Page 191 - September 2022

throughout the entire country. The hostility
toward the Guild’s involvement in the lawsuit
appears to be based on a lack of knowledge
of the underlying facts. Contrary to the
representations of some, the Guild did not join • the Louisiana lawsuit merely to bargain the
number of times jockeys may use the riding
crop. Rather, the Guild joined the lawsuit to
push HISA to modify its rules to address a • number of concerns, all of which the Guild
previously raised with HISA and/or the FTC.
Among those concerns are:
• The uncertainty regarding the costs
of the implementation and operation • of HISA and the amount allocated to
covered entities and covered persons,
which has the potential to put certain
jockeys as well as racetracks, owners,
breeders, and horsemen out of business.
• HISA’s elimination of the ARCI model
rule requirement which had been • adopted in many states of having one
certified paramedic trackside during • training, and two certified paramedics
trackside during racing. Just as the
HISA rules require at least two
operating equine ambulances, so should • there be at least two operating human ambulances to safeguard the lives of
jockeys. Cutting back on the number
of required paramedics and ambulances
is absolutely unacceptable. This will
be used as a justification by some
racetracks to cut costs. It also creates a • potential for lack of medical care in the
event of a multiple horse spill, which
happens often.
• The lack of a centralized database
to maintain the baseline concussion
tests, annual physicals, and to track
jockey injuries, including return to ride releases from physicians in the event of • an injury.
• The lack of guidelines as to when a jockey can return to racing following injuries other than concussions.
• The fact that the HISA rules penalize jockeys – and only jockeys – with a points system.
• A non-tiered system of unduly harsh fines and suspensions for jockeys that
has a disproportionate impact on jockeys who race at lower-grossing tracks and that many jockeys cannot afford.
The lack of an accessible, centralized database to maintain all rulings and track penalty points assessed to jockeys under the HISA rules.
Permitting the use of only two models of riding crops, which
were initially made by a single manufacturer, creating supply problems and selective enforcement. Disqualification of horses when jockeys exceed the permissible number of strikes, which at a major race, like the Kentucky Derby, could erode public confidence in the industry and will have a major impact on owners and breeders.
Uncertainty surrounding the appeals process for HISA rulings.
“Covered persons,” including jockeys, being required to waive their rights with respect to HISA’s search and seizure rules.
After July 1, inconsistences throughout the country in how the HISA rules are being interpreted and applied, leading to confusion and frustration not only among the jockeys, but also regulators, stewards, horsemen, owners and the betting public.
After July 1, selective enforcement of the rules, including but not limited
to the riding crop rules, and the selective enforcement of some rules against jockeys only. Picking and choosing which rules to enforce is fundamentally unfair and erodes HISA’s stated goal of uniformity. Requiring continuing education for jockeys at every race meet, while
other “covered persons” are required
to undergo such training only on an annual basis. (Prior to July 1, and following months of conversations with HISA, HISA informed us that this requirement was changed.)
had previously been done by the National Thoroughbred Racing Association’s (NTRA) Safety and Integrity Alliance. In fact, under the HISA rules, racetracks that had been previously accredited by the NTRA Safety and Integrity Alliance are automatically accredited under HISA for an extended period of time. In February of 2018, the Guild outlined the concerns with the NTRA and the continued failure to enforce the requirements pertaining to jockeys, including the necessity of having properly trained paramedics and fully staffed and operating ambulances. The links below, to videos/pictures that have been captured recently, provide an example of the conditions that the jockeys are expected to work in at a racetrack that is currently accredited by the NTRA. This has been an issue the Guild
has been trying to get resolved for number of years, and of which many have been aware
of, but still has not been fully and adequately been addressed. There is currently another racetrack which has zero water in the jockeys’ room, meaning the jockeys do not have access to showers and the laundry of the silks and equipment must be done off site. Yet, the jockeys are expected to continue to work in those conditions.
Those who have called for the Guild
to withdraw from the lawsuit should
ask themselves what the HISA rules as currently written are doing for jockeys and their safety. Those who have threatened adverse consequences against the Guild for its participation in the lawsuit should ask themselves how marginalization of jockeys’ voices could possibly benefit the industry.
For its part, the Guild intends to move forward. HISA is not going anywhere, and the Guild intends to work with it. The Guild is and has always been willing to make reasonable compromises. If HISA, in the future, ignores the Guild’s legitimate concerns, the Guild reserves its rights, including its right to bring
as a last resort a legal action as it has done
in Louisiana. However, if HISA shows itself willing to listen to the Guild’s concerns and
to address them, it will find no better friend than the Guild. Moving the industry forward will require the insight and cooperation of all industry stakeholders.
It bears noting that HISA accreditation for racetracks is based on much of what
“...the Guild has an obligation and duty to protect all of its members and must continue to listen to the concerns expressed by many of its members throughout the entire country.”
SPEEDHORSE September 2022 189