The Waiver Process

August 21, 2015

Last school year, over the course of 12 meetings, the MHSAA Executive Committee received 467 requests from member schools to waive either a minimum standard for student eligibility or a maximum limitation on competition. Three hundred sixty-two of these requests for waiver were approved. That’s 78 percent.

This was a typical year – neither a record high nor record low in the number of requests, or of waivers approved.

Under the MHSAA Constitution, to at least some degree, every Handbook regulation may be waived by the Executive Committee. However, it is an abuse of authority if there is not  a compelling reason for the waiver – that is, a clear case where the rule works an undue hardship (not just any hardship) on a student or school, or the rule fails to perform its intended purpose in the particular and unique circumstances documented.

There are times when school administrators will disagree with an Executive Committee determination, and more times when parents will disagree – and sometimes the difference of opinion leads to unjustified attacks on the MHSAA or individuals. This is unfortunate, but inevitable when critics see their situation alone and not in the context of past and future precedent.

Nevertheless, in recent years, fewer than one in 400 waiver requests that is not approved has been appealed to the full MHSAA Representative Council. I believe this reflects not only that the Executive Committee has been getting the decisions right, but also that those who are making the requests have felt well heard and served.

We work hard to create that atmosphere, even in the presence of emotional, invested parents who are advocating for their children. From a real live receptionist who greets every telephone caller, to our associate director who helps administrators prepare each request to the Executive Committee, we strive to present every request for waiver in its best factual light and every rule involved in its complete educational and historical context.

Unjustified

December 11, 2015

The MHSAA has taken some unjustified criticism about the last-minute cancellation or relocation of several boys basketball games scheduled for the University of Detroit-Mercy earlier this week.

Unjustified because we would have liked the event to have been successful for our schools involved and a venue (Calihan Hall) we use often for MHSAA events.

Unjustified because the failure to follow interstate sanctioning rules was not our fault.

Unjustified because those who were in charge failed to respond to several outreaches well in advance of the event that were intended to inform or remind the organizers to seek and obtain proper approvals.

Unjustified because those approvals are a required part of the sanctioning policies and procedures of the national organization to which we belong, and which applied as much to the out-of-state schools as to our own.

Unjustified because critics now blame the problem on travel distance restrictions, which was not the issue at all. The travel was well within the generous limitations that exist.

What was at issue was the requirement that interstate events that are sponsored or co-sponsored by entities other than member schools must have the prior approval of each of the state high school associations involved, as well as the approval of the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS). This flows from the original purpose of the NFHS which was to bring accountability to interstate events at the high school level operated by colleges and commercial organizations.

We expect our schools to follow established rules of their state association, and we try to model that expectation by following the rules that apply to the MHSAA within its national organization.