Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old April 28th 06, 02:51 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
Sam Sloan
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ernie Schlich brings on Four Controversies, part 3

Controversy Number Four

Ernie Schlich collected the signatures on Company Time. Ernie Schlich
collected the signatures while on the USCFs time-clock.

Ernie collected the signatures while he was working as director of the
National Junior High School Championship in Louisville, Kentucky,
which was held April 7-9, 2006. Ernie Schlich was employed by the USCF
to be a director of that tournament. So, he did not merely collect the
signatures during a period of time when he was an employee. He
collected the signatures while he was a USCF official working for the
USCF at a USCF event.

http://www.uschess.org/tournaments/2006/jhs/
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....641.0-10212995

This seems to clearly violate the bylaw which states: Section 4: "An
employee of the USCF may not be nominated for election to the
Executive Board". This raises ethical questions as well. Can a person
use his position as director of an official USCF national event to get
players in that event to sign his petition to run for office?

This is in addition to the fact that Ernie has been working in the
USCF office in Crossville training new hires to do the job he did as a
regular staff member.

Grant Perks, who is also a candidate, but is in a questionable
position because he works for the USCF as an accountant, but
seasonally, defends Ernie by saying that Ernie may have collected the
signatures while on his lunch break! This, however, is hardly the
point. Ernie was at the event as a USCF official. Here is an official
asking a player in a tournament to sign a petition to nominate himself
as a candidate. This is clearly improper.

At 10:10 AM 4/27/2006 -0500, Mike Nolan wrote:
TDs at national events are not considered employees, they do not receive
benefits, there are no taxes withheld from their checks, they are not
eligible for worker's compensation.

They do not receive a W-2. (If they receive $600 or more during the course
of a calendar year, they do receive a 1099 as an independent contractor,
as required by law.)

All of the members of the Election Committee have responded to the poll
questions in the negative, that neither Ernie Schlich nor Grant Perks
were USCF employees and thus ineligible to run for the Board.

No member of the Bylaws Committee has said otherwise.

I consider this a closed issue.
--
Mike Nolan, Chair, USCF Election Committee
Co-Chair, USCF Bylaws Committee
_______________________________________________
uscf-election site list

http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/uscf-election


Mr. Nolan,

Can you cite any specific provision of the USCF by-laws or rules or
any IRS Rule or any provision of Kentucky or Tennessee Law which
exempts an employee of the USCF from being an employee just because he
is working as a TD at a National Tournament?

Since Ernie Schlich works as a TD at virtually every national chess
event, it is likely that he earned more than $600 last year. Can you
tell us how much money was reported on the 1099 form that Ernie
Schlich received from working for the USCF in 2005?

You seem to be sliding down a slippery slope here. Everybody will
agree that simply organizing or directing a USCF rated tournament does
not constitute employment by the USCF. However, there are a few
tournaments, although not many, which the USCF directly runs. I
believe that the US Open is awarded to bidders, so the paycheck Ernie
would be receiving would come from the successful bidder, not from the
USCF.

However, the National Junior High School Championship in Louisville
where Ernie circulated a petition and collected the signatures to run
was one of the few events which the USCF directly runs and does not
bid out. Therefore, Ernie got paid directly by the USCF. I am not
aware of any provision in the USCF by-laws which says that his working
there was exempt. Can you cite one?

Sam Sloan

At 12:00 PM 4/27/2006 -0500, Mike Nolan wrote:
Can you cite any specific provision of the USCF by-laws or rules or any IRS
Rule or any provision of Kentucky or Tennessee Law which exempts an
employee of the USCF from being an employee just because he is working as a
TD at a National Tournament?


TDs are not USCF employees, Sam. They aren't on the payroll, they
receive a fee for specific contracted services, which is why they get a 1099.

Since both the Code of Conduct and the Delegate Actions of Continuing
Interest place some limitations upon the extent to which Executive Board
members may serve as TDs at national events, BUT DO NOT PROHIBIT IT, it
is clear that the Delegates did not consider Executive Board members
employees when passing those motions.
--
Mike Nolan


Sorry Mike but I just do not see how it is possible that a person who
does work for the USCF and is paid by the USCF is not an employee,
irrespective of whether he receives a 1099 Form rather than a W-2
Form.

Let us take the case of Mike Nolan for example. You do a lot of work
for the USCF including writing this letter to me. You also do computer
work such as designing and maintaining the website and the MSA and the
TLAs.

I am sure that you are adequately paid for your services, or at least
I hope that you are.

I suspect that at the end of the year you receive a 1099 Form, not a
W-2 Form.

If that is the case, according to your interpretation and analysis,
you could run for USCF Office. In addition, Dan Lucas could run, Paul
Hoffman could run, Glenn Petersen could run, and indeed everybody
except for a few hourly workers in Crossville could run.

In short, the rule that employees cannot run would be meaningless.

Let me just pause to say that you are doing a wonderful job especially
with the MSA and enabling online submission of tournament results.
(That was a task that Ernie Schlich was never able to get done when he
had that job, by the way.) You are also doing great work on the
searchable TLAs.

However, I do not think it would be proper for you or for Ernie
Schlich to run for the board.

Sam Sloan

At 04:12 PM 4/27/2006 -0700, lawrence cohen wrote:


--- Sam Sloan wrote:

At 12:00 PM 4/27/2006 -0500, Mike Nolan wrote:
Can you cite any specific provision of the USCF

by-laws or rules or any IRS
Rule or any provision of Kentucky or Tennessee

Law which exempts an
employee of the USCF from being an employee just

because he is working as a
TD at a National Tournament?


Please see: Delegate Actions Of Continuing Interest
#13.

This limits EB members from being a TD at more than 1
National Tournament. It specifically states that
PRIOR to election to the EB does not count!

-Larry Cohen


Thank you. Very good point. I will use this because Ernie Schlich is
the TD at ALL the National Tournaments.

Almost any time there is a major tournament, especially a tournament
directly run by the USCF, Ernie Schlich will be working there as a TD.
This is exactly the problem. Most USCF members will see Ernie Schlich
working at a tournament, but will rarely if ever see any of the other
candidates there. This gives Ernie an unfair and insurmountable
advantage. It also gives him the opportunity to campaign while
directing.

Sam Sloan


Sorry Mike but I just do not see how it is possible that a person who does
work for the USCF and is paid by the USCF is not an employee, irrespective
of whether he receives a 1099 Form rather than a W-2 Form.


If I hire a carpenter to fix my front door, he is not an employee,
he is an independent contractor. He does a specific task for a fee.

There are around 30 employees of the USCF, they are not eligible to
run for the Board while they are USCF employees.

But Ernie Schlich is not a USCF employee, nor is Grant Perks. I'm not

sure if Grant was ever on the payroll but Ernie was, some years ago,
and Randy Hough some years before that.

However, at this point none of them are on the USCF payroll. If they
work as TDs at a national event they are independent contractors, just
like my carpenter.

I'm an independent contractor as well, I receive a 1099 from the USCF.
However, I am not running for the Board.
--
Mike Nolan
  #2   Report Post  
Old April 28th 06, 04:38 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
Vince Hart
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ernie Schlich brings on Four Controversies, part 3

The distinction between an independent contractor is a well established
legal concept, which would explain why Sam in not familiar with it.

  #3   Report Post  
Old April 28th 06, 11:17 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
g4
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ernie Schlich brings on Four Controversies, part 3

What Scam Sloan is doing is called a smear.

We expect

1. more smears from Scammie once the election heats up

2. silence from Larry Parr concerning Scammie's many lies and
misstatements (while at the same time excoriating others for
alleged mistakes that, even if true, are less than 1/10th the
magnitude of Scammie's). And so it goes.


"Vince Hart" wrote in message
oups.com...
The distinction between an independent contractor is a well established
legal concept, which would explain why Sam in not familiar with it.



Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ernie Schlich brings on Four Controversies Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 4 May 1st 06 12:06 PM
Ernie Schlich brings on Four Controversies Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 3 May 1st 06 12:06 PM
Ernie Schlich brings on Four Controversies, part 2 Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 4 April 29th 06 12:51 AM
Ernie Schlich brings on Four Controversies, part 2 Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 4 April 29th 06 12:51 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017