Go to Post I've been busier than a hog farmer at feedin' time. - Andy Baker [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum > FIRST E-Mail Blast Archive
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 17:09
Wetzel's Avatar
Wetzel Wetzel is offline
DC Robotics
FRC #2914 (Tiger Pride)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: DC
Posts: 3,522
Wetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond reputeWetzel has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Wetzel
**IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

Hello. This is an important announcement for all FIRST Robotics Competition teams. Please share this information with the rest of your team in a timely manner. If you think that other members of your team would also like to receive these announcements, please encourage them to sign up at http://listserv.leapit.com/cgi-bin/l...join=frcpublic.

If you would like to stop receiving these messages, please see the bottom of this message for instructions.
__________________________________________________ ____

Greetings Teams:

We have received many questions and comments from both FIRST Robotics Competition teams and FIRST LEGO League teams regarding the new Youth Protection policy.

In response, we have updated our list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) about the policy. It is available for download from the FIRST website at http://www.usfirst.org/volunteers/youthprotect/

The FAQ addresses a variety of important questions, including why and how the policy was created, and the security and privacy of volunteer personal information.

We welcome questions, comments, and recommendations to improve the policy and the volunteer screening process. Please send these by email to us at volunteer@usfirst.org.
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 18:05
JonA's Avatar
JonA JonA is offline
Embedded Firmware Engineer
no team (Semi-Retired)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 31
JonA has a spectacular aura aboutJonA has a spectacular aura about
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

Quote:
Why is the Team Mentor’s Social Security number necessary to conduct the screening?
The background check process requires that records are searched by name, social security number, and date of birth. Not including the social security will result in incomplete and inaccurate reports.
So, the reason why they need my SSN for the background check is that they require my SSN to do a complete and accurate background check?

Thanks for clearing that up. If my many classes on formal and informal logic serve me correctly, that would be circular reasoning.

This update of the FAQ's is a nice try. It clears up a number of questions but conveniently ignores others.

I am a little closer to filling out one of these background check forms but I am still disappointed in this specific implementation of a Youth Protection Policy.

-Jon

To the originators of this policy: "Keep tryin' guys!"
__________________
"That mecanum guy"

- Woodie Flowers Finalist Award Winner: 2010 Minnesota North Star Regional
- Mentor and Founder of 7 FRC Teams since 2003.
- FRC Regional Competition Score Keeper/Field Power Controller, Robot Inspector, Control System Adviser, Judge
- Co-Founder, Alumni: Milwaukee FIRST Support Organization
- Board Member, Game Design Committee, Judge, MVP-FTA: Midwest Vex Programs
- Computer Engineering Alumni '06: MSOE
- Embedded Firmware Engineer: Rockwell Automation
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 20:09
Katie Reynolds Katie Reynolds is offline
Registered User
no team (NEW Apple Corps)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Appleton, WI, USA
Posts: 2,598
Katie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond reputeKatie Reynolds has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Katie Reynolds Send a message via Yahoo to Katie Reynolds
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

[quote]All Team Mentors must be screened. A Mentor is an adult (any individual eighteen years of age or older) who is an active member of the team and works frequently with the students.... QUOTE]

Ok ... so does an individual 18 years of age who is an active member of the team and works frequently with the students but is also a student need to have a background check done as well?

That's my biggest question.
__________________
Team #93 - NEW Apple Corps
Student - 2001-2004
Team #857 - Superior Roboworks
Mentor - 2006-2009
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 20:37
Erin Rapacki's Avatar
Erin Rapacki Erin Rapacki is offline
General Manager
no team
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 898
Erin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond reputeErin Rapacki has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Erin Rapacki
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

NU would rather have the college students screened as well. So in short, it means everybody .
__________________
http://www.linkedin.com/in/erapacki
BUZZ 175 (01, 02) - NUTRONS 125 (03, 04) - QUEEN 1975 (06)
Beantown Blitz Founder (04) - FIRST Robotics Conferences (04) - Boston Regional Volunteer Coordinator (06)
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 21:00
Alavinus's Avatar
Alavinus Alavinus is offline
Siege Weapon/Robotics Guy
AKA: Andrew LaVinus
no team
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Stafford VA
Posts: 87
Alavinus will become famous soon enoughAlavinus will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to Alavinus
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

I've been silent, waiting on FIRST for clarification and all I can say is WOW... Aside from the whole SSN issue, why is FIRST acting as a moral police? FIRST means for the inspiration and recognition of Science and Technology-- it does not mean the moral police. Disqualifying people for TRAFFIC violations? Honestly, this is not the FIRST I joined four years ago.

I know that most people will not have that many violations, but when is it a liability for FIRST if someone drives too fast? Why is FIRST putting their nose in something that does not affect them?

I know that people from FIRST read these forums and other people here might provide some sort of enlightenment as to why FIRST is acting in this manner. I hope they will respond.

Sorry for the rant, but I've seen many organizations dragged down by becoming too overbearing and I feel FIRST is taking that path.
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 21:40
KenWittlief KenWittlief is offline
.
no team
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 4,213
KenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

moral police?! goto the first website and read the FAQ page. a person would only be disqualified if they have a CRIMINAL record - arrested and convicted of a serious crime

or if they had 4 serious traffic offenses in the last 36 months. If someone has been stopped for speeding 4 times in the last 3 years, do you want your child riding with that person? (Im pretty sure they would have lost their license after the 3rd time).
Reply With Quote
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 21:53
KenWittlief KenWittlief is offline
.
no team
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 4,213
KenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

BTW, is you dont think FIRST is held responsible for what happens to students, at the 2002 regional team party at the Rock and Roll hall of fame (in cleveland), a student tried to crowd surf while the band was playing, and fell to the floor, almost knocked unconscience

I dont know if he was injured or not, but at the 2003 team party at the Rock and Roll hall of fame, they had live music again, but nobody was ALLOWED TO DANCE!

How weird is that?! seriously! you have a couple thousand high school students and a live band playing rock music and they are forbidden to dance?!

I dont know the whole story behind this, but obviously something was going on with our friends in the legal profession.
Reply With Quote
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 22:09
Alavinus's Avatar
Alavinus Alavinus is offline
Siege Weapon/Robotics Guy
AKA: Andrew LaVinus
no team
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Stafford VA
Posts: 87
Alavinus will become famous soon enoughAlavinus will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to Alavinus
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

It is quite possible to get 4 traffic infractions in 36 months (No, my driving record is clean)

My point is this- whether or not a parent decides for a child to ride with a mentor should be a team based decision. If I did have 4 traffic infractions in the past 36 months and was automatically Dq-d from having anything to do with FIRST at all- it's not right

Also, Dq-d because of a serious crime is wrong. I agree that the team should have a right to know, but what you do in the past is not supposed to haunt you after you have been held responsible.
Reply With Quote
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 22:22
KenWittlief KenWittlief is offline
.
no team
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 4,213
KenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

you cant be serious?

if someone is convicted of raping a child, spends 2 or 3 years in prison, and then is let out on parole

you would want that person to be a mentor on your team? to travel with the students?

you think that would be ok?

Seriously?!
Reply With Quote
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 22:42
Madison's Avatar
Madison Madison is offline
Dancing through life...
FRC #0488 (Xbot)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,243
Madison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenWittlief
you cant be serious?

if someone is convicted of raping a child, spends 2 or 3 years in prison, and then is let out on parole

you would want that person to be a mentor on your team? to travel with the students?

you think that would be ok?

Seriously?!
I think that a person is entitled to a right to privacy and that it is our responsibility as teachers, mentors, engineers and parents to ensure that situations that may endanger children do not occur.

Does anyone want a rapist to be a mentor on their team? Of course not; because it's unlikely that anyone wants for rapists to exist at all.

What's bothersome, really, is that the information available to team leaders does not distinguish at all between a rape conviction and a handful of parking tickets. You might be saving your kids from a dangerous rapist, but chances are, you're really denying them a great mentor and teacher who tends to not feed the parking meter. By no means am I suggesting sexual predation is an acceptable action or risk, however; I just mean to point out that 99% of those who'll be negatively affected by this criteria will not represent a threat to a team or its members.

What's more, this FAQ has done nothing to clarify what other criteria is employed when red-flagging a mentor. We've been given a list of what convictions (already a matter of public record, by the way) are a cause for this to happen -- so what else?
__________________
--Madison--

...down at the Ozdust!

Like a grand and miraculous spaceship, our planet has sailed through the universe of time. And for a brief moment, we have been among its many passengers.
Reply With Quote
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 23:00
KenWittlief KenWittlief is offline
.
no team
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 4,213
KenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

I think you are exaggerating just a little - it doesnt say anything about parking tickets. You would have to be pretty wild behind the wheel to get 4 major moving violations in 3 years, and here in NY you would have lost your license after the 3rd, which means you got the 4th while driving without a license.

Since the FAQ doesnt list any other criteria for disqualifying a mentor, Im fairly certain they mean that is the inclusive list.

I think the thing to keep in mind is that mentors are suppose to be role models, someone the students will want to aspire to be like. no one has the 'right' to be on a FIRST team. Personally I consider it an honor and a privalidge - and if the other adults on the team, or if someone from FIRST told me its in the best interest of the students that I no longer participate in the program (for whatever reason) then who am I to put my personal needs above that of the team, or above the FIRST program itself?

BTW, the whole point of using the background check organization is to protect your privacy - it only comes back approved or disapproved - the other members of your team do not know what the check found, only that it was something on the predetermined FIRST list of unacceptable criminal behavior.

Last edited by KenWittlief : 12-12-2003 at 23:17.
Reply With Quote
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 23:48
Tristan Lall's Avatar
Tristan Lall Tristan Lall is offline
Registered User
FRC #0188 (Woburn Robotics)
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,484
Tristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

In all fairness, rape usually commands significantly longer sentences than 2-3 years. Even if released, conditions are frequently imposed on the parolee--like no contact with minors, if appropriate to the circumstances. (But the feeling of uneasiness that you suggest is understandable.)

Speeding tickets in general are not fair game for disqualifying a person. In addition to their proper use (as a penalty for bona fide dangerous driving), they are used as revenue-gathering ploys by certain unscrupulous municipalities. If you happen to get caught 4 times in three years by cops trying only to fill their quotas (implicit or explicit quotas--it doesn't matter), you aren't necessarily a threat to society in general, or FIRST in particular. But: I'm not sure about specific U.S. laws concerning speeding, but I assume that there exists a distinction between felony speeding and a simple traffic ticket (a felony being a full-fledged criminal offence, which is permanently recorded). In the case of speeding as a felony, it could be seen as equivalent to driving while intoxicated, fleeing a police officer or leaving the scene (of an accident) all of which are serious, and might well be grounds for disqualification. In the case of minor speeding offences (doing 2 km/h over the limit in a speed trap), there is no basis for disqualification. Actually, I think FIRST has addressed this distinction with the appeal procedure--but it isn't likely to please anybody who gets red-flagged for whatever reason, and then has to jump through bureaucratic hoops to clear themself. (The onus should not be on the mentor to justify himself for irrelevancies like non-felony speeding.)

A better question was brought up earlier: is FIRST liable for giving convicted felons (who have served their sentences, and been released) an opportunity to re-offend? And is this any different from the level of liability that would apply if any old mentor decided to do something reprehensible? And by the same token, is FIRST willing to let a rehabilitated felon give something back to the community, or will they forever dismiss and condemn them out of hand? The answer is not immediately forthcoming.

It's like the stock market disclaimer: "Past performance does not necessarily reflect future trends." You can eliminate those who have offended before (and probably reduce the risk), but I hope that nobody sees this as a catch-all solution. There exists the potential for misbehaviour whether or not the ones with a shady history have been eliminated, and no amount of background checking can eliminate all risk. FIRST is making an effort to minimize that risk (and that's a fair objective), but one wonders if they've gone a little bit too far, once again. (By "once again", I'm referring to the aforementioned crowd-surfing incident that caused dancing to be banned at FIRST team parties. While dancing is surely the devil incarnate , you've got to let the FIRSTers have some fun.)

What it comes down to is this: FIRST is taking it upon themselves to force the teams to comply with a set of far-reaching regulations intended to protect the innocent. It's a worthy cause, but it's tarnished by a heavy-handed approach that incorporates none of the charisma that FIRST exudes in so many other pursuits. They're offending longtime and distinguished supporters, and forcing bureaucratic nightmares and liabilities on the team leaders. This is not a fair burden to place on the shoulders of the very people who so strongly support FIRST as an organization. While these measures may decrease the chances (infinitesimally) that harm may come to a FIRST team member, Bill Beatty put it best when he suggested that the world is not always a perfect place, and that people need to be somewhat responsible for looking out for themselves. I'm not blaming the victim--rather, I'm saying that we shouldn't need FIRST to look out for us; we shouldn't need to check and bianually re-check every mentor, out of the fear that they may be concealing a dark past. Take them at their word (make them put it in writing, if you must have something tangible by which to hold them accountable)--but don't treat them with suspicion, just because they haven't yet been proven innocent.

And if something were to happen to a FIRST team member, as a result of the mentor's misdeeds, it would of course be a tragedy--but let's not jump to the conclusion that a background check would have prevented that person from committing a crime. If they had been rejected from FIRST, there are plenty of other potential victims everywhere--and if one of them were victimized instead, we have no right to claim that our background checks did any good. There was still a victim.
Reply With Quote
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-12-2003, 23:52
Madison's Avatar
Madison Madison is offline
Dancing through life...
FRC #0488 (Xbot)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,243
Madison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenWittlief
I think you are exaggerating just a little - it doesnt say anything about parking tickets. You would have to be pretty wild behind the wheel to get 4 major moving violations in 3 years, and here in NY you would have lost your license after the 3rd, which means you got the 4th while driving without a license.
The point is that there is absolutely no way to discern the severity of the criminal conviction that causes someone to get red flagged, or, for that matter, whether there is a criminal conviction at all.

Quote:
Since the FAQ doesnt list any other criteria for disqualifying a mentor, Im fairly certain they mean that is the inclusive list.
The FAQ document reads, "Note: A red-coded “COMPLETED” does not mean the individual has a criminal history. This code can result for a number of reasons." It is immediately followed by the question, "What criminal convictions could disqualify a person from serving as a team mentor?" The list is not inclusive as it only indicates criminal convictions that are of concern. So, while that's clear, it is also immediately followed with the phrase, "The following convictions, regardless of when they were committed," which makes absolutely no sense at all. Once again, we see example that shows FIRST staff are not world-class writers and so, like with many rules, their intent may be muddled by their language.

As a non-profit organization, FIRST has the right to deny participation to people who impede its ability to express its views. The Supreme Court says so. So, if FIRST wants to red-flag people who are gay, or who protested the war, or who advocated the legalization of marijuana, they can do that. But, if I'm going to give so much of myself to this program, the least I expect in return is a straight answer about what views this organization is expressing by this action.

As best as I always could tell, the views that this organization was trying to express focused on inspiring students to do something better than score the winning run, teaching them something more about their potential to grow and help others, and doing something more to give them the facilities and opportunities they need to accomplish our goals. If you can do those things, you don't have a right to be a part of this organization, you have an obligation.

Background checks are great and wonderful and useful -- when implemented correctly. This system is atrocious in its design and execution and does more harm and disservice to this organization and the people dedicated to it than it will ever help.
__________________
--Madison--

...down at the Ozdust!

Like a grand and miraculous spaceship, our planet has sailed through the universe of time. And for a brief moment, we have been among its many passengers.
Reply With Quote
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-12-2003, 07:51
KenWittlief KenWittlief is offline
.
no team
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 4,213
KenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond reputeKenWittlief has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

the volunteers you are talking about that are at risk of being offended, are the very same people who are at risk of being sued or held accountable if something happens to a student.

and dont forget that the people making up this new policy, are also a part of FIRST for all the same reasons that you are.

This is one of those times in life where we wish the world was perfect and we wish we didnt have to deal with situations like this

but the world is not perfect, and the fact that background check organizations even exist at all is clear evidence of that. It would be much harder for each team to check the public records and conduct their own background checks on the mentors. This organization they are using appears to be well established, and is being used by other non-profit groups.

Like everything else, keeping abusive people off FIRST teams is a problem

a problem that needs to be solved throughout FIRST. They are taking the first steps, and Im sure the process will be refined over the years. I have to give them credit for one thing, as far as I know there has never been an incident involving abuse on a FIRST team, and Im glad to see they are taking this on before it happens

instead of being required to do so as the result of a legal settlement.
Reply With Quote
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-01-2004, 11:23
jneumiller jneumiller is offline
Registered User
#0647 (CyberWolves)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 16
jneumiller is on a distinguished road
Re: **IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection Policy Update

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenWittlief
moral police?! goto the first website and read the FAQ page. a person would only be disqualified if they have a CRIMINAL record - arrested and convicted of a serious crime

or if they had 4 serious traffic offenses in the last 36 months. If someone has been stopped for speeding 4 times in the last 3 years, do you want your child riding with that person? (Im pretty sure they would have lost their license after the 3rd time).
In the interest of protecting our mentors from wrongful allegations, our team's mentors have always been dissuaded from transporting youth (other than their own kids) in private autos.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
**IMPORTANT FIRST EMAIL BLAST**/Youth Protection and Adult Leadership Policy Impleme David Kelly FIRST E-Mail Blast Archive 20 08-12-2003 15:06
Powerbook update? evulish Chit-Chat 1 01-08-2003 18:48


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:23.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi