Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get why this topic comes up every year—it can look messy from the outside. But I do think it’s worth being careful about assuming intent or favoritism without seeing the full picture.

In many cases (mine included), parents don’t get involved to get their kids hired—they get involved because their kids are already deeply invested in the team. Those kids often grow up volunteering, helping at practices, assisting younger swimmers, and building relationships with coaches over several years. By the time they apply for a coaching role, they may genuinely be some of the strongest candidates—not because of who their parents are, but because of their experience, commitment, and familiarity with the program.

It’s also important to recognize that a lot of the hiring process happens behind the scenes. Unless you’ve stepped into those roles, you may not realize how many safeguards are already in place to keep things fair. Many teams use structured scoring systems or rubrics—evaluating things like leadership, reliability, communication, and interaction with younger swimmers—and once candidates are scored, decisions are often made in a way that’s effectively blind to who their parents are. Add in conflict-of-interest practices (like people stepping out of decisions involving their own kids), and there’s usually more intentionality than it might appear from the outside.

On the swimming piece—yes, by the time someone is a teen applying to coach, they should be legal in all four strokes. They don’t need to be fast, but being able to swim all four is a pretty basic expectation and usually reflects a level of engagement with the sport. That said, coaching ability is about much more than speed—some of the best teen coaches are the ones who connect with kids, bring energy, and show up consistently.

I’ll also add—having been on the other side of this—it can be tough when your child does earn a role and people assume it was handed to them. Sometimes the “favored” kid is actually just the one who’s been putting in the work for years.

Totally fair to want a fair and transparent process. But I’d focus less on who someone’s parent is and more on whether the team has a thoughtful, consistent approach to evaluating and selecting coaches.

It sounds like your team puts a lot of thought and effort into this with some objective tools and measures- like scoring systems and rubrics! That’s wonderful. Did your team or league develop those? Are you able to share them or describe them for the good of everyone?

I understand your points and agree. I also agree speed isn’t the top attribute in a coach, but swimmers should at least be legal in all 4-5 strokes and compete. Leadership, team spirit, and being good with children are also important. The problem is when parents are just deciding about other children- it often is not fair and is full of bias, favoritism, and politics.

What's the fifth stroke?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get why this topic comes up every year—it can look messy from the outside. But I do think it’s worth being careful about assuming intent or favoritism without seeing the full picture.

In many cases (mine included), parents don’t get involved to get their kids hired—they get involved because their kids are already deeply invested in the team. Those kids often grow up volunteering, helping at practices, assisting younger swimmers, and building relationships with coaches over several years. By the time they apply for a coaching role, they may genuinely be some of the strongest candidates—not because of who their parents are, but because of their experience, commitment, and familiarity with the program.

It’s also important to recognize that a lot of the hiring process happens behind the scenes. Unless you’ve stepped into those roles, you may not realize how many safeguards are already in place to keep things fair. Many teams use structured scoring systems or rubrics—evaluating things like leadership, reliability, communication, and interaction with younger swimmers—and once candidates are scored, decisions are often made in a way that’s effectively blind to who their parents are. Add in conflict-of-interest practices (like people stepping out of decisions involving their own kids), and there’s usually more intentionality than it might appear from the outside.

On the swimming piece—yes, by the time someone is a teen applying to coach, they should be legal in all four strokes. They don’t need to be fast, but being able to swim all four is a pretty basic expectation and usually reflects a level of engagement with the sport. That said, coaching ability is about much more than speed—some of the best teen coaches are the ones who connect with kids, bring energy, and show up consistently.

I’ll also add—having been on the other side of this—it can be tough when your child does earn a role and people assume it was handed to them. Sometimes the “favored” kid is actually just the one who’s been putting in the work for years.

Totally fair to want a fair and transparent process. But I’d focus less on who someone’s parent is and more on whether the team has a thoughtful, consistent approach to evaluating and selecting coaches.

It sounds like your team puts a lot of thought and effort into this with some objective tools and measures- like scoring systems and rubrics! That’s wonderful. Did your team or league develop those? Are you able to share them or describe them for the good of everyone?

I understand your points and agree. I also agree speed isn’t the top attribute in a coach, but swimmers should at least be legal in all 4-5 strokes and compete. Leadership, team spirit, and being good with children are also important. The problem is when parents are just deciding about other children- it often is not fair and is full of bias, favoritism, and politics.

Anonymous wrote:I get why this topic comes up every year—it can look messy from the outside. But I do think it’s worth being careful about assuming intent or favoritism without seeing the full picture.

In many cases (mine included), parents don’t get involved to get their kids hired—they get involved because their kids are already deeply invested in the team. Those kids often grow up volunteering, helping at practices, assisting younger swimmers, and building relationships with coaches over several years. By the time they apply for a coaching role, they may genuinely be some of the strongest candidates—not because of who their parents are, but because of their experience, commitment, and familiarity with the program.

It’s also important to recognize that a lot of the hiring process happens behind the scenes. Unless you’ve stepped into those roles, you may not realize how many safeguards are already in place to keep things fair. Many teams use structured scoring systems or rubrics—evaluating things like leadership, reliability, communication, and interaction with younger swimmers—and once candidates are scored, decisions are often made in a way that’s effectively blind to who their parents are. Add in conflict-of-interest practices (like people stepping out of decisions involving their own kids), and there’s usually more intentionality than it might appear from the outside.

On the swimming piece—yes, by the time someone is a teen applying to coach, they should be legal in all four strokes. They don’t need to be fast, but being able to swim all four is a pretty basic expectation and usually reflects a level of engagement with the sport. That said, coaching ability is about much more than speed—some of the best teen coaches are the ones who connect with kids, bring energy, and show up consistently.

I’ll also add—having been on the other side of this—it can be tough when your child does earn a role and people assume it was handed to them. Sometimes the “favored” kid is actually just the one who’s been putting in the work for years.

Totally fair to want a fair and transparent process. But I’d focus less on who someone’s parent is and more on whether the team has a thoughtful, consistent approach to evaluating and selecting coaches.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get why this topic comes up every year—it can look messy from the outside. But I do think it’s worth being careful about assuming intent or favoritism without seeing the full picture.

In many cases (mine included), parents don’t get involved to get their kids hired—they get involved because their kids are already deeply invested in the team. Those kids often grow up volunteering, helping at practices, assisting younger swimmers, and building relationships with coaches over several years. By the time they apply for a coaching role, they may genuinely be some of the strongest candidates—not because of who their parents are, but because of their experience, commitment, and familiarity with the program.

It’s also important to recognize that a lot of the hiring process happens behind the scenes. Unless you’ve stepped into those roles, you may not realize how many safeguards are already in place to keep things fair. Many teams use structured scoring systems or rubrics—evaluating things like leadership, reliability, communication, and interaction with younger swimmers—and once candidates are scored, decisions are often made in a way that’s effectively blind to who their parents are. Add in conflict-of-interest practices (like people stepping out of decisions involving their own kids), and there’s usually more intentionality than it might appear from the outside.

On the swimming piece—yes, by the time someone is a teen applying to coach, they should be legal in all four strokes. They don’t need to be fast, but being able to swim all four is a pretty basic expectation and usually reflects a level of engagement with the sport. That said, coaching ability is about much more than speed—some of the best teen coaches are the ones who connect with kids, bring energy, and show up consistently.

I’ll also add—having been on the other side of this—it can be tough when your child does earn a role and people assume it was handed to them. Sometimes the “favored” kid is actually just the one who’s been putting in the work for years.

Totally fair to want a fair and transparent process. But I’d focus less on who someone’s parent is and more on whether the team has a thoughtful, consistent approach to evaluating and selecting coaches.

It sounds like your team puts a lot of thought and effort into this with some objective tools and measures- like scoring systems and rubrics! That’s wonderful. Did your team or league develop those? Are you able to share them or describe them for the good of everyone?

I understand your points and agree. I also agree speed isn’t the top attribute in a coach, but swimmers should at least be legal in all 4-5 strokes and compete. Leadership, team spirit, and being good with children are also important. The problem is when parents are just deciding about other children- it often is not fair and is full of bias, favoritism, and politics.

Anonymous wrote:I get why this topic comes up every year—it can look messy from the outside. But I do think it’s worth being careful about assuming intent or favoritism without seeing the full picture.

In many cases (mine included), parents don’t get involved to get their kids hired—they get involved because their kids are already deeply invested in the team. Those kids often grow up volunteering, helping at practices, assisting younger swimmers, and building relationships with coaches over several years. By the time they apply for a coaching role, they may genuinely be some of the strongest candidates—not because of who their parents are, but because of their experience, commitment, and familiarity with the program.

It’s also important to recognize that a lot of the hiring process happens behind the scenes. Unless you’ve stepped into those roles, you may not realize how many safeguards are already in place to keep things fair. Many teams use structured scoring systems or rubrics—evaluating things like leadership, reliability, communication, and interaction with younger swimmers—and once candidates are scored, decisions are often made in a way that’s effectively blind to who their parents are. Add in conflict-of-interest practices (like people stepping out of decisions involving their own kids), and there’s usually more intentionality than it might appear from the outside.

On the swimming piece—yes, by the time someone is a teen applying to coach, they should be legal in all four strokes. They don’t need to be fast, but being able to swim all four is a pretty basic expectation and usually reflects a level of engagement with the sport. That said, coaching ability is about much more than speed—some of the best teen coaches are the ones who connect with kids, bring energy, and show up consistently.

I’ll also add—having been on the other side of this—it can be tough when your child does earn a role and people assume it was handed to them. Sometimes the “favored” kid is actually just the one who’s been putting in the work for years.

Totally fair to want a fair and transparent process. But I’d focus less on who someone’s parent is and more on whether the team has a thoughtful, consistent approach to evaluating and selecting coaches.

Anonymous wrote:How do your summer teams hire the teen coaches?

Do parents/board members make the decisions, or the paid hired coach?

Are teen coaches hired if they don’t swim well- like if they don’t have legal times in all strokes?

Are your team reps kids or board members kids automatically hired?

How are interviews done? What are deciding factors?

Our pool has the volunteer board interviewing and making decisions, with some input from the paid head coach. The board includes parents who have children who are applying for coaches. It seems the team reps kids or certain volunteers kids are automatically hired and favored, even if they are not qualified or good coaches or there are other better candidates. There is so much favoritism and politics involved, and it’s really discouraging.

Any tips for how to do this right or what to avoid when choosing coaches?

Anonymous wrote:It's competitive at our team. But we have had the same summer coach for a decade so they know almost all the kids coming up who apply. The coach makes the decisions. It's his employees and his team.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's competitive at our pool, at least from the multiple emails we got last year asking for applications. A lot of teens have summer jobs and can't spare the time

My 14 year old is finally old enough this year and is interested but never got great at butterfly. Does okay on the other strokes, never DQed, but not fast. She is awesome at team spirit and kiddie wrangling. Babysits a ton. From what I've observed, that's what's needed more than actual coaching.

It sounds like it's different with more competitive teams.

Should my DD still apply?

Anonymous wrote:The truth is that the people who run the swim team's kids get those jobs. If there are additional positions available after the nepo hires, your kid has a decent shot if s/he volunteered for free the previous season.