AGM

[Alan Tate]

[Mike Scott]

Steve,
I specifically responded to the post that referred to the non-FIDE rating in the event that a disabled player can not be accommodated because for some recent events that have been run at the Edinburgh CC getting FIDE rated was a major point of running the event.

Given that organisers are always constrained financially and must book the venue well in advance without any idea who might enter, is it really reasonable that if a disabled player wants to enter but who, despite the best efforts of the organizers, can not be accommodated then the event is penalised?

Sure events might always be able to book other venues but this may have financial implications for the viability of the event and it denies Edinburgh CC the income it might get from hosting events.

[StevieHilton]

Steve,
I specifically responded to the post that referred to the non-FIDE rating in the event that a disabled player can not be accommodated because for some recent events that have been run at the Edinburgh CC getting FIDE rated was a major point of running the event.

Given that organisers are always constrained financially and must book the venue well in advance without any idea who might enter, is it really reasonable that if a disabled player wants to enter but who, despite the best efforts of the organizers, can not be accommodated then the event is penalised?

Sure events might always be able to book other venues but this may have financial implications for the viability of the event and it denies Edinburgh CC the income it might get from hosting events.

Mike,
I would hope that Edinburgh CC would continue to hold FIDE rated tournaments as well, but the fact that these guidelines are now in effect and came into effect on 1st July 2014. FIDE rules are clear you cannot bar someone from a tournament because of their disability. I would expect Edinburgh to all it can do should disabled players enter their events. Scotland as a member of FIDE has to comply with FIDE rules

[Ianbrownlee]

Scotland as a member of FIDE has to comply with FIDE rules

which in my opinion demonstrates why so many people have concerns about it being implemented by CS for CHESS Scotland EVENTS. if FIDE events are already covered by these regulations then we shall see quickly what will happen in future events as to whether they will continue or not. ON THE BASIS OF THIS my opinion is that CS should NOT adopt the motion for CS events. I've yet to see any organiser, CS or not approve of these motions. One minute we hear these are just guidelines for the organiser, the next minute we hear they have to be enforced.. I also don't think these guidelines help the organiser... at the moment they try their best to help disabled players, but now I fear they will worry if disabled players want to play in their event.

The way forward for this , and I repeat I do want this to work, is that events and venues should be graded in such a way that disabled facilities are clearly marked so that anybody can see what is available and what is not. I also strongly feel if disabled people require qualified carers, then they should provide them themselves, as only they should know what kind of qualified assistance they require, and i'm sure this point is not lost. I have spoken to a well known senior (non CS )organiser on various points about this thread. He says its a scandal when disabled players are shifted to the kitchen, analysis area or hall way to play (and I agree on this) , but I honestly believe this may become more the norm unless we seriously address this. I fear organisers may be be tempted to do this as a quick fix rather than address the spirit of what we are trying to do. I am also sure the more we integrate and work with disabled organisations, the more suitable disabled accommodation will appear and the more friends we will gain in Chess Scotland.

[StevieHilton]

Scotland as a member of FIDE has to comply with FIDE rules

which in my opinion demonstrates why so many people have concerns about it being implemented by CS for CHESS Scotland EVENTS. if FIDE events are already covered by these regulations then we shall see quickly what will happen in future events as to whether they will continue or not. ON THE BASIS OF THIS my opinion is that CS should NOT adopt the motion for CS events. I've yet to see any organiser, CS or not approve of these motions. One minute we hear these are just guidelines for the organiser, the next minute we hear they have to be enforced.. I also don't think these guidelines help the organiser... at the moment they try their best to help disabled players, but now I fear they will worry if disabled players want to play in their event.

The way forward for this , and I repeat I do want this to work, is that events and venues should be graded in such a way that disabled facilities are clearly marked so that anybody can see what is available and what is not. I also strongly feel if disabled people require qualified carers, then they should provide them themselves, as only they should know what kind of qualified assistance they require, and i'm sure this point is not lost. I have spoken to a well known senior (non CS )organiser on various points about this thread. He says its a scandal when disabled players are shifted to the kitchen, analysis area or hall way to play (and I agree on this) , but I honestly believe this may become more the norm unless we seriously address this. I fear organisers may be be tempted to do this as a quick fix rather than address the spirit of what we are trying to do. I am also sure the more we integrate and work with disabled organisations, the more suitable disabled accommodation will appear and the more friends we will gain in Chess Scotland.

Ian,
We are not going to agree on this. The very fact that there is nothing in writing vis a vis treatment of disabled players in regards to Chess Scotland events and non CS events eg, leagues and congresses. does give in theory organisers a cop out in saying we do not have to have to cater for disabled players. This does not happen I know but because of a lack of guidelines on this it could. I have experienced discrimination in league play when players have commented about my use of a dictaphone to record my moves, saying it distracts them. playing in a separate room is a proper solution in my view in order to address these concerns about distraction.

I do not accept your point that tournaments will fall because of these guidelines, as the practice already takes place and none have disappeared so far have they? Why should they now this practice is in writing?

It would be hypocritical to talk of integration and working with disabled organisations and block these proposals at the same time

I have also said that these guidelines can be adapted to meet the local situation and I am not opposed to that. In regards to FIDE rated events they must be observed in full and CS as a member of FIDE has to abide by them

[Ianbrownlee]

It would be hypocritical to talk of integration and working with disabled organisations and block these proposals at the same time

First time in my life I've been called a hypocrite. Despite what anyone may think I would love to see more disabled people play chess but it has to be in the right environment. I know most organisers and I know their passion and commitment. I implicitly trust each and every one of them to provide the best possible environment for everybody.

I have also said that these guidelines can be adapted to meet the local situation and I am not opposed to that. In regards to FIDE rated events they must be observed in full and CS as a member of FIDE has to abide by them

the point I am repeatedly trying to make is that if CS does implement them in CS events then are you say they must be observed in full.

I do not accept your point that tournaments will fall because of these guidelines, as the practice already takes place and none have disappeared so far have they? Why should they now this practice is in writing?

dead easy because your are restricting the liberty of the organiser to conduct his tournament as he has done in the past. It is a guideline which has to be enforced so the organiser cannot apply in own wisdom and experience. I am surprised you cannot see this. It also allows the guideline to be used as a weapon by a disgruntled entrant against the organiser and the tournament as a whole. I have learned from a non CS organiser that there was an incident where disabled players played in the kitchen which is simply not good enough. This incident and the incident Pat mentioned are the only two incidents I know Pat's incident would not be covered of issues. Again thanks to Pat for bringing that up. However as far as I believe Pat's incident would not be covered by the guidelines.

If Chess Scotland were to adopt the motion, then it would directly affect their tournaments. For example in the macisaac, Spens Cup and Nancy Elder tournaments Chess Scotland would have to provide disabled facilities for the home venue. No way can that be enforced so by these guidelines that events would have to be cancelled or at least no games in that event could be graded. however due to the spirit on how games are played in these tournament and how they are controlled, disabled players in the past have participated and will in the future will continue to do so providing these "guidelines" are not implemented.

I also seem to get the impression that Andy Howie thinks these guidelines are more like recommendations given the three options he mentioned and Stevie thinks there are guidelines that must be followed. Perhaps the AGM will clarify this but hope the members present will know exactly what they are working on. For my part I am now convinced that this motion should not be not adopted by Chess Scotland and will recommend when asked against this motion entirely. I am sure this motion will only be for CS events

Finallly, on the matter of Edinburgh Chess Club since it has been mentioned on this thread As far as I am aware there has never been any issue regards disability. I hope they will continue to thrive regarding their endeavours but I would not be surprised if a test case does appear in the next year. What then for FIDE and CS events in the future

[John Dempsey]

This debate is extremely interesting, and I have little to add to it. Other, that is, than to point to an event which overtook Glasgow Montrose Chess Club a few years back. The club had been in the RAFA Club venue for many years and was very happy, but, one day the RAFA Club in Glasgow was told it had to close. The reason was that it was not able to accommodate disabled members due to the very steep stairs leading to its front door. The cost of changing to accommodate the disabled was prohibitive, so it had to close and the chess club had to find an alternative venue, whilst the RAFA membership, all of them, lost their club. It is what it is.

[StevieHilton]

Ian,
I never called you a hypocrite directly so please withdraw that remark. I came to the view that it would be hypocritical to talk of integration and working with disability organisations and block this motion. I have not attacked you personally I ask again for you to withdraw the remarks

I have repeatedly said that the guidelines can be adapted to meet the local situation. To this end, I have never opposed any rewording of the guidelines for that type of situation and that still stands, but if the motion is rejected it will indeed be a sad day for chess in Scotland

[Ianbrownlee]

The cost of changing to accommodate the disabled was prohibitive, so it had to close and the chess club had to find an alternative venue, whilst the RAFA membership, all of them, lost their club. It is what it is.

Hi John nice to hear from you again, thanks for your input

if the motion is rejected it will indeed be a sad day for chess in Scotland

hardly a sad day but if it is written down it is only a guideline for organisers but not mandatory it may get through. Even if it doesn't get through the discussion on this forum has been hugely positive. Apart from Stevie I haven't heard anyone with any conflicting views from myself

[JMcNicoll]

You haven't read very carefully then, have you?

I thought my position was perfectly clear but for clarity, just for you, I ,personally, entirely reject your supposed scenarios.
I have talked to a couple or three tournament organisers and organisations today who can see no problem adopting the guidelines but don't post on this forum so are not heard.
There are no circumstances in the real world under which any event can be held to ransom by a single over demanding disabled entrant.
As to " restricting the liberty of organisers " the guidelines do no such thing. you are free to organise any event you wish, just having regard to the needs of all entrants.
To suggest that events would have to be cancelled or not run is scaremongering in the extreme.
You bring up Edinburgh, I have heard of disabled users having great difficulty with the access but there is no suggestion from those in favour of the guidelines that Edinburgh shut it's doors just because it is not disabled friendly. Those against, on the other hand, seem to relish such an event. If I had Edinburgh's vote I know which way I would cast it.