SYMPOSIUM: Horsemen, jocks at odds on new losing mount fee increase

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

If a jock works a horse they should get paid just as a rider would in the AM.. isnt there a fee per horse thing?

They dont benefit from learning about the horse they ride?
They dont create some goodwill that hopefully leads to mounts?
Isnt it expensive enough to own horses without being hit up for another expense?

You do understand that we have a shortage of owners but an overabundance of jockeys?

[Honu]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Uh when the purses contractually negotiated by the horseman go up?

But the 10% stays the same , and when the purses go down the 10% stays the same. Its all relative ....I really dont think many horseman (and you may be an exception )give any thought at all to the jockey's portion when they are trying to get the purses raised.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

are the jockeys who are riding in the afternoon part of the respective trainers workmans comp?

Yes the workmans comp covers all stable employees and jockeys.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

These guys put their life on the line every time the get on the back of a tbred. AND the track / owners / trainers are basically the "employer" of the jockey.. (I know, I know, they are self employed). I find that to be a different situation than not working and asking for free insurance.

And I gotta give credit when credit is due, cause we all know we are quick to criticize when he does something we dont like.

So what? Being in a dangerous job doesnt entitle you to welfare on the backs of others. Are they your employee when they beat you on another guys horse? The Jockeys guild screwed up their insurance, it is their problem. Let them fix it. As for the mount fees, which is what this thread was about i have already said that i support higher fees though this "model rule" seems ridiclously out of touch. The insurance issue has been properly dealt with in many jurisdictions already.

Next time hold off on praising someone till you read the actual "plan" and not the speech (I'm referring to the sm business 'help'). More on that in politics...

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

They dont benefit from learning about the horse they ride?
They dont create some goodwill that hopefully leads to mounts?
Isnt it expensive enough to own horses without being hit up for another expense?

You do understand that we have a shortage of owners but an overabundance of jockeys?

Wouldnt you have to pay for the horse to be worked anyway if it was an exercise rider who did it?

Sure at NYRA or some of the big tracks where the jockeys make more money than all of us combined, that jock should wave the fee.

But if a guy/gal is struggling to get by.. why should they not get paid for the work they do?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So what? Being in a dangerous job doesnt entitle you to welfare on the backs of others. Are they your employee when they beat you on another guys horse? The Jockeys guild screwed up their insurance, it is their problem. Let them fix it. As for the mount fees, which is what this thread was about i have already said that i support higher fees though this "model rule" seems ridiclously out of touch. The insurance issue has been properly dealt with in many jurisdictions already.
Next time hold off on praising someone till you read the actual "plan" and not the speech (I'm referring to the sm business 'help'). More on that in politics...

Its a good thing if it is being properly dealt with.

And I read the cliff notes of the small bus plan and it seemed good to me, tax cuts, etc.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Honu

But the 10% stays the same , and when the purses go down the 10% stays the same. Its all relative ....I really dont think many horseman (and you may be an exception )give any thought at all to the jockey's portion when they are trying to get the purses raised.

What difference does it make who was thought of? The fact is that when the purses go up the jocks get more money in the same proportion to everyone else. Why should they get more? If the purses go down they have the option to leave for greener pastures. And honestly the last 20 years in he vast majority of circuits have seen an increase in purses.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Its a good thing if it is being properly dealt with.

And I read the cliff notes of the small bus plan and it seemed good to me, tax cuts, etc.

It is mostly an attempt at pandering that will not really do much of anything. The same program was tried years ago (Dell's man Carter) and failed miserably. The only thing of value is the zero% capital gains for sm bus for a year. Remember we are about to get hit with huge tax increases when the Bush tax cuts expire, but no one in the White house dares mention that. Everything else is propaganda for spending more money in an attempt to see temporary economic gains in an election year.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What difference does it make who was thought of? The fact is that when the purses go up the jocks get more money in the same proportion to everyone else. Why should they get more? If the purses go down they have the option to leave for greener pastures. And honestly the last 20 years in he vast majority of circuits have seen an increase in purses.

How much did you pay your gallop rider per head in say 1998? How much do you pay them now? Im sure if you were paying 10$ in 1998 and were still trying to pay that now you would be having to gallop your horses yourself.
I think the fee per mount should go up just like anything else , you dont pay a groom or hot walker what you paid them 10 years ago , not if you are being lawfull anyway. Do you still charge the same day rate as you did in 1998?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Honu

How much did you pay your gallop rider per head in say 1998? How much do you pay them now? Im sure if you were paying 10$ in 1998 and were still trying to pay that now you would be having to gallop your horses yourself.
I think the fee per mount should go up just like anything else , you dont pay a groom or hot walker what you paid them 10 years ago , not if you are being lawfull anyway. Do you still charge the same day rate as you did in 1998?

They have no one to blame except for themselves for having the same pay scale. No one said the mount fee shouldnt go up but tying it to Cost of living adjustments is seriously flawed.

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Respectfully giving your trainer 10% of the winning purse vs. 10% of your net is bit off the mark as well IMO.. You win a race 30k you pay 1800 to the jock and then you pay 1800 to trainer. Jock only earns when he cashes(commission) trainer has his day rate.. I realize that nobody gets rich on 2000-3000 a month to take care of a horse but it certainly has some salary built in..

lol, day rate barely covers expenses. Jocks also gets breeze rates, if they get up and hussle. Some jocks ride for big outfits in the morning on stakes horses bono, but they are looking for the big payday. Trainers don't run in every race, but some jocks do.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by MisterB

lol, day rate barely covers expenses. Jocks also gets breeze rates, if they get up and hussle. Some jocks ride for big outfits in the morning on stakes horses bono, but they are looking for the big payday. Trainers don't run in every race, but some jocks do.

What the heck is a breeze rate ?????Are you from Europe because I rode races for 13 years and never heard of a breeze rate. If you are saying that some jockeys gallop horses and get paid for it to suppliment their income then I get ya. Believe me the big boys dont gallop horses , and if a jock is riding the card anywhere they arent galloping horses on the side for money.
Im sure expenses and cost of living has went up for jocks just as it has for everybody else. Goggles have gone up to 7 bucks a pair and that isnt even for the name brand. Pants used to be about 35 bucks a pair but are now closer to 70. A set of girths is around 180$ . So maybe they shouldnt say the increase is for cost of living but for the cost of making a living.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by MisterB

lol, day rate barely covers expenses. Jocks also gets breeze rates, if they get up and hussle. Some jocks ride for big outfits in the morning on stakes horses bono, but they are looking for the big payday. Trainers don't run in every race, but some jocks do.

Yeah OK Mr B its 20 bucks to turn a horse out and feed it and 100 a day to have it in training. I don't think 100 is crazy but save the "I am bearly breakin even" for someone who can't do the math. If you aren't paying extra for Gastrogaurd, shoeing, vitamins and tonics(always a fav), and etc 100 a day is ok in NY and Ca. 50 a day is the standard at Penn Nat and that is for 20%plus trainers.. No clue how much Marty Wolfson's shoes cost but if I had a horse with him I think I would be thrilled to pay the premium

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

well no **** trainers get some salary built in... I mean who takes care of the horse, boards it, feeds it and trains it every day?

Who shows up once a month to ride it and maybe work it once and awhile?

You were reaching there buddy!

Always considered owning a horse a luxury not a utility so I never grind the figs. BUT the disparity is alarming and the cost is NOT a reflection of care. Half the cost is sometimes twice the care.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Always considered owning a horse a luxury not a utility so I never grind the figs. BUT the disparity is alarming and the cost is NOT a reflection of care. Half the cost is sometimes twice the care.

How would you know?