectful questions.

[Catwoman]

I'm not being snarky -- I'm genuinely curious.

Do you think most of the parents even bothered to read the Code of Conduct? 

I can imagine a lot of people knowing their kids wanted to participate, and just signing the form the kid handed them without paying much attention to what it said.

Or perhaps, because alcohol was available at that particular event, could the parents have assumed it was allowed on that occasion?

Edited to add -- I posted this before I read all of the posts in the thread, and I see that you already answered my question! 🙂 

Edited May 3 by Catwoman

[wintermom]

4 hours ago, wathe said:

No-one seemed to be doing that though.  I really think that parent thought drinking courtside, and while in contact with youth was fine (because the entire event venue was licensed and alcohol was being sold, so drinking must be OK).  I'd guess most parents had no idea this was even a code of conduct item -- I think it's likely that most sign off on it at the beginning of the season without really reading it.

I agree that by the letter of the CoC, each individual is responsible for their own behaviour and own CoC breach.   But I also think that the org isresponsible for nudging / creating an environment that normalized a prohibited behaviour.

It's so rare in Ontario to even find a venue where drinking this close to activities with minors is legal. Did this sport association have to search long and hard to find this venue? You have to wonder if it was completely intentional, or a very weird 'mistake.' Even outdoor venues for organized events have separated drinking areas. 

Whether this was a mistake or not, the whistle needs to be blown for sure. I would bring this violation to the attention of the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport as well as the league.

Edited May 3 by wintermom

[wintermom]

Hey, since we're on the topic of ethics in sports, this is my first year (thankfully last) as a parent for a competitive travelling sports team athlete, how long has the rule about "Stay to Play" been in effect, where we're over-charged for specific hotel rooms in order to participate in a tournament? Talk about corruption in sport and people unethically making money off parents who are just trying to provide sporting experiences for their kids. 

I can start a spin off thread if others have experienced this are fuming about it.

[HomeAgain]

11 minutes ago, wintermom said:

Hey, since we're on the topic of ethics in sports, this is my first year (thankfully last) as a parent for a competitive travelling sports team athlete, how long has the rule about "Stay to Play" been in effect, where we're over-charged for specific hotel rooms in order to participate in a tournament? Talk about corruption in sport and people unethically making money off parents who are just trying to provide sporting experiences for their kids. 

I can start a spin off thread if others have experienced this are fuming about it.

StP is pretty common here.  It keeps the teams together under one roof to manage them better and honestly, with the way some of the kids/parents act I don't blame the hotels for upping the fee a bit. 

I don't like it, and I REALLY don't like some of the hotels we're forced to use, but this is one of those things that I'm willing to accept for tournaments. 

[teachermom2834]

When my ds was playing travel baseball we would be required to stay at a tournament hotel and then the games would be at ball fields all over a metro area. So we might play games at 3 or four different fields all an hour from the hotel and each other. Sometimes we would have a game so early so far from the hotel that we would have to leave the hotel before we could even access the hotel breakfast. 
 

Insanity.

[wintermom]

20 minutes ago, HomeAgain said:

StP is pretty common here.  It keeps the teams together under one roof to manage them better and honestly, with the way some of the kids/parents act I don't blame the hotels for upping the fee a bit. 

I don't like it, and I REALLY don't like some of the hotels we're forced to use, but this is one of those things that I'm willing to accept for tournaments. 

How does over-charging everyone have any relationship to poor behaviour of the few? Why not chuck out those who cause trouble? 

I was under the impression that teams were 'guaranteeing' their participation by staying at a specific location, because it's crucial to the tournament to have confirmed entries and messes up the draws if there are last-minute no-shows. This makes at least some sense to me, but I don't understand why everyone has to be over-charged. I can stay at the same hotel and pay less as a normal customer, but then my kid can't play in the tournament.

Edited May 3 by wintermom

[HomeAgain]

8 hours ago, wintermom said:

How does over-charging everyone have any relationship to poor behaviour of the few? Why not chuck out those who cause trouble? 

I was under the impression that teams were 'guaranteeing' their participation by staying at a specific location, because it's crucial to the tournament to have confirmed entries and messes up the draws if there are last-minute no-shows. This makes at least some sense to me, but I don't understand why everyone has to be over-charged. I can stay at the same hotel and pay less as a normal customer, but then my kid can't play in the tournament.

Yes, the second part is right, but to answer your question, it's a combination of peer pressure and effective banning.

When you have an entire team stay together, it's easier to ban the entire team for having parents/kids who aren't behaving.  You don't have to try to follow a specific name of a person to ban them.  The entire team can be kicked out of the hotel circuit and tournament for conduct of a few, so it puts more pressure on them.  Plus, for the parents who aren't taking care of their spawn, it gives the hotels an additional point of contact and pressure - the coach/their organization.  The hotels do take on the added headache of having a weekend that is nearly all kids and possible disruption to their other guests.

I don't like the tournament hotels.  They're often run down and not up to par, so if we don't need to stay with the team we opt for a place that doesn't have any other team members there.  Our kid does best when he has a place to retreat to from all the noise.  But I understand why they're tied in to the tournaments.

[Dmmetler]

If it's like conferences, the org gets venue space free or at a discounted rate by guaranteeing hotel room sales in the conference center. When we go to JMIH, which always is in Marriott hotel/conference centers, they ask those who can afford it (basically, those who wrote it into their research grant) to stay in the conference hotel, which is more expensive, and then they do a room block at a less expensive hotel for graduate students/undergrads/early career folks who don't have grant funding.  

I hated StP as a parent, because we were paying for the hotel, and the gym was paying registration fees (which I was actually paying via monthly gym tuition) and then we were paying heavy spectator fees, but having a friend who was the treasurer for many years for JMIH and hearing what she had to deal with as far as the conferences made me understand why they might do the STP thing. I do think that they should give a free parent admission to the competition if you book the hotel or something, though-the ones at Amusement parks seem to have figured this out and provide perks for staying on site, but the others...not so much. 

 

 

 

 

 

[HomeAgain]

I never considered there might be spectator fees that parents also have to pay.  DS is not at a level where tickets are sold.  That begins with varsity high school/juniors for hockey here.  About half the time there isn't even real stands in the rinks, though we were lucky enough at a tournament to be in the "overbooked" category and they moved some games to the college.  The kids adored getting to play in a real arena for a few games before moving to the regular tournament rink: a super cold oversized barn with standing room only and creepy locker rooms done in 1970s wood paneling.

 

ETA: We have tournament fees, where it's about $900 to enter a team and that cost is split among players.  So I guess it's sort of the same thing, just paying months ahead instead of at the door.

Edited May 3 by HomeAgain

[teachermom2834]

When my ds was playing travel baseball I think the requirement for each team was ten rooms. There would 10 -12 kids on the team plus a coach/coaches so a ten room requirement made sense I guess for ease. The team dad that made arrangements would send out the link for the hotel and we would book where we were told to. A couple weekends into the season I realized that one family just ignored the instructions and booked elsewhere cheaper. It was ok because we still met the minimum but man I don’t have the nerve to do that.  They just laughed at all of us suckers paying the higher rates. 
 

Travel baseball. Lots of stories. 

Edited May 3 by teachermom2834

[Dmmetler]

1 hour ago, HomeAgain said:

I never considered there might be spectator fees that parents also have to pay.  DS is not at a level where tickets are sold.  That begins with varsity high school/juniors for hockey here.  About half the time there isn't even real stands in the rinks, though we were lucky enough at a tournament to be in the "overbooked" category and they moved some games to the college.  The kids adored getting to play in a real arena for a few games before moving to the regular tournament rink: a super cold oversized barn with standing room only and creepy locker rooms done in 1970s wood paneling.

 

ETA: We have tournament fees, where it's about $900 to enter a team and that cost is split among players.  So I guess it's sort of the same thing, just paying months ahead instead of at the door.

There were lots of tricks cheer parents used-three families might get together and register all three kids in one hotel room with one adult, but actually book one room at the official hotel and two cheaper rooms, divide out the costs, and each parent keep their own kids. We often "shadow registered" a teammate with us, because we had only 3 in our family and she had MCAS and her parents would drive an RV to competitions so she had an allergy free room to stay in. She was counted for STP numbers (and had a hotel key so could use our room to change in, etc), but didn't actually sleep at the hotel. 

 

Travel cheer...lots of stories there, too. There are things I miss about it (lots of time to talk with your kid in the car, for example), but a lot I definitely DON'T miss!