USATF COO tells why Dave Clingan didn’t get full payment
A major reason for Dave Clingan’s resignation from all USATF committees was a holy hassle over getting paid for his work on a stand-alone, independent USATF Masters T&F Web site. USATF budgeted $4,500 for this project and Mike McNees, the “masters advocate” within the national office, signed off on this. But when time came to pay Dave for this work, USATF Chief Financial Officer Gina Miller balked, citing a little-known provision in the USATF Code of Ethics limiting such payments to $2,000. Despite offers of creative bookkeeping, Dave decided not to fight. Mike, the USATF COO, emailed his explanation to Bob Weiner and CC’d me, Gina, Andy Martin and USATF Masters T&F Treasurer Carroll DeWeese. It is reprinted below.
Here’s what Mike said in reply to a comment I posted on behalf of Bob Weiner:
Bob – Based on your comments as posted on Masterstrack.com, I wanted to explain the issue that affected Dave Clingan, as it has others in the past.
“Indy” didn’t impose anything on him, what’s at issue is the USATF Code of Ethics, as adopted by the organization as a whole in 2006, not by the staff. Its conflict-of-interest provisions include the following (emphasis added):I. Policy on Conflicts of Interest (COI): This Conflict of Interest Policy is designed to help “Responsible Persons” of USATF identify situations that present potential Conflicts of Interest and to provide USATF with procedures to address Conflicts of Interest.
A. Any one of the following circumstances shall create a Conflict of Interest.1. Transactions greater than $100 in the aggregate per year between USATF and a “Responsible Person”. This includes any employment or payment for services with USATF.
2. The following payments shall constitute exceptions to the $100 in the aggregate per year limit.a. Expense reimbursements paid by USATF, as long as such reimbursements comply with Board-approved expense and other policies.
b. Amounts paid to individuals for programs requiring a particular expertise necessary to achieve the program’s objectives. These amounts are limited to an aggregate of $2,000 in any calendar year. A “Responsible Person” shall not take part in any decision resulting in his or her receipt of payment. These amounts are commonly referred to as “honoraria.”
c. Prize money paid to athletes based on their competitive performance.d. Appearance fees paid to athletes from sponsorship dollars as designated in the sponsorship contract.
Further: A “Responsible Person” is any person serving as a Board member, National Office employee, independent contractor, or member of a committee, sub-committee, council, task force or any other decision making body of USATF.
(Mike continues:) This provision of the ethics code is very clear, and the underlying reason for it is obvious; it prevents committees or committee members from hiring themselves to do USATF work. When you suggest that we should find a way “around the system”, you are saying we should manipulate the payment in some way so as to violate the code of ethics either in spirit or as written. I know that is not what you intend, nor is it how you would have us behave.
In truth I initially approved full payment to Dave in ignorance of this provision, which came to light after the fact. I appreciate Dave’s efforts on behalf of Masters Track and Field as well, and am sorry he feels frustrated by our mutual progress to date. I too am disappointed that we have not fully joined his product with the USATF website, and remain committed to that outcome. I told the Master’s T & F Exec. Committee at our Annual Meeting last week that we would link to Dave’s pages as they stand right away.
The underlying ethical principle however, that one cannot be simultaneously in a position of authority and a direct beneficiary of the exercise of that authority, is sound. If you see another way to interpret the policy I am certainly open to hearing it.
I hope your time in Indianapolis last week was productive, I know it was more than a little busy. We all need an extra weekend this week.Healthy Training, Mike
20 Responses
This is a deplorable way to treat Dave. A deal is a deal. To question Dave’s ehtics is not right. What’s not ethical is agreeing with a man to do a job and then not paying him based on an interpretation of a policy or ignorance thereof. Try telling that to a judge. I wonder who a court would side with?
I was on the Board when this code of ethics was being modified. If I recall correctly it ( the intent ) had more to do with compensation issues by committee members who were coaches who had financial connections with athletic equipment suppliers etc. In most cases those who had financial ties with the suppliers were able to justify exceptions to the code of ethics.
So what they are saying if you are a member of a committee you can’t be compensated for your services. I guess high performance coaches aren’t part of a committee so there isn’t a problem there.
Reimbursement for things is ok but services by a committee member, no.
I believe that rankings, records and websites are services that probably should be outsourced to contractors because I believe it is really too much work to ask from a volunteer. With a contractor you get the opportunity to pay a lot more for the services. It will be interesting to see who will replace Dave. It will take more than one. Our Defense department found a way around their policy to pay retired generals, why not wedsite, records and rankings people?
Obviously, the new management are just doing their high paying jobs. History is lost on them. They didn’t live it.
USATF is a professional athlete’s organization. Which is a good thing for them. Youth is the feeder system and Masters is a small cash cow. Independence or Senior Games affiliation?
George
Wow. Mike initially approved full payment and is now falling back on this “provision” saying how unethical it would be to make full payment.
What a complete jerk!!!
I’m sorry Dave is leaving, but I would too in this case (as I understand it).
i wonder how things would have been if dave had agreed to $2,000 , and then upon completion , found a loophole / technicality that allowed him an extra $2,500. in my business for over 32 years, when i offered a fair price for an autobody service say $ 500….and was lowballed by an adjuster who came back with ” how about $150 less, we’ll pay $350 ” i would always reply…” well, how about $150 more or $ 650 ” nine times out of ten the original amount was paid . i think it’s a shame that a guy that’s done so much for masters track and field is subjected to this “slight of hand ” george is dead on…” a deal is a deal “….albert
offer.
acceptance.
performance.
Payment is due.
breach of contract.
judgment for Dave.
fees and costs for Dave.
interest on the judgment for Dave.
black eye for USATF.
Case closed.
I appreciate Mike’s sympathetic remarks, and I believe that Mike is an honorable guy. But I agree with George that a blanket policy of excluding dues paying athletes (i.e., members of a sports committee such as masters track and field) from all contracts beyond a modest “honorarium” is detrimental to the organization. There should be better ways to screen the ethics of my website agreement with USATF than to disallow reasonable compensation for a job I was fully qualified to do. It’s pretty clear I did not “hire myself” to do this work. In fact, I offered to do it for considerably less than what I would have charged a corporate client, knowing full well how limited our masters budget is. I could be wrong, but I believe if USATF outsourced this project to someone who is not intimately involved in the masters program, they would pay 2-3 times as much and possibly end up with an inferior product.
Rather than defend their policy, I think USATF should seriously consider revising the language of its ethics code to prevent activities it frowns upon, without undermining activities which would actually be prudent, cost effective and beneficial.
does anybody at USATF understand ex post facto, a principal of english common law that still would trump their other concerns?
Mike needs to run this situation by the USATF lawyer so Dave can be paid and this ridiculousness will cease.
Board policy, even under the important heading of “Ethics” cannot invalidate a contract to pay someone for services rendered. Am I missing something? The tail is wagging the dog!
Take them to small claims court for the difference.
With “ethics” like Mike’s and USATF’s, who needs criminals and cheats?
This is a huge black eye for USATF. They need to fix this, and they need to fix it fast.
Though I’d guess it was not intentionally done, this law makes it real easy to hire someone and then pay less than what was originally promised. It would have been better to figure out that limit of $2,000 before the work was done. Dave puts a great deal of time into this, mostly out of love for the sport, and deserves to be treated better. Turning around and claiming that it is “unethical” to pay what was promised is unethical.
Nobody wants to see Dave treated unfairly. In fact staff has already proposed a number of options for how we might resolve this, so far unsuccessfully. I have proposed another, and will continue to work with Dave on that.
Thank you all for your opinions, you are preaching to the choir for the most part in principle, notwithstanding your understanding or lack thereof of the details. As USATF staff however we don’t pick and choose which rules or ethics code provisions we abide by, and my understanding of the history on this one is that the ethics code provision in question has been consistently enforced.
All of that said, we will continue to work directly with Dave to find a legitimate means to resolve the issue of his services rendered, and will likely not have further commment here.
Mike McNees
COO, USATF
I believe there is an appeal process to the USATF ethics committee which Dave should initiate.
I think there is an even bigger problem with this code with other Masters Committees, particularly the Media Committee, which I believe we definitely need more of if we are to grow. It might be that different people serve on the committees and others provide the services on a contractual basis.
George
Gotta love how many of us don’t “understand” the process of awarding Dave a contract that violates a code of “ethics,” then only enforcing that code when it comes to paying him. Hey, you guys ARE the USATF – so don’t hide behind USATF rules as if they were some foreign beast keeping you prisoner behind walls that cannot be breached.
You know what I’d do if I’d promised a guy like Dave Clingan a contract and then found out my organization wouldn’t pay him? I’d pass the hat among everyone involved and make up the difference – or at least split it.
Hell, as a USATF masters competitor myself, I’m willing to donate $25 to a fund to make up the difference. I’ll bet a lot of masters athletes would be. So, Mike, if you want to start up a non-USATF Let’s Pay Dave For Dave’s Work fund, let me know where to send my check.
Ethics isn’t some ethereal code living off in some intangible alternate universe. And it’s sure as hell not words on paper. Ethics lives inside us as human beings. It’s the way we treat one another. It’s the thing that allows us to look in the mirror every morning.
Let’s make this right for Dave. And for god’s sake, let’s get that masters web site up and running!!!
That’s sounds like a good idea. I’m in for $25. I would be willing to be the collection point if you like. Could run through Seattle Master AC. Make check to SMAC, 9787 Country Club Dr. Hayden Lake, Id 83835. Then I’ll cut a check to Dave.
George, 208-691-0193
Hey Mike,
with all due respect, how about you cut Dave a check for the amount promised, and then “resolve the issue” amongst yourselves? It’s your screwup, not his. I agree this is a black eye for USATF.
Dave has been helpful to me, I will go for $25
Bud Held
Just mailed my $25 at lunch. Thanks George and thanks Dave.
I am stunned- first USATF contracts with Dave Clingan to work on the masters website for $4500. Then when it comes time to pay him the COO suddenly discovers a “code of ethics” excuse to stiff him $2500. Wow – maybe I will try that with the plumber the next time I need him to come fix my furnace.
Gee Mr. Plumber guy – I know you said $500 to install the whatzit and I agreed to that – but I now I find that would conflict with my code of ethics not to pay anyone whom I contract to work in my house more than $300 a year. Take it or leave it.
I suspect my plumber (who actually is a really nice guy) might leave with a key piece of my furnace in his hand so that it will not work.
So – does this “code of ethics” apply to everyone who is employed by USATF perhaps including the COO? Oh no – they are “employees” while all others who contract to provide serrvices to USATF receive an “honoria”. Does this also mean tha anyone who is on a USATF committee or asked to fulfill some role for USATF and is not an employee is limited to a maximum compensation for time, effort, and I assume travel expenses- hotel, convention fees, meals, etc – to $2000 a year regardless of the expenses they may have in fulfilling their responsibilities. If this is the case there may be more than a few folks who decide not to accept these committee or team manager responsibilities because they do not wish to or cannot afford to make such a financial donation to USATF. And good luck in finding members of USATF to work cheap for you.
This “code of ethics” seems to be made up by a committee of folks who are unable to understand the implications of their work. If this is in response to a bozo or two who were ripping off USATF with inflated bills for “services” such penthouee suites in hotels at international or national championships,limo services, room service, mini-bar raids, and the like – there are other ways to manage this aside from imposing a limit on compensation for a calendar year. It has resulted in Dave being stiffed $2500 for services he rendered to USATF -which sounds like a theft of service to me – and an ugly stain on USATF as a contract breaker and not to be trusted in the future.
I’m gratified, touched and overwhelmed by the kindness… but could never accept a dime from my friends. Free beer, on the other hand, is perfectly acceptable (according to the Clingan Beer Drinking Code of Ethics), so I won’t turn down any future pints!
As an update to all the goings on, Mike McNees has informed me that he plans to present this issue to the USATF Ethics Committe for their consideration. I appreciate that and, for now, I think that is the best plan of action. My check’s in the mail to USATF and at this point I would prefer not to comment further until we see what the Ethics Committee has to say. It may take a while, but I will keep you posted.
Thanks again for all the understanding and support. Beyond all this rubber check nonsense, I hope that MTF will find a way to launch and maintain the website that I built and that it will prove to be beneficial to masters athletes.
It seems unethical to cheat a guy like Dave who over the years has given so much to USATF Masters. Now, Dave’s been working on this project for quite sometime. At the end of 2008, he was awarded a contract to set up the website for $4,500,and $4,000 annually to administer it. But the Ethics agreement limits his pay to $2,000 per year.
So okay, pay him $2,000 for all the work before and including after the meeting in calendar 2008. Then another $2,000 for 2009, and then maybe a little more work for the first week in January 2010, for another 2,000 per year. Whatever, it’s still priceless, technically “ethical” and considerably less than what they owe him and a whole lot less than what he’s worth.
Leave a Reply