Students treated as adults for levy?

[Angry Haggis]

5. The number of participants for levy purposes, is calculated as the number of senior competitors (those over the age of 21 at the next 31 December) plus one-third of the number of junior competitors (rounded down to the nearest whole number). Whether or not competitors are students is irrelevant, for levy purpose.

This appears to suggest that students are being treated as adults, for the 2011 levy rules, and an old BOF ruling from circa 2000 IIRC is that students are to be treated as juniors, for event fees purposes. Does this means that students, if over 21, are now the least desirable entrants to have at an event?

[Scott]

I don't think it has ever been clear whether than old BOF AGM motion has been enforceable in practice - I certainly know of a few clubs who charge students the adult rate for entries. You can't really blame the clubs for doing so if BOF has now decided that the full levy will be due on students - I have always thought that this was a bit of a grey area in the past, but it is possible that I may have been missing the previous guidance and that this has been policy for a while.

Still, it could be changed by an AGM motion - I would happily propose one saying that "full-time students paying an entry fee equal to junior competitors at an event should be treated as Juniors for levy purposes" or similar wording. Anybody else - thoughts?

[mappingmum]

it could be changed by an AGM motion - I would happily propose one saying that "full-time students paying an entry fee equal to junior competitors at an event should be treated as Juniors for levy purposes" or similar wording.

Yup - sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

[Scott]

Thinking about this a bit, the wording might need to be "full-time students paying an entry fee equal to a discounted junior entry fee at an event should be treated as Juniors for levy purposes".

Points in favour:

• The discounted fee actually does make a big difference to most students. Students don't have much disposable income. Speaking as a student, the amount of orienteering I do would decrease dramatically if I had to pay £10 per event instead of £3 or £4 - when you factor in transport costs, it starts to become unaffordable.
• Most clubs recognise this, and charging students a reduced rate is already standard practice across much of the country, to the point where it's even built in to the online entry systems. Personally, I think this is one of the great things about the sport.
• "HE/FE" is a key point in BOF's new development strategy.
• Admittedly, some clubs (for whatever reason) may not wish to offer a discounted student entry fee at some events. That's their choice, and there would be nothing to stop them charging students the full adult fee, as long as they then pay the full levy out of that fee.
• But as AH points out above, charging the full levy for students who are paying a reduced entry fee is in effect actively discouraging clubs from offering a reduced student fee. I can't really see why BOF would want to do that.

Points against:

• Open to abuse by clubs trying to dodge levy - it's relatively hard for BOF to check how many people at an event were actually students. Personally I think it would just be a bit sad if any club tried this, but it will probably happen somewhere.
• Anything else? Am I missing something in additional costs to BOF in students vs. juniors?

But before I get too carried away , I'll email the BOF Treasurer in the morning to enquire further about the current situation.

[McCloy]

Whilst you're looking, maybe some-one could answer another one on the same topic... how outreaching are the rules on entry fees? For example are clubs bound under BOF to offer a junior and student entry fee at every event, or is it perfectly fine for an event to charge a flatline rate?

[graeme]

I suspect this is another knock on from the database which doesn't acknowledge second clubs. From BOF data available to the organising club, there's no way to verify if someone is a student or even a member of a student club.

[Mrs H]

.....but given this is the very age group and demography we are desperate to keep in the sport then every effort must be made to make it cheap and easy to do so - even if that extends to the rule of thumb called "benefit of the doubt"

AS a debate opener and based on the above does anyone think there is a case for extending junior rates at events - both entry and levy, to the age of, say, 25? Student life is very different to what it was in my day when you left debt free and walked into a job you had trained for. Proof would of course be by your DOB on your BOF card (membership at junior rates).

[*Carol*]

Students usually (I've never met a student without one) have a student card, with an expiry date, which we are expected to show when we are entitled to a student discount on high-street or in student venues. Why not ask for this at events for an orienteer to qualify as a student? I carry mine anyway, given that student status is often questioned when you count as staff too. Also, I'm not a member of a student club (there isn't one), so the BOF database wouldn't help so instead I'm (soon to be) a member of two different clubs (and need some help in understanding the rules of second claim clubs!).

[Scott]

From BOF data available to the organising club, there's no way to verify if someone is a student or even a member of a student club.

True, although there is reduced-rate "student" membership of BOF, and I can't remember if I have ever been asked for proof of student status when applying for that (not for the last couple of years, at least).

If BOF are prepared to take it on trust that someone is a student, hopefully we can let organising clubs take the same decision - I have been asked for a student card a couple of times at EOD events, and have happily shown it, although nobody ever checks when I enter online as a student. After all, even if students do count as juniors for levy purposes, clubs are probably still going to lose out financially by not charging students the full senior rate, so it's in their interest to catch individuals trying to cheat the system.

[Clive Coles]

We seem to have got ourselves into a daft situation if we apply one set of criteria for giving student discounts and a conflicting set of rules for calculating a levy. This needs to be sorted out so that there is some consistency.

We have to be very careful in drafting an AGM motion on this subject however given the activities which appear to be ongoing within the BOF Board and Executive to bring a new proposal on membership to the AGM. All the last Board minutes gave us is that one report has been discussed but further work is being progressed. I don't suppose we will get to know their recommendations until the deadline for submitting AGM motions has expired. So we need a motion expressing the need for a consistant approach rather than one that specifically demands all full time students should be charged a junior levy.

The problem of membership fees, event levy and BOF Finance is interconnected. I believe the Board are currently working on a overall solution. Perhaps someone in the know could confirm if I interpret the latest Board minute correctly.

It would be nice to be given the details of any recommendation well in advance of the AGM so that clubs can have time to consider what is being proposed.


We currently have local members and national members ~ a concept introduced to encourage club members to join BOF. Is this still appropriate ~ has it worked ?

We have the concept of free membership in the first year ~ I think this has probably failed in its objective of growing the membership base.

We have Juniors who quite correctly IMO pay a reduced Junior membership. There are the undergraduates living away from home for the first time ~ I am sympathetic to their financial position and support a reduced fee for them.

But then comes a grey area where I am less comfortable ~ the mature student and the post graduate researcher. Shouldn't we be considering a cut off point of say age 25 years when these orienteers start to pay the adult rate ? Perhaps a Youth discount applying to anyone under 25 years old would be a fairer and simpler option to implement.

There are other sectors of our orienteering community who live in the adult world and have reduced income. The unemployed and those on a retirement pension for example. Isn't there just as strong a case for these groups to pay a subsidised rate and attract a reduced levy ?

Don't actually yet have to declare a personal interest but let's float the idea of awarding some form of loyalty membership discount to those stalwarts who have been a BOF member for 25 or more years. They have, and many still are, keeping our clubs going. But can we afford to do this given we seem to have high senior orienteer membership base. Orienteering is obviously "good for you"

I hope the Board will bring forward a well thought out balanced proposal that sorts out Membership fees and event levys once and for all.

[Mrs H]

There are other sectors of our orienteering community who live in the adult world and have reduced income. The unemployed and those on a retirement pension for example. Isn't there just as strong a case for these groups to pay a subsidised rate and attract a reduced levy ?

You're missing the point - we are not exactly suffering from lack of pensioners I suggested everyone under 25 because we need young people and surely we wuld be straying into the realms of social engineering merely to be encouraging students.

Let's not be mealy mouthed about this - it's about supply and demand - not fairness.

[Scott]

From the Board Minutes on membership and levy proposals:

Board members agreed to adhere to the same structures in 2011 with any possible changes in 2012.

I interpreted "in 2011" as "at the 2011 AGM", but could well be wrong. You are absolutely right that we do need to be careful, so I'll check that as well.

Personally I think the Board would be silly to completely upend the levy system again this year after all the debate that got us to the current system, but am quite looking forward to seeing what proposals they come up with for the membership system.

Slightly relatedly, I do think that setting the Levy fees for the next year nine months in advance is a bit silly. It means we are always having to make a decision on next year's levies with only a couple of months of data on how the current levies are working out. Personally I would l favour voting at the AGM (March/April) for a new system to start on 15th August (or similar - a date after the summer multiday) of the same year - would that give event organisers enough time to adjust their budgets for changes in the system?

[Scott]

I suggested everyone under 25 because we need young people and surely we wuld be straying into the realms of social engineering merely to be encouraging students.

I don't think I would object to changing it to "under 25" instead, although there are a few impecunious students in their late twenties who would lose out. But I guess clubs may feel less inclined to offer a discounted entry fee to 24-year-old graduates with well-paid jobs (there are still a few of them out there).

Just to clarify - I don't think we should force clubs to offer a discount, especially when the vast majority of them are already doing it voluntarily. I just want to remove the penalty in the levy for doing so.

[SeanC]

I don't mean to be negative, but the reservation I would have is that this adds extra workload onto on the day organisation - having to record the numbers of students. Numbers of juniors can be calculated from the results. You'd want the positive effects to be worth the additional item on the organisers to do list. I know it's only a small thing but the orienteering event is a long list of small things.

In our area the positive effect would be marginal as 95% of our events are the local cheap levy free sort. We don't offer a student discount at the local events, maybe we should, but the fees are pretty cheap anyway. If ULOC were to re-surface they would now have a lot more events they could reach on the south east London metro, which for students without easy access to cars or minibuses is much more useful.

I suggest you would get a greater positive effect by increasing levies (for adults) and chanelling the money into development initiatives. To recruit more in this age range many clubs need advice (eg. the sort that comes to club meetings and helps construct club development strategies), resources (for example help producing marketing material that will appeal to younger people) and money (for club development initiatives such as SI kit for local events in urban areas). Unfortunately such a tax rise is likely to be a lot less popular than the suggested tax cut.

[graeme]

Students ... have a student card, with an expiry date,

.
...and I've got a student card without an expiry date...

Why not ask for this at events for an orienteer to qualify as a student?

Most clubs are happy to give student discount - the issue is that BOF will still demand the full levy from the club. Its fair enough to expect students to bring a card to the event for their discount, but not so fair to ask them to get the bus to Matlock afterwards to get the club its levy back...