An arbitrator with the American Arbitration Association has extended the protections of the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act to coaches, a first according to an attorney who represented the plaintiff-coach in the case.
“This is the first time, of which I am aware, where a ‘coach, trainer, manager, administrator or other official’ has invoked the protections extended to them, as with athletes, under Section 220522(a)(8) of the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act,” said Edward G. Williams of Stewart Occhipinti LLP. The Act mandates that a National Governing Body provide “fair notice and an opportunity to be heard” to an individual athlete before declaring he or she ineligible to participate in amateur athletic competition.
The ruling was administered by arbitrator James R. Holbrook, a professor at the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah.
The impetus for the litigation was the emergence earlier this year of allegations of sexual misconduct between coaches certified by U.S. Swimming and their athletes. Two men, Ken Stopkotte and Michael Saltzstein, suggested that reforms be introduced.
Saltzstein, a judge in the 2008 Beijing Olympics, proposed a detailed 6-step plan to protect the athletes from sexual misconduct. In the plan, he proposed that any coach, without a license or training, cannot perform massages on an athlete, and coaches with special training cannot perform those acts in a one-on-one situation. Also, any member of USA Swimming that tries to hide, hinder or slow an investigation down will encounter probationary measures and possible termination. Saltzstein claimed that since he publicly stated his opinion of USA Swimming’s lackadaisical approach on preventing sexual misconduct, he has been denied work. He was also allegedly prevented from being re-nominated to FINA, swimming’s international governing body.
Saltzstein claimed that he went to USA Swimming with his concerns before going public with the complaint to the United States Olympic Committee. In the complaint, which was filed by Williams, he alleged that he has been “denied eligibility to participate only after speaking out about the acceptance of USA Swimming of the culture of sexual misconduct that exists within USA Swimming.”
Williams cited the following AAA cases — Stephon Flenoy v. Track and Field; Natalie Salk v. US Sailing; and the recent Table Tennis case (all available on the USOC Web site) – for the supposition that an NGB and/or its affiliate “may not deny an individual (and that includes coaches) eligibility to participate without first giving notice and an opportunity for a hearing.”
The arbitrator concluded that “the respondent’s decision—to nominate Mr. (Robert) Broyles as a FINA referee rather than re-nominate the claimant—was arbitrary, capricious, and in violation of the claimant’s legally protected opportunity to participate as an international referee under the Sports Act, which affords him due process rights in being fairly considered as a nominee for FINA List 16.”
Further the arbitrator ordered “the respondent to immediately replace Mr. Broyles with the claimant as a referee nominee for FINA List 16 and so inform FINA immediately.”
