This has come up in a different context when talking about if/how much to charge for pre-season matches, but I worry about the implications for other officials whenever I'm asked to accept little/no fee for a game. I'm lucky enough that I earn enough from my day job that I could cover a couple of free trips to a match at a weekend or in the evening each season if I wanted to, but does that give me an unfair head start over a different official, who may need to at least charge mileage if offered the same game?
Imagine a hypothetical situation where a manager is looking for an official for a high-profile charity game and sends out a call to action and then gets two responses. One is able to do it for free/donate the fee, the other is perhaps younger or from a less-well-off background and says that he'd need mileage covered at least. It makes sense that the manager would choose the official who is already better off and who then gets the opportunity as a result.
It's little things like this that can entrench existing small privileges into bigger differences in opportunity, and it's an unusual situation where I think the better thing to do for "refereeing society" is to normalise taking a fee wherever possible.
Imagine a hypothetical situation where a manager is looking for an official for a high-profile charity game and sends out a call to action and then gets two responses. One is able to do it for free/donate the fee, the other is perhaps younger or from a less-well-off background and says that he'd need mileage covered at least. It makes sense that the manager would choose the official who is already better off and who then gets the opportunity as a result.
It's little things like this that can entrench existing small privileges into bigger differences in opportunity, and it's an unusual situation where I think the better thing to do for "refereeing society" is to normalise taking a fee wherever possible.