Subscribe to this feed Subscribe via Email
This section summarizes the responsibilities and functions of the Judges Committee (including the Regional Administrative Judges), qualifications for US SAILING and ISAF judges and descriptions of other programs.
The Committee has a general franchise to review the Judging Program and to interact with other US SAILING committees, such as the Rules Committee and Race Management Committee, on matters of common interest.
The Judges Committee is organized under the US SAILING Competition Division, Race Administration Committee.
Foremost the Committee develops, supports, and certifies judges within the jurisdiction of US SAILING. It maintains oversight of the certification process, reviews reported incidents involving the conduct of judges and, if necessary, disciplines judges. The Judges Committee may also honor a retired judge who has provided long and distinguished service to the Judges Program with the designation of Judge Emeritus. It also reviews the qualifications of all US SAILING Judges requesting certification as International Judges by the ISAF and submits its recommendation to the Executive Committee of the US SAILING Board of Directors for transmission to the ISAF.
The Judges Committee meets twice a year, at the spring meeting and at the annual meeting of US SAILING. Between these meetings, the Chair may bring matters of interest to the Committee for discussion or review via the telephone or by correspondence.
The Committee is comprised of a Chair, eleven Regional Administrative Judges (RAJ), the Chair of the Umpires Committee (ex-officio), the Chair of the Judges Training and Testing Working Party, and a Secretary. The Judges Committee Chair is, ex officio, a member of the Race Administration and Umpires Committees.
The Judges Committee appoints a RAJ for a US SAILING Area (Area), with the concurrence of the US SAILING Board of Directors. The RAJ should be a Senior Judge and is appointed for a term of three years. Appointments are normally limited to two consecutive terms with a successor serving as an apprentice, if possible, for at least one year.
Besides meeting with other members of the Judges Committee, an RAJ administers the Judges Certification Program for an Area. This involves reviewing applications for certification and re-certification, making recommendations to the Judges Committee about applicants, reviewing annual reports of judges, and recommending upgrade to Senior Judge. The RAJ may also respond to informal requests in the Area for rules interpretations, OA’s to obtain qualified judges for an event, or investigate reported misconduct of judges.
One increasingly important duty of an RAJ is the encouragement of capable sailors in the Area to become certified judges. This is done primarily in two ways:
· Sponsorship/mentoring of potential applicants by Area judges.
· Well advertised and well run Judges Workshops at various locations throughout the Area.
Before the US SAILING Judges Program began in 1977, a set of criteria was established for certification as a US SAILING Judge. The criteria included racing experience, race management experience, protest committee experience and a high standard of personal integrity. Application was by resume and supported by personal references. RAJs handled applications for those in their geographic area.
In 1995, the Executive Committee of US SAILING asked the Judges Committee to improve the quality of the Judges Program, to review the procedures used in appointing and reappointing judges and to consider training and testing.
The Judges Committee developed a new set of standards for the US SAILING Judges Program. These standards require experience in racing, race management, and protest committee work. Attending a workshop and passing a written open-book test is required within the previous four years for certification and re-certification.
Standards of personal behavior are more explicit than they have been in the past. All those who seek initial certification or re-certification as a US SAILING Judge must meet the standards, found in this manual. Certified or not, judges serving on protest committees should meet most of these standards. US SAILING Judges should meet them all.
When a protest committee is on duty afloat or ashore and the chair is a US SAILING Judge, they may display the US SAILING Judges’ Flag.
The standards also recognized that individuals may engage in different judging paths, based on their experience and abilities. The Judges Program established qualifications and standards for Judges, Senior Judges, and ISAF International Judges. The following sections describe the qualifications required for certification for each of these different paths.
Note: Changes to the judge’s qualifications will be posted on the Judge’s Website. Please consult www.ussailing.org/judges for the current certification requirements.
· Be a member in good standing of US SAILING.
· Be, or have been, an active racing sailor for at least three complete racing seasons in a position requiring on-the-water application of the racing rules (as skipper, tactician, watch captain, or navigator).
· Be an active sailor (not necessarily an active racer).
· Be knowledgeable and experienced in the running of races and have performed in a major role on the water in at least three U.S. events during the last four years.
· Be an active member of PCs. In the last four years:
1. Have served on eight (8) protest committees during the last four years of which the applicant shall have chaired at least three hearings at a regatta of significant importance to the region.
2. Have served on juries in at least three events in the US at the interclub, regional, or national level. (Jury, in this context, is a PC not appointed by the RC.).
· Attend a US SAILING Judges Workshop within the past four years. See schedule at www.ussailing.org/judges/workshops/index.asp.
· Have passed the US SAILING Judge’s Exam within the past four years.
· Be highly recommended by three US SAILING members who are familiar with the PC and judging work of the candidate and are either experienced PC members or US SAILING Judges, at least one of who shall be a US SAILING Senior Judge or a Canadian Yachting Association Gold Judge.
· Be willing to serve actively for a four-year term.
Consideration will be given to service on an association appeals committee.
Potential judges are encouraged to use the Sailing Officials Automated Reporting System (SOARS) in order to log their judging activity. Logging activity through SOARS is a requirement for certified judges, but SOARS is available as a service for all US SAILING members.
A judge must have thorough knowledge and understanding of the current RRS, US SAILING Appeals Decisions, and ISAF Cases, and be able to use them appropriately. This is demonstrated by skills such as being able to:
· Interpret the RRS and other rules as they are written, not as you think they should be written or as it was intended that they be written.
· Review the NOR and SIs so as to make constructive suggestions about them to the RC and OA.
· Observe racing on the water and record critical events accurately.
· Hear protests according to RRS Part 5, Appendix M (Recommendations for Protest Committees) and Appendix P (Immediate Penalties for Breaking Rule 42).
Judges should (where applicable):
· Be able to see and hear well enough to perform the job.
· Be capable of going on the water in small boats for extended periods in a variety of weather conditions.
· Be able to operate small motorboats safely in proximity of racing sailboats.
· Have the stamina to work on the water during the day and then hear protests in the evening.
A US SAILING Judge must possess judicial temperament, a reputation for mature judgment, and have an outstanding reputation for integrity. This includes:
· Being viewed by sailors and other judges as a person with judicial temperament (be honest, fair, act with integrity, respect the rights of others).
· Viewing the hearing of protests as a service by sailors for sailors (not an exercise of power and control).
· Being approachable by the competitors and race officials.
· Being able to have a rational discussion with someone with whom you disagree.
· Being considerate of other people (be aware of the needs of others and respectful of them).
· Taking good care of other people’s property (boats, equipment, and housing).
· Accepting the assignment of tasks willingly and cheerfully (don’t whine).
· Not expecting special privileges (duties, housing, meals, arrival and departure dates).
· Understanding that protest committee work comes before social obligations, and before taking care of a partner who has attended the event as a guest.
· Abstaining from use of alcohol until protest committee duties are complete.
· Refraining from use of medications that might impair judgment or alertness.
· Honoring commitments made.
· Being viewed by other protest committee members as contributing, cooperative, thoughtful (not as manipulative, divisive, elitist or insistent on getting one’s own way).
· Maintaining the confidentiality of the deliberations of the jury.
· Acting as a strong and effective leader (neither a dictator or weak manager
· Acting with reason and thoroughness when solving problems.
· Documenting actions; taking responsibility for follow through.
· Seeking advice from more experienced people when that is appropriate.
· Working cooperatively with the race committee and organizing authority
· Responding constructively to sailors and others under stress.
· Admitting mistakes graciously and in a timely manner.
· Being able to act completely free of favor or discrimination towards any sailors.
· Being a good role model and mentor for those interested in becoming judges.
· Judges must own and maintain current versions of US SAILING publications:
· Racing Rules of Sailing.
· US SAILING Appeals Decisions and ISAF Cases Manual.
· US SAILING Judges Manual.
· Judges are encouraged to own the equipment described in section 4.5.
· Desirable Optional Certifications:
· CPR.
· First Aid.
· Senior Life Saving or Water Safety Instructor.
· Candidates who are unsure of their qualifications and experience should consult with their RAJ prior to submitting an application. The RAJ can provide assistance in obtaining additional training and experience. The steps for certification are:
· Complete an application for certification (www.ussailing.org/judges) and submit it to your RAJ.
· Once submitted, the RAJ will obtain completed reference forms from the references cited by the applicant in his or her application. A copy of the reference form is available online. (www.ussailing.org/judges)
· Once the references are completed, the RAJ will finish processing the application in accordance with the RAJ Judges’ Manual.
· The RAJ advises a candidate why their application was rejected and encourages them to obtain the necessary qualification. If the rejection is based upon a reference evaluation of poor judicial temperament or reputation of the candidate, the sources should not be disclosed.
· If US SAILING receives a request by a candidate to have their rejected application reconsidered, the request is forwarded to the RAJ who is obliged to review the application, reinvestigate the reasons for rejection, and offer to have a personal conversation with the applicant. The RAJ documents the procedures followed, and forwards this material to the full Judges Committee.
Every certified judge is required to report on his or her judging activities through the SOARS (Sailing Officials Automated Reporting System) page on the US SAILING website (www.ussailing.org/soars) for each event.
The electronic SOARS reports are available to the RAJ to review. The RAJ will examine these reports to evaluate a judge’s performance, and will take appropriate action (e.g., making a re-certification recommendation) when required. Failure to file reports for two consecutive years may result in de-certification.
Certification term is for four years. A judge’s term ends at the end of the calendar year of that fourth year. For example, if a judge was initially certified in May of 2009, their first term would end on December 31, 2013.
During the last year of a judge’s term, the RAJ will verify the judge has attended a workshop and passed the exam within the last four years and review the applicant’s performance by examining the judge’s reports and other pertinent information, such as complaints or praises regarding judicial temperament. If a judge meets all the requirements for re-certification, the RAJ will then forward that recommendation to US SAILING. Judges do not need to formally apply for re-certification.
If the RAJ believes that a judge is missing one or more of the requirements to re-certify, the RAJ will notify the judge during the last year of the judge’s term and will work with the judge to try to resolve the missing requirements.
To be certified as a US SAILING Senior Judge, a candidate shall:
· Meet all of the qualifications for US SAILING Judge.
· Have served on juries in at least three Class B or C events at the national or international level during the last four years. At least one of these events must be OUTSIDE the candidate’s primary US SAILING Area. The intent of this requirement is for a Senior Judge candidate to have had experience working in “unfamiliar” territory. Such a regatta would be held far enough from the judge’s home so that the racing venue and the host club are essentially unfamiliar to the judge. The regatta therefore requires them to work with key personnel that they do not know well (such as other members of the protest committee, the PRO, the organizing authority). An event that meets the intent of this requirement but is within the judge’s home Area may be used with the approval of the judge’s RAJ.
· Have served capably as chief judge in at least three events during the last four years.
· (Initial appointment only) be highly recommended by:
· At least one US SAILING Senior Judge or an ISAF International Judge.
· At least two additional US SAILING judges.
· One of these references must be from a judge that is outside the candidate’s primary US SAILING Area who has worked with the candidate in an event outside the candidate’s primary US SAILING Area.
· Be qualified to judge a regatta of the highest level anywhere in the U.S.
· Candidates who are unsure of their qualifications and experience should consult with their RAJ prior to submitting an application. The RAJ can provide assistance in obtaining additional training and experience.
· The requirements for national or international certification should be met at events that have national and international level exposure and have a high level of expectation in the expertise and quality of the jury. Some events with “National” or “International” in their title may not meet this requirement, while other events that do not have “National” or “International” in their title could be eligible. Please consult with your RAJ for what might or might not be sufficient.
· Complete an application for certification and submit it to your RAJ.
· Once submitted, the RAJ will obtain completed reference forms from the references cited by the applicant in his or her application. A copy of the reference form is available online at the www.ussailing.org/judges/docs/JudgeReference.pdf website.
· Once the references are completed, the RAJ will finish processing the application in accordance with the RAJ’s Manual.
· The Senior Judge needs to continue to follow procedures similar to those described under the Judge application process.
Candidates for initial appointment by ISAF as International Judge (IJ) with a United States country designation must be nominated by US SAILING.
At ISAF’s request, the Judges Committee may review candidates for re-appointment.
In order to request a nomination from US SAILING for initial appointment as an International Judge an application must:
· Be a US SAILING Senior Judge.
· Send a copy of their completed International Judge application (PDF) to US SAILING.
· Meet all of the requirements for International Judge as described in the ISAF Regulations (PDF).
· Have his or her principal place of residence in the United States.
· Do a substantial portion of his or her judging in the United States.
· Qualify for and accept ISAF “country” listing as the United States for service on an International Jury (see RRS Appendix N, International Juries).
· Have at least three favorable references who have served with the candidate on International Juries.
· No current member of the US SAILING Judges Committee or Board of Directors may serve as a reference.
· At least two references must be current ISAF International Judges.
· At least one reference must be a US SAILING Senior Judge.
· At least one reference must be a non-US International Judge who has worked with the candidate on an International Jury outside of the US in the past four years.
· At least two references must have been the Chief Judge of an International Jury on which the candidate as served in the past four years.
ISAF also requires International Judge applicants to submit evaluations forms on IJ candidates from the Chief Judges of international juries on which the candidate serves. These references are submitted directly to ISAF.
The final decision to forward an application for initial certification as an ISAF International Judge is made by the US SAILING Board of Directors. The Board relies heavily the Judges Committee’s analysis and recommendation for each application.
Table 12‑1 (below) delineates the timeline and process for evaluating applications within US SAILING for all ISAF Race Official applications. In Table 12‑1, “B” is date of the July Board of Directors meeting. So “B-10” means 10 weeks prior to that meeting.
Table 12‑1. IJ Application timeline and process.
Schedule
Action
1 May
(B-10 weeks)
Applicant registers intent to apply with US SAILING Race Administration Director (RA Director, raceadmin@ussailing.org, 2009: Pat Sheehan)
· RA Director lets appropriate committee know the names of applicants.
· Relevant Reviewer contacts applicant and reviews experience and qualifications. The Committee Chair will appoint the Reviewer. Judges Committees specifics: the Reviewer is generally the candidate’s RAJ unless the RAJ has a conflict of interest.
1 June
(B-6 weeks)
Applications deadline to US SAILING.
· RA Director sends out request letters/forms to specified references as candidate submits an application.
· Judges Committees specifics: In addition to the candidate’s specified references, the RA Director will also solicit confidential evaluation forms for the Chief Judges listed on the candidate’s application.
· Candidates strongly encouraged to submit applications earlier so that references can be obtained sooner (see deadline for references)
15 June
(B-4 weeks)
Deadline for completed applications with all US SAILING required references
· It is the candidate’s responsibility to stay in touch with their references to ensure that they reply to US SAILING on time.
· RA Director distributes the application and references to the Committee members.
· Prior to the teleconference, the Reviewer performs the following tasks:
· Verify that all requirements are met, i.e. number of events, etc;
· Contact all references for any additional relevant information;
· Review all comments and issues, contacting the relevant people, including the candidate, and thoroughly investigate any claims or issues and report the findings back to the.
· The Committee Chair will circulate the names of the candidates to the Board and to the other Race Administration related committees with a request to forward comments, if any, to the Reviewer prior to committee teleconference.
All committee members should submit comments/issues to the reviewer by email PRIOR to the teleconference and preferably as soon as they have the information. Comments must include sufficient details so that the committee can conduct a thorough examination of the facts. Unsupported comments cannot be allowed.
B-3 weeks
Judges Committee Teleconference
· Each Reviewer presents each candidate’s applications and summarizes the research done.
· Committee discusses each application.
· If, after discussion, the committee decides that further investigation is required before acting upon a person’s application, that application will be referred back to the reviewer to conduct the further investigation requested by the committee.
· If there is no need for further investigation, the committee votes on the application.
· Following the teleconference, the Chair and the respective Reviewer will prepare a letter to each candidate advising the candidate of the results of the committee vote on that person’s application and a composite copy of the ISAF references received by the Committee. (This letter will not be sent until after the Board meeting)
· If there are no applications deferred for further investigation, the Chair submits a report of the Committee’s recommendations to the Board of Directors.
B-2 weeks
(if necessary) The Reviewer reports back to the Judges Committee on the results of the further investigation.
B-1 week
Deadline for the votes on the deferred applications.
· The Chair will report voting results to the Committee
· The reviewer and Chair will update letter/composite ISAF forms for the candidates as necessary.
· The Chair submits a report of the committee’s recommendations to the Board of Directors, to include:
· Summary report of committee’s recommendations
· Composite assessment form for all candidates (Board Request)
Full application and all references – ONLY for any candidates that JC does NOT recommend. (as per Board Request).
B
July Board of Directors meeting
· For all candidates with a final recommendation from the Board:
· Should the Board decide to reverse any of the committees’ recommendations, the Board Secretary is responsible for providing a detailed explanation to the appropriate committee Chair.
· All Candidates are notified of the BOD’s decision as soon as possible after the BOD meeting. This will be done by telephone from appropriate Chair to each candidate and follow-up letter to the candidate.
B to B+3 weeks
Should BOD have issues / concerns requiring additional investigation, Board Secretary/President confers with appropriate Chair and candidate to resolve.
B+3 weeks
(only if unresolved Board concerns) Committee Chair submits updates on any unresolved applications.
B+4 weeks
August Board of Directors meeting.
· (only if unresolved Board concerns) Final Board decision on unresolved applications, Committee Chair notifies candidates as above.
1 Sept
Deadline for submitting nominations to ISAF
· RA Director to forward approved applications
· The applications and references will be confidential within the appropriate committee.
· All discussions of the candidates/applications by any committee member with the candidate or theirs references are confidential.
· Only the reviewing committee person or Chair should discuss the application with the candidate.
· With issues raised during the review process: the source of the comments will be kept confidential if the source so requests. The substance of the issue will be shared with the candidate if found to be valid.
· References will be encouraged but not required to share their comments with the candidate directly.
US SAILING has established a Judge Emeritus Program to recognize judges who have given many years of distinguished service to the sport. An RAJ may nominate retired Senior Judges from their area whom the RAJ feels are deserving of the distinction. The appropriate committee will first review the nomination and, if approved, forward their recommendation to the US SAILING Board of Directors for final confirmation. The designation is for life and includes a suitably inscribed certificate describing the honoree’s contributions. Names of judges honored with Emeritus status are also published in the US SAILING Year Book and on its website.
Photo 12.1. Mr. Bill Bentsen being honored as a Judge Emeritus for his outstanding contributions to Judging and the sport.
Judge workshops and examinations are conducted throughout the country each year. Consult the Seminar Calendar located at www.ussailing.org/judges or contact your RAJ.
US SAILING Judges must maintain current membership in US SAILING and log their judging activity in US SAILING online logging system, SOARS. SOARS is the primary mechanism for tracking experience in order to support re-appointment and upgrade. Failure to log judging activity via SOARS may result in removal of the Judge’s name from the directory.
Personal conduct of judges must be above reproach before, during, and after an event. US SAILING Judges must comply with the Standards and Practices outlined in the Judges Manual. A judge who has engaged in serious misconduct should be dismissed from the jury immediately.
If the Judges’ Committee receives a report alleging inappropriate conduct by a US SAILING Judge, it will investigate the report and may take disciplinary action.
This procedure describes how the Judges Committee handles reports about the conduct and competence of US SAILING certified judges.
1. Reports shall be sent to the Chair of the Judges Committee. If the report covers individuals in more than one officiating discipline, the committee receiving the report will include all other affected committees and the report will be processed jointly.
2. When a report is received, the author of the report will be informed that our policy is to inform the judge of the contents and author of the report. If the author insists on their identity remaining confidentially, they will be allowed to withdraw the report and no further action will be taken.
3. If the report is not withdrawn, the relevant judge will be promptly informed of the content of that report and will be subsequently updated of all actions taken regarding the report.
If the report is positive, no additional action is necessary. For negative reports, the remainder of this procedure applies.
4. The report will first be considered by the Chair of the Judges Committee who shall perform brief initial analysis/investigation. (The Chair may ask one or more members of the Judges Committee to perform this step). This initial analysis/investigation is solely for the purpose of verifying the basic veracity of the report and categorizing the severity.
5. The initial analysis/investigation will decide if the allegations in the report may have merit and will rate the allegations in the report into one of the following categories:
(a) Insignificant – the allegations are not significant in relation to the competence or conduct of the judge concerned.
(b) Minor – the allegations are relevant to the conduct or competence of the judge but are not serious enough to warrant any sanction.
(c) Major – the allegations concern a lack of competence or conduct serious enough to warrant a formal investigation and possible sanctions. These may include a series of minor reports commenting on the same or similar problems.
(d) Urgent and Serious – the allegations disclose a lack of competence or conduct so serious that it would be appropriate to consider immediate suspension of the judge and subsequent possible sanctions.
Reports will be categorized as insignificant, except in the case of urgent and serious reports, unless they are in writing and made by another judge, a competitor, or an authorized member of the organizing authority or class association.
6. After the initial analysis, if a report that is rated as without merit (the allegations are either incorrect or cannot be substantiated), the judge will be so notified. The report will not be kept in the judge’s record, nor considered in any way in future evaluations of the official.
For reports rated to be without merit, no further action may be taken. For other reports, the remainder of this procedure applies.
7. If the report is rated insignificant, the judge will be notified that the report was found to be insignificant and no further action will be taken
8. If the report is rated minor, then the Chair of the Judges Committee will discuss the allegations with the judge to assist him or her in improving his or her demeanor or technique/skills.
For insignificant or minor reports, no further action will be taken. For major or urgent/serious reports, the remainder of this procedure applies.
9. For reports rated as potentially valid and major or as urgent and serious, formal action by US SAILING will be taken. The Chair of the Judges Committee shall appoint a panel to investigate the report further. The panel shall include at least two members who are members of the relevant committee(s).
10. A copy of the report including all written reports shall be provided to the judge. The judge will be allowed to submit a written statement to the panel. The official may request a hearing, which can done by teleconference.
11. The panel shall investigate the report and make a recommendation to the Chair of the relevant committee(s). If allegations are not found to be true, or the report is re-categorized to insignificant or minor, then no sanctions will be imposed and the report will be handled as described above for invalid reports or minor/insignificant reports. If the allegations are substantiated, the panel may recommend that sanctions shall be imposed or they may recommend that the matter be referred to the Review Board.
12. If the panel recommends sanctions, they shall specify the sanction. Some sample sanctions could be:
· Give a formal warning
· Give a reprimand.
· The judge to be supervised when officiating an event.
· The judge attend a relevant officiating seminar before officiating a further event.
· The judge be re-assessed.
· The judge take a relevant officiating test.
· The judge be suspended from his/her appointment for up to one year.
· That the appointment of the judge be terminated.
13. The Chair of the Judges Committee will forward the panel’s recommendation to the full Judges Committee. The committee shall confirm the recommendation or decide that a different sanction is to be imposed.
14. If the decision of the committee is that the appointment be suspended or terminated, the committee will forward a summary of the findings and its sanctions to the Chair of the Race Administration Committee.
15. The judge may appeal any sanction imposed under this policy to the US SAILING Review Board. If this is done, then the committee will forward a copy its report and relevant documentation to the Review Board.
US SAILING extends its liability policies for the benefit of certified judges (CJ), race officers and umpires. There are actually four policies where CJ’s are named:
1. General Liability (bodily injury and property damage on land and personal injury)
2. Hull and Protection & Indemnity (liability for the operation of a boat)
3. Umbrella (excess liability over the two above policies)
4. Director’s and Officer’s Liability (liability for wrongful acts)
The General Liability policy pays for sums US SAILING (or the CJ if named personally in the lawsuit) becomes legally obligated to pay for bodily injury or property damage caused by the CJ performing duties for US SAILING anywhere in the world. “Bodily injury means physical injury, sickness or disease sustained by a person, including resulting death, humiliation, mental anguish, mental injury or shock at any time. All such loss shall be deemed to occur at the time of the physical injury, sickness or disease that caused it.” The cost to defend the lawsuits is included. Each policy has a $1,000,000 limit per occurrence.
There is also protection for personal injury claims. This protects the CJ from lawsuits “arising from alleged libel, slander, defamation of character, false arrest, and wrongful eviction.” Included are claims from “discrimination, harassment or segregation based on a person’s age, color, national origin, race, religion or sex.” It is important to note, however, that there is no coverage if the personal injury is either “expected or intended.”
The Protection and Indemnity policy pays for sums US SAILING (or the CJ if named personally in the lawsuit) becomes legally obligated to pay for bodily injury or property damage caused by the operation of a boat up to 85 feet. It also includes primary hull insurance up to the value of the boat. This would include boats owned, chartered or borrowed by US SAILING. The P&I policy also carries a $1,000,000 limit per occurrence and applies anywhere in the world. If the boat used by the CJ is borrowed or chartered by a yacht club (or similar entity hosting the event), there may be primary insurance provided by the yacht club. NOTE: If the yacht club is insured in the BURGEE PROGRAM, the coverage is automatic for borrowed boats, and a CJ would meet the definition of insured because the CJ is a volunteer of the club. This is a good thing, as it may provide another source of coverage for the CJ.
The Umbrella Policy carries a $10,000,000 limit, which works in excess of the above underlying policies.
The Director’s and Officer’s Liability (D& O) policy protects US SAILING (or the Chief Judge if named personally in the lawsuit) for damages (not bodily injury or property damage) from wrongful acts committed by the Chief Judge. Wrongful Act means: “any error, misstatement, misleading statement, act, omission, neglect, or breach of duty committed, attempted, or allegedly committed or attempted by any insured person in his or her capacity as such.”
There is a $5,000,000 limit on the D&O policy, which includes defense costs.
Jury Chairs might ask, “What other insurance protection might be available to me personally beyond what US SAILING offers?” There are two possible answers:
1. If the CJ is considered a volunteer of the hosting yacht club, the club’s insurance might offer protection depending on the insurance program carried by the club.
2. If the CJ has a so-called personal umbrella policy, it may protect him for his activities on behalf of a not-for-profit organization.
The insurance that US SAILING provides for race officials is quite adequate, but they may find comfort knowing that there may also be other coverage available for their volunteer efforts.
