My question involves labor and employment law for the state of: Massachusetts
I've been doing some research into this and received conflicting reports. Recently, Wizards of the Coast (WotC) made it a requirement for all local game store (LGS) owners to background check what are referred to as "judges" for organized play. WotC makes Magic: the Gathering, a collectible card game that has 20-million players worldwide. At the lowest local level, tournaments are routinely held on Friday evenings, referred to as Friday Night Magic. In order to run one of these tournaments, stores have to have someone to judge or officiate these tournaments. Many times a store can use an employee to do this, but not knowing the rules this can cause issues and many players are "certified" judges or rules advisers, better equipped in terms of knowledge to officiate. WotC has repeatedly said that judges, while certified initially by them, fall under the Judge Committee, a "volunteer organization" that certifies/decertifies judges based on certain criteria, maintains records of all judges worldwide, and is the go-to for when there is an issue with a judge (such as unfair actions or general impropriety).
Recently, WotC and the judge program came under fire after it was found that several pedophiles and sex offenders were both playing Magic, as well as officiating tournaments post-conviction. This put children in danger, obviously. In response, WotC--having been made aware of one judge who was convicted of possession of child pornography in 2015 but was still active in 2017 according to records--mandated that LGS owners are required to perform background checks. Several states apparently have laws on the books requiring the staffing agency or agency in charge of certification to do that, including with volunteers. I have been told Massachusetts falls under the same category: as a certified judge I technically report to the judge committee, and am not a store employee. It seems that since I am not an employee, Massachusetts state law does not require the store owner to perform these checks but the judge committee does. I am curious which is true for the purposes of this entire debacle.

