Clarifying roles

Earlier this week, a hullabaloo ensued when a veteran national athlete (followed by another) publicly complained about not receiving the regular allowance from the Philippine Sports Commission, which was scheduled for disbursement yesterday. The commission responded that, despite problems caused by the pandemic, allowances for January and February were already being processed. The agency had, in fact, allocated close to P 4 million for the international training that the said athlete is at. It was approved by the PSC Board, which is required to disburse the money. The budget itself is a public document. Bear in mind that many huge, revenue-generating agencies of government (like PAGCOR, the major source of PSC’s funding) were depleted or shut down for months. Things have been bad all over.

Let’s delineate roles and responsibilities. Just to be clear, it is the PSC which funds the training of elite athletes, using public funds. It is one of their mandates. National sports associations rarely spend. But as professional managers, NSA officials should be prepared to act as a buffer in case of any problems. Or at the very least – the very least – they should help athletes understand any issues involving PSC, not aggravate them. The PSC and NSAs are meant to have a cooperative – not adversarial or indifferent – relationship. After all, they are after the same thing, for the athletes to succeed. Aren’t they?

But, whenever NSAs themselves cause problems, it’s the athletes and the PSC who deal with the consequences. When an NSA does not liquidate expenses, or takes its time, how will its athletes’ allowances be processed? Still, the PSC has, on occasion, disbursed funds directly to the athletes to keep them going, despite NSA ineptitude. The same happens when an NSA does not submit its reclassification of athletes on time. (Each year, athletes in every NSA are ranked, and this determines their allowances.) How would the PSC then know exactly how much an athlete is supposed to receive?

NSAs also benefit from the athletes in more ways than one. They use them for advertising and public relations campaigns, and to get sponsors, often without compensating the athletes. The luckier enlisted athletes receive salaries from the branches of the Armed Forces of the Philippines which they serve, and are at times granted on-the-spot promotions in rank (in the same spirit as battlefield promotions) for victories in international competitions. The PSC does not need advertising mileage, and doesn’t ask for any. It is simply doing its Herculean job despite horrendous circumstances.

Furthermore, the PSC does not involve itself in athletes’ training except to help. It does not recommend training trips or programs, and does not pass judgment on them. The PSC funds all the NSAs that have athletes who qualify for elite international competitions under the commission’s umbrella. And though the commission has supervisory and oversight authority, it does not interfere with the operations of NSAs. Even when NSAs create problems or do not cooperate, the PSC does what it can to ensure that allowances get to the athletes. Even with the cancellation of several international qualifying events due to the pandemic, the PSC has still supported national athletes. The athletes, in turn, have consistently, selflessly given their all. But in these extreme conditions, things are not normal. That leaves it to the NSA to bridge any gap between the athletes and the PSC.

Lastly, the Commission does not meddle in how an athlete spends his or her allowances and incentives, even though those are intended to supplement an athlete’s needs. The agency understands that many athletes are not well off, and thus need to send money to their families. The PSC does not deny qualified, accomplished athletes their allowance. But it does occasionally need understanding when circumstances beyond its control adversely impact the availability or processing of funds. These are extraordinarily difficult times.