Sign in to follow this  
DCI Petitioner

Sign the Petition

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Lance said:

I made sure to include the fact that FBI and State Patrol checks are required in my state. 

Did the one in PA not include an FBI check?

Also, I'm not reading the whole thread, but there's a difference between evidence of criminal activity popping up on a background check, and a specific org's' policies for what is and is not "allowed" for working in their org. Maybe that's the real question that needs to be addressed. 

Our policies are pretty strict, but like I said, it's public ed that I work in. All schools in the state are required to use the same hiring policies for what pops on a background check. 

it requires FBI. that to me is where the red flag should have been

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, garfield said:

See, this is how discussions devolve into finger-pointing personal attacks.  Please, Jeff, don't tarnish my opinion of your level headedness.  No where did I say that I have proof that it's not happening.

What I said is that the OPs method for addressing the issue is flawed because it makes oblique contentions that DCI, the corps, Dan Potter, and an at-large director (a single one) aren't doing enough (or anything, or the wrong things - the OP and the petition don't say) to address this very important issue.  Says who?  The petitioner?  Is there any evidence presented that DCI or the member corps DON'T have policies addressing the issue?  (That's a stupid contention - every single one of them does, I guarantee you!) 

But the petition demands that corps "submit" their policies (ostensibly for review by DCI, again no detailed expectations are presented), and that DCI, in some misunderstood assumption of how the organization works, should act as designer, implementer, police, arbiter, judge, and jury into each corps' practices on this subject.

What is the problem being addressed by the petition?  That there is an issue in drum corps of sexual assault, that DCI isn't doing enough to monitor the corps in its association for approved practices, or that an instance in PA is definitive proof that DCI isn't doing its job.

Again, I never said I don't believe it happens.  What I've said from the beginning is that the contention that DCI has some magic power vested in it to act is flawed, and that, as of now, the association has determined to address the issue in each corps individually.

I wonder if Stu's apt suggestion of a single-line "policy" statement would assuage the OP's (petitioner's) demands.

what in my post is an attack? I stated fact. if you think this isn't an issue, you need help. help as in discovering the harsh reality of how this is sadly too ignored.

 

i agree with the petition. it needs to be circuit wide.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, garfield said:

From DCI's website* (emphasis mine):

"What's the Relationship Between the Drum Corps and DCI?

Drum corps that participate in DCI-produced or -sanctioned events and drum corps that are members of Drum Corps International are independent entities. There are no legal or fiduciary ties between the corps and Drum Corps International other than those associated with membership or participation in an event.

Each drum corps is responsible for its own financial, managerial and operational well-being. That said, Drum Corps International has an interest in helping corps remain financially healthy and organizationally sound. Therefore, each year some resources are allocated to evaluate and support corps that may require assistance."

 

My argument against the petition is the amount of valuable time and effort required to address an issue that DCI shouldn't be addressing.  The notion that "what's the harm" applies is a naive assessment of the costs to address invalid claims while still attempting to not paint the organization as being supporting of the action.

*admittedly, this same site is still showing a video describing DCI that was produced in 2006.  You know, back when corps wore uniforms and marched on yard-lines instead of tarps.

in todays legal world, it would be very smart of DCI to address it circuit wide.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

it requires FBI. that to me is where the red flag should have been

FBI checks only deal with Federal crimes and Federal data base. It does not check State crimes that are State specific.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, garfield said:

From DCI's website* (emphasis mine):

"What's the Relationship Between the Drum Corps and DCI?

Drum corps that participate in DCI-produced or -sanctioned events and drum corps that are members of Drum Corps International are independent entities. There are no legal or fiduciary ties between the corps and Drum Corps International other than those associated with membership or participation in an event.

Each drum corps is responsible for its own financial, managerial and operational well-being. That said, Drum Corps International has an interest in helping corps remain financially healthy and organizationally sound. Therefore, each year some resources are allocated to evaluate and support corps that may require assistance."

 

My argument against the petition is the amount of valuable time and effort required to address an issue that DCI shouldn't be addressing.  The notion that "what's the harm" applies is a naive assessment of the costs to address invalid claims while still attempting to not paint the organization as being supporting of the action.

*admittedly, this same site is still showing a video describing DCI that was produced in 2006.  You know, back when corps wore uniforms and marched on yard-lines instead of tarps.

DCI has the official statement that there are no legal or fiduciary ties between the corps and Drum Corps International.... but it comes with this injection, “… other than those associated with membership and participation in an event”.  Also, DCI admits that they do indeed meddle somewhat into the inner workings of each corps with the statement, “That said, Drum Corps International has an interest in helping corps remain financially healthy and organizationally sound. Therefore, each year some resources are allocated to evaluate and support corps that may require assistance."

The problem with your stance, Gar, is that DCI admits that they do indeed have association with each corps membership and participation combined with the admitted DCI meddling in evaluation of individual corps inner workings; that negates your claim that DCI has no vested interest in the membership, participation, and inner workings of each corps using the DCI banner.

And if I were a parent, and something happened to my child in this type of situation with a corps under the banner of DCI, I would have my attorney key on on those '...other than...' and '... that said...' lines in the DCI statement and hold DCI accountable as well.  Because with those caveats, DCI does admit that they do indeed have a vested interest in the inner workings of the corps under their banner.

Edited by Stu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, garfield said:

And it's not being tolerated, is it?  

 

If an organization is at the point whereas they can’t find qualified individuals who agree to educate and/or instruct their marching members who don’t have a background of inappropriate behavior with minors, then yes it’s being tolerated and condoned. In Cadets case maybe they couldn’t find anyone else to say yes I’ll join your staff. I don’t know or care, but these sick people shouldn’t be allowed around or anywhere near a youth activity. Are we really to the point where there isn’t any other qualified people? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If someone was accused of financial improprieties or stealing, would that person be hired as a business manager by a corps? 

If a housing site fell through and it was believed to be due to the negligence of the tour director, would that person work for another corps? 

If a bus company knowingly hired drivers with driving offenses, would that company be driving for a corps? Would that company be rehired if it was discovered they did not do appropriate background checks?

Chances are, the answer is no to all these questions. So why would we risk something potentially more serious and dangerous?

in this day and age, all the corps coming up with a policy on hiring practices is not admitting it's a problem even though some suggest it might be,  it's saying it is not going to become a problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean theres this 

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-04-02/news/os-moody-sexy-student-text-messages-20100401_1_text-messages-band-director-female-student

 

and this 

 

http://www.crossmen.org/joel-moody-bio

 

 

Im sure hes a great guy and does his job. People make mistakes and can move on from them !

.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Stu said:

FBI checks only deal with Federal crimes and Federal data base. It does not check State crimes that are State specific.

This is why there are calls for a National registry, but this would only list people convicted and not those accused. So someone who is on administrative leave from a school district or fired based on suspicion would not be listed on an FBI check or a state check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tim K said:

If someone was accused of financial improprieties or stealing, would that person be hired as a business manager by a corps?

I wonder if anybody here has the guts enough to post that they would support a corps hiring the person who was convicted of embezzling from SCV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.