Officials - set default availability to "Blocked"
Idea shared by - July 16, 2014 at 1:50 PM
Declined
We don't want the officials to show as available by default, but to only show as available where they have directly set their availability.
 
How do we do that?
 
thanks
Val

9 Replies

Reply to Thread
0
Shaun Peet Replied
Employee Post
Hello Val,
 
This is not the design of the officials module and is not currently possible.  The feedback from most centres using the officials module is that this would create more work for both the officials (because they're probably available more often than they are not) and eventually create more work for the assignor (because the pool of available officials will probably no longer include people who actually are available but just haven't told the system that they are).  Hope that helps,
 
Shaun
 
1
I agree with Val that it would be ideal to have officials have to tell when they are available, as opposed to when they are not.  Ultimately, the current format creates more work for schedulers, since we assign games based on the availability list, and then end up reassigning them because officials deny games for times they have not bothered to set blocks for.  There is no incentive for officials to set blocks, whereas there would be definite incentive to set availability:  if they didn't, they wouldn't ever be available, and they would never get any games. 
1
I agree with the incentive comment regarding this.  Though my area has the no-decline option.  If games are assigned based on availability, it is up to the official to either skate that game or find a replacement.  If they can't find a replacement and they blow the game off, they're suspended.
0
I AGREE WITH VAL. THE DESIRED EFFECT THAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE AS ASSIGNORS SEE. I HAVE OVER 500 DECLINES TO DATE THIS SEASON FOR TIMEKEEPERS ALONE, AND I AM CONFIDENT IF I POLL THE REFEREE ASSIGNORS THAT THIS NUMBER WOULD BE EQUAL OR GREATER.

DAN
0
I AGREE WITH BETH. THE EFFORT IS ALL ON THE ASSIGNOR AND THERE IS NO INCENTIVE FOR THE TK'S OR REFS TO EVEN LOOK AT THEIR CALENDARS.
0
WE CAN'T ALLOW THEM TO SIMPLY "BLOW' THE GAME AS THE ASSOCIATIONS DEPEND ON SERVICE. WHILE I AGREE THAT IN THEORY THIS IS SOUND, IN PRACTICE IS NOT. THERE ARE ISSUES WITH SKILL AND ABILITY THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED, NOT SIMPLY JUST PLUGGING ANOTHER BODY INTO THE SLOT....EVEN IF WE ASSUME THE PERSON WHO DIDN'T PUT THE MINIMAL EFFORT INTO SETTING THEIR AVAILABILITY WOULD THEN PUT IN MORE EFFORT TO FIND AN APPROPRIATE SUB.
THIS RARELY HAPPENS AND WHEN IT DOES, IT IS NOT FROM THE OFFENDERS, BUT RATHER THE MOST CONSCIENTIOUS.

WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO BE ABLE TO TOGGLE THIS BY ASSOCIATION?
0
It would take a major redevelopment in order to accommodate this feature request.  While noted we cannot at this time commit to developing the software in this instance.  We hope that referees and assignors will understand and cooperate to allow the system to work as designed for all concerned.
0
What about taking a poll of all your Association's assignor groups, I believe you will find that this is what they want.
We use the system as is, it this would be a tremendous improvement.
0
I agree with Shaun above --- Get tougher with your officials. I run two associations and this is not an issue at all. I get it's tough at times, but if you assign more than a week ahead of time, there is zero issues with this.

Reply to Thread