Recruiting

Originally posted by MegSmath OK Connie, you've lost me. If you don't want the government to be involved in running public pools, then why do you want USMS to accept government money? (And by the way, I've been involved with USMS since the late 80s, and this is the first I've heard about any possibility of USMS receiving government operating funds! I'm not sure your source is correct.) I don't want USMS to recieve government money. What bugs me is that we claim to stand on our own, but in an indirect way we do take advantage of the existance of government money. So which is it? We want it or we don't want government help? is it like this: We'll take it, as long as we don't do it openly and directly? It's almost like trying to hide that there is reliance on assistance, and claiming that we exist on our own and pull our own weight. I'm sure it's not intentional. As someone who works for a quasi-government agency, I happen to believe it's our mission to help our fellow citizens, and not to make it easier for private business to make a profit. Are you talking about USMS? Well, some people want USMS to be the quasi-government agency, and others want it to be run more like a business. Guess we (the USMS) will have to decide what they want to be. I don't think we need to worry about private pool operators making too much profit. What I'm hearing is that right now we are worrying about government and quasi government agencies closing down pools because they're too expensive to maintain. Well, guess what, looks like even the government that some people think should help you thinks keeping the pools operational at government's expense is too much. For example, something Kevin and a number of people here doesn't know about Mission Viejo Nadadores is that several years ago the City did sone to the effect of: stopped helping support it, turned it into a foundation, and made an ultimatum, it's either going to support itself, or it's closing down. The whole place relies on volunteers and swimmers fees for it's existance. Even the board of directors that runs it are volunteers. The only paid staff there are coaches. And trust me, They're not exactly profiting. Most are working for them 10-12/per hour. If I recall correctly, very few are full time employees. Most of them are allowed to work something like 39 hours, no overtime, no benefits, no paid vacations. Is that fair???? Where are all the bleeding heart liberals when it comes to standing up for hard working people that dedicated their life to swimming??? Making sure there's enough money in swimming that the coaches can make a livable wage off their efforts. Especially the Masters Coaches. But, nooo, we're all too concerned how to pay less money out of our pockets for recreation, god forbid that the people working to provide you the recreation actually made a half ways decent living. Oh, I know, they have a job, we need to worry about them coaches making too much profit. For example, you have a coach with a relevant Masters degree working for $15 an hour, accepting a job with no health insurance, insuficent to support a family off of, so he can dedicate himself to being a full time coach. How many potential quality coaches do you think will be willing to take that kind of a financial hit so that we can swim??? Or do you think they should be a city employee? I mean, it's great that you believe in government help, but the reality of the situation seems to be that the local governments have less and less desire to subsidize the pools. Sure, lets subsidise the pools, and raise taxes to the level where the cities and school districts don't have to worry about the operating costs. Really, I don't care how you wanna do it, it's going to come out of your pocket directly or indirectly. Personally, I don't trust the government to be very cost effective. I trust a privately run organizations more, and if they are doing a terrific job and manage to make a profit at something that historically is struggling to just break even (like pools), I think they deserve it. So, which direction does USMS want to take to contrubute in trying to remedy this situation? Lobby with government to change their mind or try to operate in a self supporting manner. Worrying about someone making too much profit off of masters swimmers is rather far fetched at the moment. We need to worry about the pools that we want to have available to us just breaking even.

Originally posted by MegSmath OK Connie, you've lost me. If you don't want the government to be involved in running public pools, then why do you want USMS to accept government money? (And by the way, I've been involved with USMS since the late 80s, and this is the first I've heard about any possibility of USMS receiving government operating funds! I'm not sure your source is correct.) I don't want USMS to recieve government money. What bugs me is that we claim to stand on our own, but in an indirect way we do take advantage of the existance of government money. So which is it? We want it or we don't want government help? is it like this: We'll take it, as long as we don't do it openly and directly? It's almost like trying to hide that there is reliance on assistance, and claiming that we exist on our own and pull our own weight. I'm sure it's not intentional. As someone who works for a quasi-government agency, I happen to believe it's our mission to help our fellow citizens, and not to make it easier for private business to make a profit. Are you talking about USMS? Well, some people want USMS to be the quasi-government agency, and others want it to be run more like a business. Guess we (the USMS) will have to decide what they want to be. I don't think we need to worry about private pool operators making too much profit. What I'm hearing is that right now we are worrying about government and quasi government agencies closing down pools because they're too expensive to maintain. Well, guess what, looks like even the government that some people think should help you thinks keeping the pools operational at government's expense is too much. For example, something Kevin and a number of people here doesn't know about Mission Viejo Nadadores is that several years ago the City did sone to the effect of: stopped helping support it, turned it into a foundation, and made an ultimatum, it's either going to support itself, or it's closing down. The whole place relies on volunteers and swimmers fees for it's existance. Even the board of directors that runs it are volunteers. The only paid staff there are coaches. And trust me, They're not exactly profiting. Most are working for them 10-12/per hour. If I recall correctly, very few are full time employees. Most of them are allowed to work something like 39 hours, no overtime, no benefits, no paid vacations. Is that fair???? Where are all the bleeding heart liberals when it comes to standing up for hard working people that dedicated their life to swimming??? Making sure there's enough money in swimming that the coaches can make a livable wage off their efforts. Especially the Masters Coaches. But, nooo, we're all too concerned how to pay less money out of our pockets for recreation, god forbid that the people working to provide you the recreation actually made a half ways decent living. Oh, I know, they have a job, we need to worry about them coaches making too much profit. For example, you have a coach with a relevant Masters degree working for $15 an hour, accepting a job with no health insurance, insuficent to support a family off of, so he can dedicate himself to being a full time coach. How many potential quality coaches do you think will be willing to take that kind of a financial hit so that we can swim??? Or do you think they should be a city employee? I mean, it's great that you believe in government help, but the reality of the situation seems to be that the local governments have less and less desire to subsidize the pools. Sure, lets subsidise the pools, and raise taxes to the level where the cities and school districts don't have to worry about the operating costs. Really, I don't care how you wanna do it, it's going to come out of your pocket directly or indirectly. Personally, I don't trust the government to be very cost effective. I trust a privately run organizations more, and if they are doing a terrific job and manage to make a profit at something that historically is struggling to just break even (like pools), I think they deserve it. So, which direction does USMS want to take to contrubute in trying to remedy this situation? Lobby with government to change their mind or try to operate in a self supporting manner. Worrying about someone making too much profit off of masters swimmers is rather far fetched at the moment. We need to worry about the pools that we want to have available to us just breaking even.