Families that never volunteer - swim team

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the success of any sports league tied to the number of new kids who come out and try the sport?
Seems like a carrot vs stick should be used to compel parents of new swimmers to help out.

Swim has has no problem attracting new kids every year. It doesn’t need this wrecking ball of a troll.

+1. We just had our largest mini meet ever. We have no problem at all attracting swimmers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

So I’m not a swim parent, but this thread is kind of fascinating to me…can someone explain why this is a burn?

I’m not completely sure but I think it means these people push their way into the area where the kids who are swimming and the people actually working the meet are standing in order to watch their kids swim. If you’re at the appropriate distance for someone who is not working the meet, your feet don’t get wet.

Anyway I agree that parents who can’t handle the volunteer requirements shouldn’t sign up for swimmer swim. It’s not a right to sign up for a swim team. Life requires making choices. You can say oh “it’s just a rec sport” but that doesn’t change the inherent nature of a swim meet. A lot of volunteers are needed to make it not take 10 hours. Having fewer timers would make close races impossible to adjudicate. It’s not like every swimmer finishes 5 seconds after one another. I know people whose kids don’t do swim because they don’t have the ability to volunteer so much. There are many other choices out there where you can do a lot less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

Just stop it already. You are in a small minority in favor of this. Most people are very happy with the way NVSL meets are run and don’t want this aspect to change. Besides, timing is a relatively enjoyable volunteer experience. I would do it every meet if our pool wasn’t short on certified judges. You should just find a pool in a league that does it the way you suggest.

PP's post was spot on. Clearly, people don't want to volunteer, and so things SHOULD change.

Those who don’t want to volunteer should simply quit swim. I suppose if there is enough that do, maybe there will be impetus to change but that seems highly unlikely

Or, just maybe, the leagues could adapt to work better for the modern family.

You aren't listening and/or are being deliberately obtuse. WE CAN'T RUN THE MEETS without the volunteers. We can't let parents buy their way out because too many would. And there aren't enough unemployed teens around who want to stand around working the meets instead of lazy parents. If you had a clue what was actually going on at swim meets, you would understand the issue. I guess your "modern family" just won't include kids on swim team, and that's ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

Just stop it already. You are in a small minority in favor of this. Most people are very happy with the way NVSL meets are run and don’t want this aspect to change. Besides, timing is a relatively enjoyable volunteer experience. I would do it every meet if our pool wasn’t short on certified judges. You should just find a pool in a league that does it the way you suggest.

PP's post was spot on. Clearly, people don't want to volunteer, and so things SHOULD change.

Those who don’t want to volunteer should simply quit swim. I suppose if there is enough that do, maybe there will be impetus to change but that seems highly unlikely

Or, just maybe, the leagues could adapt to work better for the modern family.

You aren't listening and/or are being deliberately obtuse. WE CAN'T RUN THE MEETS without the volunteers. We can't let parents buy their way out because too many would. And there aren't enough unemployed teens around who want to stand around working the meets instead of lazy parents. If you had a clue what was actually going on at swim meets, you would understand the issue. I guess your "modern family" just won't include kids on swim team, and that's ok.

At least at our pool, every teen interested in swim who wants a job is already a coach. I'd really love to see who you could get to time if you just offered to pay - are these people proposing putting it on taskrabbit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

Just stop it already. You are in a small minority in favor of this. Most people are very happy with the way NVSL meets are run and don’t want this aspect to change. Besides, timing is a relatively enjoyable volunteer experience. I would do it every meet if our pool wasn’t short on certified judges. You should just find a pool in a league that does it the way you suggest.

PP's post was spot on. Clearly, people don't want to volunteer, and so things SHOULD change.

Those who don’t want to volunteer should simply quit swim. I suppose if there is enough that do, maybe there will be impetus to change but that seems highly unlikely

Or, just maybe, the leagues could adapt to work better for the modern family.

You aren't listening and/or are being deliberately obtuse. WE CAN'T RUN THE MEETS without the volunteers. We can't let parents buy their way out because too many would. And there aren't enough unemployed teens around who want to stand around working the meets instead of lazy parents. If you had a clue what was actually going on at swim meets, you would understand the issue. I guess your "modern family" just won't include kids on swim team, and that's ok.

+1. DH and I work full time jobs and still have volunteered over 50 hours for swim team this year, and will both be volunteering 10+ hours each tomorrow and Saturday for divisional prep, divisionals and the year-end party. Your “modern family” is lazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

So I’m not a swim parent, but this thread is kind of fascinating to me…can someone explain why this is a burn?

I kind of love that I am apparently an elitist prole with wet sandals. I might have to get a Tshirt made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the success of any sports league tied to the number of new kids who come out and try the sport?
Seems like a carrot vs stick should be used to compel parents of new swimmers to help out.

Most of these pools have waitlists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

So I’m not a swim parent, but this thread is kind of fascinating to me…can someone explain why this is a burn?

I kind of love that I am apparently an elitist prole with wet sandals. I might have to get a Tshirt made.

I preferred time card running to timing and learned very early on to stand WAY back when those teen boys are swimming, especially butterfly. Holy tidal wave Batman!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

Just stop it already. You are in a small minority in favor of this. Most people are very happy with the way NVSL meets are run and don’t want this aspect to change. Besides, timing is a relatively enjoyable volunteer experience. I would do it every meet if our pool wasn’t short on certified judges. You should just find a pool in a league that does it the way you suggest.

PP's post was spot on. Clearly, people don't want to volunteer, and so things SHOULD change.

Those who don’t want to volunteer should simply quit swim. I suppose if there is enough that do, maybe there will be impetus to change but that seems highly unlikely

Or, just maybe, the leagues could adapt to work better for the modern family.

You aren't listening and/or are being deliberately obtuse. WE CAN'T RUN THE MEETS without the volunteers. We can't let parents buy their way out because too many would. And there aren't enough unemployed teens around who want to stand around working the meets instead of lazy parents. If you had a clue what was actually going on at swim meets, you would understand the issue. I guess your "modern family" just won't include kids on swim team, and that's ok.

At least at our pool, every teen interested in swim who wants a job is already a coach. I'd really love to see who you could get to time if you just offered to pay - are these people proposing putting it on taskrabbit?

We occasionally have au pairs time at our pool. If a parent wanted to hire someone to take their place no one would care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

Just stop it already. You are in a small minority in favor of this. Most people are very happy with the way NVSL meets are run and don’t want this aspect to change. Besides, timing is a relatively enjoyable volunteer experience. I would do it every meet if our pool wasn’t short on certified judges. You should just find a pool in a league that does it the way you suggest.

PP's post was spot on. Clearly, people don't want to volunteer, and so things SHOULD change.

Those who don’t want to volunteer should simply quit swim. I suppose if there is enough that do, maybe there will be impetus to change but that seems highly unlikely

Or, just maybe, the leagues could adapt to work better for the modern family.

You aren't listening and/or are being deliberately obtuse. WE CAN'T RUN THE MEETS without the volunteers. We can't let parents buy their way out because too many would. And there aren't enough unemployed teens around who want to stand around working the meets instead of lazy parents. If you had a clue what was actually going on at swim meets, you would understand the issue. I guess your "modern family" just won't include kids on swim team, and that's ok.

At least at our pool, every teen interested in swim who wants a job is already a coach. I'd really love to see who you could get to time if you just offered to pay - are these people proposing putting it on taskrabbit?

We occasionally have au pairs time at our pool. If a parent wanted to hire someone to take their place no one would care.

Sure, but who are you getting to do setup for an hour at 7:00 on a Saturday morning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

Just stop it already. You are in a small minority in favor of this. Most people are very happy with the way NVSL meets are run and don’t want this aspect to change. Besides, timing is a relatively enjoyable volunteer experience. I would do it every meet if our pool wasn’t short on certified judges. You should just find a pool in a league that does it the way you suggest.

PP's post was spot on. Clearly, people don't want to volunteer, and so things SHOULD change.

Those who don’t want to volunteer should simply quit swim. I suppose if there is enough that do, maybe there will be impetus to change but that seems highly unlikely

Or, just maybe, the leagues could adapt to work better for the modern family.

You aren't listening and/or are being deliberately obtuse. WE CAN'T RUN THE MEETS without the volunteers. We can't let parents buy their way out because too many would. And there aren't enough unemployed teens around who want to stand around working the meets instead of lazy parents. If you had a clue what was actually going on at swim meets, you would understand the issue. I guess your "modern family" just won't include kids on swim team, and that's ok.

At least at our pool, every teen interested in swim who wants a job is already a coach. I'd really love to see who you could get to time if you just offered to pay - are these people proposing putting it on taskrabbit?

We occasionally have au pairs time at our pool. If a parent wanted to hire someone to take their place no one would care.

Having someone else time for you is fine. Expecting to pay a little money and that a volunteer will then volunteer to spend more of their time recruiting and interviewing and supervising someone to take your spot isn’t. But if you find them, it’s not a problem.

Similarly if you sign up to do a snack run and deliver it to the pool, or to bring something for the potluck, we don’t care if the instacart driver is the one actually shopping and dropping it off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun.

I’m assuming you glanced at the 1956 rules that only specifies one timer per lane. In the 1965 rules while it only says it recommends two timers per lane, for any time to be counted as a record the lane needed to have 3 timers. Yes, times change, and in most cases, like this one, improvements are made. We’re not going back in time.

I have actually wondered if the famous Roger McLeod 8U free record was set using a single stopwatch. It seems unbreakable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

Just stop it already. You are in a small minority in favor of this. Most people are very happy with the way NVSL meets are run and don’t want this aspect to change. Besides, timing is a relatively enjoyable volunteer experience. I would do it every meet if our pool wasn’t short on certified judges. You should just find a pool in a league that does it the way you suggest.

PP's post was spot on. Clearly, people don't want to volunteer, and so things SHOULD change.

Those who don’t want to volunteer should simply quit swim. I suppose if there is enough that do, maybe there will be impetus to change but that seems highly unlikely

Or, just maybe, the leagues could adapt to work better for the modern family.

You aren't listening and/or are being deliberately obtuse. WE CAN'T RUN THE MEETS without the volunteers. We can't let parents buy their way out because too many would. And there aren't enough unemployed teens around who want to stand around working the meets instead of lazy parents. If you had a clue what was actually going on at swim meets, you would understand the issue. I guess your "modern family" just won't include kids on swim team, and that's ok.

+1. DH and I work full time jobs and still have volunteered over 50 hours for swim team this year, and will both be volunteering 10+ hours each tomorrow and Saturday for divisional prep, divisionals and the year-end party. Your “modern family” is lazy.

+2

Summer swim team is ~eight weeks out of the year. It’s also very much a nice to have, not a need to have, i.e., if your family can’t volunteer, and your team has no buy out option, you shouldn’t sign your kids up. It’s really not that complicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear that the volunteer requirements are more than many bargained for and are the cause of a lot of resentment. Rah rah parents who spend the most time and run the whole thing seem more sympathetic than the proles who crowd three deep behind a lane and leave the meet with wet sandals. Parents who pay to belong to the club think they get a pass from volunteering because they are really super busy like you wouldn't believe.

Asking for a hefty volunteer deposit doesn't really solve the problem because no one wants to show up for a 2 hour shift. It just alleviates the guilt of the people who are happy to pay and squeezes the rest of the suckers who now have to assume those shifts.

Since timers put the biggest burden on the meet, I don't think it would ruin the fun by going down to one or two timers per lane. And for those who say, "but we have always had 3 timers per lane", no you haven't. It used to be one timer and a starting gun. Times change. Three crappy stopwatch times are not much better than one crappy stopwatch time. Have those would be timers pass out popsicles or sit at a cupcake decorating table instead. I guarantee kids would appreciate that more than another timer at the end of the lane. Or better yet, let them watch their kids swim.

Just stop it already. You are in a small minority in favor of this. Most people are very happy with the way NVSL meets are run and don’t want this aspect to change. Besides, timing is a relatively enjoyable volunteer experience. I would do it every meet if our pool wasn’t short on certified judges. You should just find a pool in a league that does it the way you suggest.

PP's post was spot on. Clearly, people don't want to volunteer, and so things SHOULD change.

Those who don’t want to volunteer should simply quit swim. I suppose if there is enough that do, maybe there will be impetus to change but that seems highly unlikely

Or, just maybe, the leagues could adapt to work better for the modern family.

You aren't listening and/or are being deliberately obtuse. WE CAN'T RUN THE MEETS without the volunteers. We can't let parents buy their way out because too many would. And there aren't enough unemployed teens around who want to stand around working the meets instead of lazy parents. If you had a clue what was actually going on at swim meets, you would understand the issue. I guess your "modern family" just won't include kids on swim team, and that's ok.

+1. DH and I work full time jobs and still have volunteered over 50 hours for swim team this year, and will both be volunteering 10+ hours each tomorrow and Saturday for divisional prep, divisionals and the year-end party. Your “modern family” is lazy.

+2

Summer swim team is ~eight weeks out of the year. It’s also very much a nice to have, not a need to have, i.e., if your family can’t volunteer, and your team has no buy out option, you shouldn’t sign your kids up. It’s really not that complicated.

Right - and it’s not like the teams try to hide it. Every team broadcasts the fact that they require x amount of volunteer jobs per family from the very first meeting.

Unless my family is was unique, volunteering for kids activities is a decades long tradition. I remember watching my mom draft a monthly newsletter for one of my activities, my dad coaching my rec soccer teams and both parents timing at swim meets. The horror in this thread at being asked to volunteer is a bit much.

[Anonymous]

TBH post COVID less and less families esp w younger kids help out. We see the same group of people pitching in
No one hides it that we need volunteers but it is frustrating to watch the same families do nothing while everyone else is stepping up. These are also the same people who don’t read emails and require tons of handholding from very exhausted team reps. I say make them pay