DCI Shares Important Information on Hiring & Vetting Processes

[garfield]

10 minutes ago, LabMaster said:

As this topic goes round and round it may help to clarify what DCI does or doesn't do as well as what DCI can and can't do, per their mission statement.  The mission statement makes it clear that DCI's primary role is to "create the stage".  To me that means DCI is a facilitating organization rather than a governing organization ruling over each individual corps operations. There certainly has to be a level of compliance and coordination in an operational sense, but each corps has a lot of autonomy in the actual function of the org.  Each competing corps should provide to DCI, before the start of each season, a document confirmed by the org., signed by leadership, including BOD members that they are compliant with DCI rules and refs as a competing corps and they have an established employee and volunteer vetting p&p and a comprehensive health and safety program (including a reporting process).  DCI should not be dictating policy to corps but should be able to share policies with orgs so each may adopt p&p to further improve their own.  Each corps continues to govern themselves and DCI continues to facilitate and enforces compliance more rigidly as it pertains to creating the stage.  At least that's my $.02.

And, IMO, your $.02 is exactly correct.

 

[JimF-LowBari]

3 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

I would imagine bylaws and such are being clarified, but that process can take time

Ugh bad memories of groups I belong/belonged to. Wonder if any corps have bylaws that deal with interacting with DCI. If so they may need changed too.

[JimF-LowBari]

If DCI wants a copy of the corps clearance checks that could open up a can of personal information worms. First off no idea anymore if social security and birth date are on the forms that get returned to the sender. Second the person who whose info is on the forms is agreeing to let the corps (potential employer) see that personal info. But will that person also have to agree to having that info shared with a third party (DCI). No idea if a clearance is considered personal info but the PII (personal identifiable info) of the birth date and SSN may have to be redacted

yrah time for my PII training for the way too many years

Edited December 11, 2018 by JimF-LowBari

[rpbobcat]

1 hour ago, LabMaster said:

As this topic goes round and round it may help to clarify what DCI does or doesn't do as well as what DCI can and can't do, per their mission statement.  The mission statement makes it clear that DCI's primary role is to "create the stage".  To me that means DCI is a facilitating organization rather than a governing organization ruling over each individual corps operations. There certainly has to be a level of compliance and coordination in an operational sense, but each corps has a lot of autonomy in the actual function of the org.  Each competing corps should provide to DCI, before the start of each season, a document confirmed by the org., signed by leadership, including BOD members that they are compliant with DCI rules and refs as a competing corps and they have an established employee and volunteer vetting p&p and a comprehensive health and safety program (including a reporting process).  DCI should not be dictating policy to corps but should be able to share policies with orgs so each may adopt p&p to further improve their own.  Each corps continues to govern themselves and DCI continues to facilitate and enforces compliance more rigidly as it pertains to creating the stage.  At least that's my $.02.

To me,DCI being a "facilitating" vs. a "governing" organization is what has contributed,at least in part, to a lot of the activity's ongoing problems.

Seems odd that  Drum Corps does not have an true governing body.

In fact,it seems like DCI has done its best not to be one.

Personally,I believe that Drum Corps needs an independent  governing organization with legal  authority over all members.

To me,the word "should" not "shall" in your post shows a weakness in DCI, as it currently exists.

You need an organization that will,as necessary, enforce policies,standards,etc. that apply to all members.

Otherwise, DCI is just "the inmates  running the asylum".

 

[GUARDLING]

1 hour ago, rpbobcat said:

To me,DCI being a "facilitating" vs. a "governing" organization is what has contributed,at least in part, to a lot of the activity's ongoing problems.

Seems odd that  Drum Corps does not have an true governing body.

In fact,it seems like DCI has done its best not to be one.

Personally,I believe that Drum Corps needs an independent  governing organization with legal  authority over all members.

To me,the word "should" not "shall" in your post shows a weakness in DCI, as it currently exists.

You need an organization that will,as necessary, enforce policies,standards,etc. that apply to all members.

Otherwise, DCI is just "the inmates  running the asylum".

 

MAybe so BUT it's not why and How DCI was formed. If it's to be changed the corps have to change that.

[IllianaLancerContra]

The rules need to go into the Blue Book, probably near the age rules, and spell out specific consequences if Corps fails to pass muster.  IMHO a multi-year DQ is appropriate if Corps fails to take immediate corrective action when credible allegations are made (or info discovered)

To paraphrase either Eisenhower or T Roosevelt (I have heard it attributed to both) - if you grab them by the testicles, their hearts & minds will follow.

Edited December 11, 2018 by IllianaLancerContra

[Tim K]

Overall this policy is good and a necessary step in the right direction. Much of what it contains is not surprising to people who have been involved in youth and college activities and acknowledges the limitations of background checks, going from state to state, etc.

As I look at it more from a "read between the lines" interpretation, DCI is putting corps on notice who have poor hiring practices, do not bother with background checks, or ignore safety issues. letting these corps know that while they may not have the authority to supervise their practices, they can ban them from competing. If the corps fights this and takes the matter to court, they would have to prove that DCI was wrong by showing they complied. It would mean that the person hired would be put under legal scrutiny. In today's climate, you don't want to go near a court with even a hint of any matter involving sexual misconduct. This document  can be important for liability issues for DCI. It also says to offending corps from this point forward, "If you're going to hire these people, you won't compete and you wont bring us all down with you." 

[IllianaLancerContra]

1 hour ago, GUARDLING said:

MAybe so BUT it's not why and How DCI was formed. If it's to be changed the corps have to change that.

Agree.  Adapt, migrate or die.

[garfield]

25 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

The rules need to go into the Blue Book, probably near the age rules, and spell out specific consequences if Corps fails to pass muster.  IMHO a multi-year DQ is appropriate if Corps fails to take immediate corrective action when credible allegations are made (or info discovered)

To paraphrase either Eisenhower or T Roosevelt (I have heard it attributed to both) - if you grab them by the testicles, their hearts & minds will follow.

"Immediate", "Corrective", "Action", and "credible" all seem to be subjective words.

Hard to agree on what "muster" is if the metrics are all subjective.

 

[IllianaLancerContra]

21 minutes ago, garfield said:

"Immediate", "Corrective", "Action", and "credible" all seem to be subjective words.

Hard to agree on what "muster" is if the metrics are all subjective.

 

Agree they need to be defined.  Immediate is what YEA did w/r/t the individual on the 'PA clergy list'