Not quite. Smaller race companies that are only putting on races over the summer will most likely be insulated from the FLSA, under Section 213.

See:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29/213

In layman's terms, if all your events fall within a seven month window, you are exempt and are perfectly fine using volunteers. And even if you fall a little outside this window, if, during any six month window of the prior year your average revenues were less than 33.3% of the average of the remaining six months, then you are also exempt. To ensure they fall within the latter definition, RDs may want to delay opening registration for some events further into the spring such that their fall/winter revenues are lower such that they are less than a third of their spring/summer revenues.

Will this law suit creep past our small world of amateur sports and into county fairs, music/food/drink festivals, spelling bees, waterway clean-up, trail building, and on?

I was trying to point out the folly in wanting to apply personal moral reasoning to business practices. It is not possible because, for instance, we all place a different value on sweat equity. Surely janitors and coal minors suffer more than accountants or attorneys- in terms or physical labor- but that isn't grounds for paying them more for the reasons you pointed out. People seem to confuse personal morality with business ethics, and there is an important distinction between the two. At the end of the day, whether you are the janitor or the CFO, you are judged based on your ability to deliver on your promises. Now, if we want to see how subjectivity can invalidate a competative system, look no further than the College Football Playoffs.

thank you, did not know that .. I'm sure ATCEndurance will be happy to know this too ;-)

It is possible, but, highly unlikely. See what Kay posted regarding the FLSA, above. Most of those likely are not governed by the FLSA.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

First, if any of your examples above are non-profit, then they are exempt. Beyond that, I suspect most of your examples will be exempt under Section 213 (see my post above). Not sure what you mean by "amateur sports".

In March, MLB had the lawsuit against it tossed out by successfuly claiming that it's All Star FanFest game is a special one-off event, and as such falls under the seasonal exemption. The litigants have appealed to state court.
See:
http://nypost.com/...er-suit-against-mlb/

Darrin isn't making profits and taking them to Wall Street, he's just making a living by putting on a lot of good races for us. But since it is a for-profit, in terms of the lawsuit Racing Underground and Ironman are the same.. that is a problem.

Agreed. This is where it get's tricky.

One thing that needs to be said, most people in this business ( the endurance sports event management business), don't get into it to make money. Main reason - is that despite the outside optics, there is not a lot of money to be made. Like many businesses, the margins are very thin and the competition for bodies is getting harder and harder every year.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I didn't know if she was pro se or not

So why not have each race or series be an independent legal entity?

Maybe this could work, and seems to be the way MLB has managed to win its case. But MLB's FanFest is indeed a one off event separate to its other activities (from the little I know of that case), and so it's probably easier to argue as such. If CGI tried to argue that each of its R&R races is a separate legal entity that would be harder, as it has so many races year-round. Most laws are designed not to be circumvented by some clever legal manoevering. Also, in your scenario you may need to have a single holding company that owned each individual race, and that company could then be liable. Don't know...

Race management companies will probably prefer to build a business where they grow the equity, reinvest profits, build goodwill, etc., rather than have a series of independent races (that could even be classed as non-profits) that pay an event management company a fee to put on each race.

These are the questions that for-profit event management companies that have year-round races will need to address going forward, assuming the CGI suit is successful. Is there a way to structure my company to avoid breaching FLSA? Is a charity donation to, say, a church group which then provides 100 volunteers a breach of FLSA? Does it make a difference if a portion of profits go to charity?

Hopefully Dan's investigations will find some workable solutions for the year-round medium- and large-sized race production companies to work within the law.

Didn't see this at the time, but it seems that the lawsuit filed against Competitor Group (Rock n Roll events) failed last January, but did so on technical grounds. If I'm reading correctly from the summary in the link below, the suit was not filed within the statute of limitations.

So good and bad news for large race companies using volunteer labor. Good news that no legal precedent was set barring the use of volunteer labor for these types of private, for-profit race companies, but bad that the door may still be open (theoretically, at least) for a future complaint.

However, it seems (to me) relatively unlikely that another lawsuit will be filed, and clearly the Rock and Roll series appears comfortable soliciting volunteer labor (per requests for such posted on this forum in recent months), so I would think WTC and similar large race companies will be breathing more easily now. Smaller RDs likely had nothing to worry about anyway, based in part from the seasonality of their business.

http://www.leagle.com/...20COMPETITOR%20GROUP

From the link:

"Because Plaintiff did not file her consent until after 3 years from the accrual of her action, her FLSA claim is time-barred under Eighth Circuit precedent."

"Because Plaintiff's FLSA federal claim was not timely filed, the Court dismisses Count I with prejudice."

"Because the Court has dismissed Plaintiff's FLSA claim, Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Conditional Class Certification and Court-Authorized Notice Pursuant to §216(b) of the FLSA (ECF No. 53) is denied as moot."

Interesting to see this pop up again, I know I posted on this a few years ago.

Personally I still see volunteers as unpaid workers. When I volunteer for something outside of work, I certainly don't expect to be compensated.

Right, but the point is that it's not about what you, as an individual volunteer expects (clearly you expect no compensation if you have volunteered), but rather is the for-profit company that is using unpaid volunteers in breach of the FLSA?

Or put another way, it's not about your rights to volunteer unpaid, but rather it's about denying the rights of job-seekers in the area to find employment, even if temporary, because those should-be-paid positions are being taken by volunteers.

agree on the points in RED. further, no one is putting a gun to anyone's head to volunteer. volunteering to help / participate with the event is exactly that, VOLUNTARY. expect to get paid ? go get a job.

"Because Plaintiff's FLSA federal claim was not timely filed, the Court dismisses Count I with prejudice."

does this mean the individual filing the lawsuit must pay competitor gp's attorney's fees to defend?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I'm not sure, but I doubt it (unlike in the UK). In the US I believe rules vary by state, but in general one has to pay to defend against a lawsuit brought against you, even if you win. In some states a frivolous suit could require the litigant to pay (Texas being one), but it's a minority of states and in this case I don't believe the case would be deemed frivolous. It was not dismissed as such.

Businesses may take out legal insurance too, which CGI may have done, in which case they would likely only need pay their deductible.

Yes, I agree that it's about the law and not about my personal opinion.

But, if there are people willing to take those positions for $0, isn't that the market rate for that position, and the rate that the job-seekers should get?

No. You need to do more research on employment laws as they pertain to volunteers working for private, for-profit companies.

Here's a starter for you:
http://www.businesslawpost.com/...e-by-for-profit.html

I am well aware of the many ways that the government distorts the markets.

I just can't imagine that taking away the option of volunteers would be a good thing for anyone in the end.

RD's cannot afford to pay it. So prices would skyrocket, attendance would go down, and eventually, all races would go away, and no one would have jobs.

.

So which bits of the FLSA would you like to tear up as government distortion? Or all of it? And are you just worried about the triathlon industry for your own personal reasons, or you think all for-profit companies should be allowed to use volunteers to, you know, keep costs and therefore prices down, lest their business model not qquite work?

The good news is that most of the triathlon industry is immune from this issue, due to the seasonality of their business and (perhaps) the way they structure their volunteers, but larger companies like WTC and Competitor Group may be breaching the law.

Does anyone care? Possibly the government, and possiibly unemployed locals who may feel they should be entitled to benefit from a big race company coming to town and using public roads etc.

Since the economic benefit of Ironman to the local community is pretty well documented, then the unemployed are getting a benefit, especially if the alternative is no Ironman, no thousands of people renting hotel rooms and eating and shopping locally. Which most likely does produce more employment opportunities.

Thinking that WTC would just hire thousands of people is just absurd, kind of like thinking that every illegally downloaded song would have been paid for if Napster, etc. didn't exist.

What do you mean the RD's cannot afford it? All the races I help at either give a voucher for like 10 bucks an hour for a future race, or 50% off a future race.
For the few who do not do things like this, HITS is one, IM is another, etc., we just do not help at. There right to not pay, my right to let them make their profits off
someone elses back.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep