Problems are brewing...

[Fearless Leader]

The more things change, the more they stay the same. If you read the laughable blood Horse chat with the leader of the gnome society you will see that without a shadow of a doubt, NOTHING has, or will change. This guy is equal parts arrogant, evasive, and just plain uninformed. The jockey's only have themselves to blame for allowing the nonsense to continue and shouldn't be shocked when they continue to get ZERO support from the other factions within the industry.

[blackthroatedwind]

See the " Problems Are Brewing " thread.

[Left Bank]

Originally Posted by Honu

But do not pro football players and such get to make commercials endorsing products for a fee? I do believe they are employees of the owner of the football team they play for.
A solution I think would be to just put all jockeys under contract for owners like they do in Europe( where by the way standard losing jock mount no matter the purse is no less than 100.00) , then the owners could mandate what they can and cant do and they would be insured and protected.
Sure the owner without alot of money and good horses would get the bottum rung riders but then again they would only have to insure 1 or 2 jocks and they would be their employees. Racing is very diffirent from any other industry and its hard to find solutions when everyone has a "we against them" attitude , I do agree that the jockeys approach the horseman in a combative way and until they adjust their attitude it is most likely the jocks wont get any help at all.
Racetracks and horseman do have an obligation to make sure that riders have the help they need when they get in accidents on horseback otherwise they open themselves up to lawsuits and to be honest I wouldnt step a foot into the stirrup unless I knew I would be covered by accident insurance.
There are still racetracks that dont mandate the trainers have workmans comp. and how they get away with this I have know idea.

I tend to agree with this idea.We could make it like baseball.But I think it would have huge drawbacks.If they did it like baseball or football,and had a league minimum for pay,it would drive out all the small stables,period.The small guys would not be able to afford the jock.And the small stables would not be able to afford all the insurance,etc,that would probably be required under league rules.
The Big shot jocks would still get all the good mounts,and the shitty jocks would still get the shitty mounts.In this scenario,On the plus side, when Johnny V comes up for free agency when his contract with Pletcher expires,The owners could have one hell of a bidding war.They could do it at Keeneland,like a sale,and put it on ESPN,and all of us could bet on who is going to get him.We could wager on how big his new contract will be,etc,etc...Then,all the new jocks from McCarron's school could get drafted in the same way.They could ride at OBS first,so everyone could see their skills.This would also be the end of Jockey agents,so there is one less person they would have to pay,putting more money back in their pockets.The possibilities could be endless

[Thunder Gulch]

Originally Posted by sumitas

National health care is long overdue in this country.

Absurd...move to Europe.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by deltagulf

agree 100% the guild is what went wrong.

i do as well. this all seems to have come to a head the last couple of years, with that ass gertmenian running the show-into the ground!

jocks want to be contractors, arranging individual rides--yet want someone else to foot the bill for this independance. you can't have your cake, eat it, and send someone else the bill.
trainers hire staff-they are their employees, working for said trainer day in and day out. the jock shows up long enough to get on the horse, ride the race, take a pic if lucky enough, and go to the next horse, with the next trainer, etc.....
seems the whole point in having the guild would be so that the jocks, collectively, could get the coverages they need, without it costing the lesser-paid a fortune.

[sumitas]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

Absurd...move to Europe.

it's not absurd...you move to, ummmm, geesh i can't think of a country (cept us) without national health care, so go back to your stall.

[packerbacker7964]

To me if jockeys are employees then you put 15 names in a hat and draw names for who rides what. Just like at the Mountain the jockey silks are the same each and every race.

[ELA]

I think part of the misunderstanding is that there are two perspectives here -- one being that of the fan, and the other being someone who is "in" and involved in the industry and works within it. This is not about national health insurance -- and if you think that is the answer, then you are being very myopic and neglecting the economic, sociological, political and numerous other aspects of the United States. This is also not about being an "independent contractor" or an "employee" -- and if there are any labor lawyers here, I am certain they can add an educated and qualified amount of knowledge to the discussion.

This isn't about "pointing fingers" and "blame". Don't get me wrong, there are people and parties who are at fault. However, "proving" it and everything that goes along with that is part of the problem, not the solution.

What this is about is the entire industry -- and all of the parties -- their inability to collabortively and collectively work together. Each party has to give, take, compromise, pay, subsidize, and so on. Until that happens -- all you will see is finger pointing, blame, granstanding, threats, lawsuits, BS, lies, propaganda, BS, committees, studies, BS, no progress, BS, and, did I say BS.

Eric

[Danzig]

racing (and this has been said so many times before) needs a national body to oversee all this--much like the nba, nascar, the nfl, etc. all employees are under the national 'umbrella' of that sport. i think that this would be a huge step forward for racing, and for everyone involved. it would solve so many problems--but the solution itself is a problem as so many don't want a nat'l governing body.

just think of it--blanket policies nationwide for the sport, and for everyone involved.

it'll never happen.

[Thunder Gulch]

Originally Posted by sumitas

it's not absurd...you move to, ummmm, geesh i can't think of a country (cept us) without national health care, so go back to your stall.

I'm not going to get into a political debate on a horse racing board. Obviously there are some problems with the health care system, but Americans generally shy away from Socialists policies. Free trade tends to correct any inefficiencies. Just because other countries have national health care doesn't make it right. If we followed the rest of the world's lead on the economy, we wouldn't be the world leader.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Honu, have you seen Mike Smith ride? He should pay us to watch him.

Oh I totally agree , not a fan of his riding or his person . I would put Joy Scott on my horse first or scratch.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Honu

Oh I totally agree , not a fan of his riding or his person . I would put Joy Scott on my horse first or scratch.

Yes Honu. Chantal wins an occasional race also.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by easy goer

I never made the statement originallly, someone else did. I just find the logic here very hard to understand. You mentioned something about the owner's horse dying. You did or the other guy did, I guess the other guy did. What's the pt? Dead or alive someone has to pay expenses.

I understand your position and I realize you have an emotional stake involved here. Which is fine, I would just like to keep the thread on a more logical basis.

For example the pt. about paying for your tack, this actually works against the argument that jocks are employees. If they are paying for their own equipment this suggests they are indep. contractors.

There are several factors the IRS looks at in cases such as these, including do they get paid hourly and do they report to a certain location like an office? In the case of jocks, it seems to me that much of the time they maybe doing things that count as work for several employers at once...

For example, a jock diets to make weight, who is he workign for? Well everybody who he is riding for on that day.

Or he studies the condition of the track (something that applies for all his mounts), or goes to get equipment, or he drives to the track, all in the normal day. How do you divide that up among several employers? Seems to me he is basically at the track and working for a number of employers at the same time.

SOunds like an independent contractor.

Now there was another pt. about benefits and the guild and all that. I think it would be in their best interest if they were to be a certified bargaining unit like the NFL players association and then a lot of these issues could be negotiated out and they wouldnt have this ongoing argument about who should pay for what. They wouldnt have to argue about indep. contractor status if the bargaining unit and owners had agreed to it.

OF course owners being rich folks arent likely to bargain as a unit either. So there is a problem there.

You made a pt. about there is no doubt that the owners should pay for medical. Why are you so stuck on this position? It is really an emotional stand you are taking here, logically economically it could be paid for either way. It probably wouldnt change things no matter which way it is done, the jock income probably wouldnt change either way. So why the emotional attahcment to this issue?

I didnt say that the owners should foot the bill , I really think the racetracks should pay for unlimited accident insurance for the jockeys afterall it is their private property . Im sure they have an unlimited accident insurance policy for the patrons who come to the track.
Jockeys are independent contractors until they throw a leg over the horse in the paddock , then they are a payed employee of the owner.
I agree the Guild screwed it up , they pissed off the racetracks and the horseman , but what about the riders who are not in the Guild , dont they get a say in any of this . You wonder why I have an emotional attatchment to this subject , well I was a jockey for 13 years that would be the first reason and the second is that a few of those 58 jocks on the Disabled list are my friends and perhaps some of them were never in the Guild but are now losing the help they were getting .
I will never change my mind , jocks should have unlimited accident isurance while they are on the job , if they go down and get paralyzed or have severe head injuries they shouldnt have to worry if their medical bills are payed and if they will have enough money to eat on. It should be in the insurance policy and to be honest the racetracks should pay for it .

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Honu

Oh I totally agree , not a fan of his riding or his person . I would put Joy Scott on my horse first or scratch.

I can tell you one thing about Mike Smith, when he was riding well in the mid 90's in NY he was good with his money. He always took care of us (the help at the barn)

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If you were married to his wife you would have been too

Not getting married Chuck. Nothing but trouble.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Not getting married Chuck. Nothing but trouble.

no comment

[Honu]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I can tell you one thing about Mike Smith, when he was riding well in the mid 90's in NY he was good with his money. He always took care of us (the help at the barn)

That is very good of him for sure , its always nice to be appriciated. My views of him on a personal level are from when he lived with a friend of mine and how he treated her, As far as his riding, I just have never been a fan.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Honu

That is very good of him for sure , its always nice to be appriciated. My views of him on a personal level are from when he lived with a friend of mine and how he treated her, As far as his riding, I just have never been a fan.

Well I never lived with him so I could understand the differing point of view. There was a time before he got hurt really bad at Saratoga that he was an excellent rider.

Why couldnt the track foot the bill for something like a catastrophic medical insurance? Something that doesnt kick in until $50,000+ or something.

Below that jocks could foot something that had limited coverage. There's lots of ways to work insurance so that no one person has to foot the entire bill. Perhaps even the owners could fund a catastrophic fund. I think that is the real issue that Honu is getting at. Smaller bills could be covered by personal coverage.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by easy goer

Why couldnt the track foot the bill for something like a catastrophic medical insurance? Something that doesnt kick in until $50,000+ or something.

Below that jocks could foot something that had limited coverage. There's lots of ways to work insurance so that no one person has to foot the entire bill. Perhaps even the owners could fund a catastrophic fund. I think that is the real issue that Honu is getting at. Smaller bills could be covered by personal coverage.

The tracks did cover the jocks for $100000 until they (Guild) let the policy lapse. Plus that amount really isn't enough anymore to cover a serious injury. Most tracks have adequate coverage in place.