Somwhat OT: Rock 'n' Roll Marathon sued

[CunegoFan]

Sued for not paying volunteer labor that is duped into volunteering with the impression the work will benefit charities instead of the bottom line of a huge private equity firm. In reality charities pay money to be associated with the marathons.

http://www.outsideonline.com/fitness/bodywork/the-fit-list/This-Marathon-Lawsuit-May-Shake-Up-the-Running-World.html

A lot of recreational cycling events use a similar business model.

[FastforaSlowGuy]

Forgive my ignorance, but which cycling events are you thinking of that operate as cash generators like the R&R series?

[m_sasso]

Hope they win, in my view way to many promoters lining there pockets by promoting and fronting their athletic participation activities as events to raise money for charities.

[binxnyrwarrsoul]

Not to start a war, but the amount of money from a donation that actually goes to a charity is ridiculously low, essentially across the board. Sorry, don't think my donation (of money, or unpaid services) should go towards paying for the lease on a G6 (!) to jet the charity "execs" to fundraisers.

Plus 1, I too hope they win.

[CunegoFan]

Forgive my ignorance, but which cycling events are you thinking of that operate as cash generators like the R&R series?

I am thinking in general about for-profit events using volunteer labor. There are no cycling promotion companies on the scale of Competitor Group, Inc. or World Triathlon Corporation, but maybe with the growth in gran fondo events with thousands of participants that might eventually happen. There are a lot of small time promotors that have a business model based on volunteer labor. Maybe no one cares so much because the money goes into the community. With CGI and WTC making tens of millions per year in profits, it is easy to see the same business model as cynical exploitation, especially when the schemes are overlaid with a veneer of charity.

One of the most interesting things about this is the charity angle because I have become sick and tired of every running or cycling event being associated with a charitable cause--or at least pretending to be.

[gdw]

If the case goes forward and she wins the promoters will just pass the additional costs of running their events onto the competitors......yippee.:rolleyes:

[ultraman6970]

If they don't add a charitable cause to the event people won't go to it, and what ever permissions and legal stuff they need to ask to the local authorities probably won't run as smooth as it should.

Would you pay your entrance fee for an event that straight forward goes to somebody's pocket instead of the "charity of police enforcement widows" for example??

The problem is that at least here (in other places is not) charity will drive people to participate, that the % of money that actually goes to charity probably is comparable to the % KK sends to charities after selling her crap for big dollars at ebay is really low, well is not surprise at least to me.

[93legendti]

Suing is the easy part...

[gdw]

"Would you pay your entrance fee for an event that straight forward goes to somebody's pocket instead of the "charity of police enforcement widows" for example??"

Yes, I have and will in the future if the event or course interests me.

Do you think people run the Boston Marathon just because it's put on by a nonprofit?

[carpediemracing]

It's definitely on topic for any race promoter that asks for volunteers to help with course marshaling etc.

Basically I really don't know of any 501c3 race promoters. Well very few anyway. When a club puts on a race, like the club I belong to, they typically ask for volunteers.

At that point, by definition, the volunteer is an employee (because the volunteer is told what to do and is given the tools they need, like a marshaling vest, walkie talkie, stop sign, etc). I just, and I mean just, had a discussion about this exact lawsuit with a racer lawyer and he agreed that it would be hard to escape the employee definition.

The only time that it would be okay is if the volunteer actually got comp'ed to race. Then there's a give and take and it's not "volunteering". We didn't get into that.

For example I've been pretty heavily criticized for having 10 part time employees for the Bethel Spring Series. I issue W2s, pay workman's comp, unemployment, etc. It cost me $11k total to have them work for me for 7 days.

A lot of people asked me why I didn't have volunteers do that stuff. My real answer is stress - volunteers need to be trained and supervised. At some point I traded money for stress.

However the other answer is that my wife is a CPA. She said legally the folks working for me were employees and I had to issue W2s. Because she's a CPA she has to follow the rules. I compare it to being a pro bike racer married to a USADA person - you have to be particularly clean because it's just unfathomable for anything sketchy to go on.

I still comp'ed people for working the race, meaning if a racer marshaled for a race or two they raced for free. Based on entry fees they were being compensated about $20/hour if they worked two races. However it really cost me $3 out of pocket to pay for their race insurance. The rest was unrealized income (which may or may not have happened, the racer may not have even shown up if the racer couldn't race for free).

In the future I'd like to secure a venue that requires less marshaling and therefore require fewer people.

Also certain companies have a volunteer pool where employees can volunteer a day at a company event in lieu of an actual work day. For the event it's free labor because the sponsor pays them their regular working salary for the day. I hope to work with companies like that so the volunteers get covered by said companies.

I didn't realize the company being sued made so much money. I guess the scope is different. However the concept is the same. Million dollar marathon race promoter and Spring Series bike race promoter, same thing if they use volunteers and they're not a non-profit organization.

[ultraman6970]

To many yes, in your case sports is about your personal interests and sure you arent blind that events are about money coming in 1st and second about the charity part of them.

For example a girl that ran for fun will be attracted by the charity part because in that case she is helping to a "cause" and at the opposite side you have the pro runners and those pretty much are paid in front to go to the race. Many do not see what you see or what this court case is showing of how the things are in reality.

Hope the guys win the case, just because of my interest to know exactly the %s that are coming in after all was paid vs what was donated to charity.



Do you think people run the Boston Marathon just because it's put on by a nonprofit?

[likebikes]

Denver rock and roll marathon is tomorrow, and will go on as scheduled.

[DRZRM]

My memory is that the Boston to New York AIDS rides were critiqued (and eventually went out of business) for the same sort of practices. Of course that was a while back, I don't know that many biking events that were big fund raisers. I hear about the MS fundraisers, but their percentages mostly go to MS if I remember correctly.

Forgive my ignorance, but which cycling events are you thinking of that operate as cash generators like the R&R series?

[Birddog]

Isn't the Tour de Tucson owned and operated by an individual who then doles out some of the proceeds to charitable orgs? I might be mistaken on this but the event routinely draws 8,000 or so riders.

[Bruce K]

This conversation was happening on FB as well and several promoters chimed in.

The case is relevant and could affect bike races.

I thought part of the issue here was that the volunteers thought they were helping the charity and not a for profit entity. I believe it was this "deception" that triggered the initial suit.

The problem, as I read it, is that the promoters of events that are run by clubs, which are generally not for profit entities, believe that they could be lumped in with the target of the suit and potentially owe back wages to several years worth of volunteers.

BK

[old fat man]

My memory is that the Boston to New York AIDS rides were critiqued (and eventually went out of business) for the same sort of practices. Of course that was a while back, I don't know that many biking events that were big fund raisers. I hear about the MS fundraisers, but their percentages mostly go to MS if I remember correctly.

The guy who runs the panmass makes well into six figures. Spends winter in Hawaii I believe. A lot of the money raised in that event is not making it to the actual charity.

[CunegoFan]

I didn't realize the company being sued made so much money. I guess the scope is different. However the concept is the same.

Not that long ago CGI was bought by a private equity company for $250 million. Earlier this year WTC took out $240 million in financing so it could pay its private equity owner a $220 million dividend. This is not a club putting on a century as a way to raise funds for itself.

[malcolm]

A little off topic but what is it worth to have a person running a large complex organization like some of these charities ? I've been appalled to find how little of the funds goes to the actual charity in many cases and how much some of the executives make, but on the other hand to be successful and accomplish the things they want to accomplish they need skilled managers. Skilled managers make big bucks in the private sector and in order to compete I imagine they have to be willing to pay some fairly high salaries. I also suspect there is a shortage of skilled capable people willing to work for what many people would consider a reasonable wage. I don't know the answer, just throwing the thought out there.

[Bruce K]

PMC is an odd deal.

100% of RIDER RAISED revenue gets to Dana Farber. Salaries snd management fees come from the revenue generated from corporate sponsorship.

Most people who participate ride in spite if Billy Starr, not for him.

If the measure of a charity's effectiveness is the percentage of participant revenue that gets where it's supposed to, then the PMC is #1.

All that said, Billy is HIGHLY compensated, as is his wife, and some others. And that is s point that U.S. certainly open for debate

BK