BOF membership
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
38 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Re: BOF membership
whoops me again, anyone know what the gossip is on Scottish O tours?
- PhilJ
- green
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:59 am
Re: BOF membership
No Phil, I saw that and wondered myself; moreover, SOT Website is down as well.....
The mystery deepens
Wonder whether Gross knows anything
The mystery deepens

Wonder whether Gross knows anything

Last edited by madmike on Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
hop fat boy, hop!
-
madmike - guru
- Posts: 1703
- Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 7:36 pm
- Location: Retired in North Yorks
Re: BOF membership
Is this really the place to discuss this?
- RS
- brown
- Posts: 537
- Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 5:47 pm
Re: BOF membership
Mrs H wrote:Sunlit Forres wrote:we all owe it to our national body to do what we can to keep numbers up.
I can't quite put my finger on it but I'm struggling with this statement
I thought that might raise an eyebrow or two - especially in Scotland where I live!I might be in a minority Mrs H, but like it or not, BOF is the sport's governing body working on our behalf; surely we can all accept the sport's progress over recent years owes a lot to some extremely hard working people, both paid staff and volunteers who do some pretty unglamorous stuff behind the scenes. It's a bit like your local council - everyone wants all the services but nobody's prepared to pay for them.
As far as I know the level of external funding can be influenced by membership and participation, as well as other factors that us mere mortals can't influence - like international success! Everyone who goes orienteering enough to want to be a member of a club should be prepared to contribute be paying the modest annual fee.
PhilJ mentioned the BOF Board meeting minutes which go on to say that "the larger issue was dealing with the membership system and amending it to something fit for purpose." I'm also curious to hear what's in the pipeline... and to know what the new training scheme for "event safety officers" will entail)
- Sunlit Forres
- diehard
- Posts: 615
- Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:57 pm
- Location: Moravia
Re: BOF membership
I understood your sentiment - it was the way you said it that made me smile - made BOF officers sound like a bunch of Chelsea Pensioners existing on our alms. The work they do is only any good as long as it works in our favour - not against it. The national governing body owes it to us not to make it harder to recruit members. For what ever reasons the sport is getting harder to stage, more expensive to do and membership is falling. I understand that participation on the other hand is rising. I have personal evidence that this might be the case. At the moment BOF and the clubs are not pulling in the same direction - who is to deiced which of those directions is correct is open to debate - but it is by no means a given that BOF have got it right - but perhaps they are beginning to realise that themselves and change their direction 

-
Mrs H - god
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 3:30 pm
Re: BOF membership
I think the probable loss of external funding will cause some fundamental changes to the way we manage and finance the Federation. Our expectations as to what BOF deliver by way of support and services will probably need to be curtailed.
I noted from the recent Board minute we are needing to consider restructuring staffing at the National office ~ the Chief Executive post for example may have to become part-time. This suggests to me that the roles (and demands) need to be slimmed down. We cannot expect any salaried officer to do the same in a shorted time.
I don't think this review is necessarily a bad thing ~ it's time to take stock and question what we really need National Office to provide. We must ensure we continue to operate within the constraints that the new financial situation demands.
Minutes can never detail what was actually discussed, but what doesn't quite add up at the moment is the statement that the costs will remain at a similar level ~ surely if a part-time Chief Executive does less and has a reduced working week there should be a salary cost reduction. If we end up paying the same we haven't achieved any financial benefit to compensate for the slim down of services.
Perhaps things might become a little clearer during the autumn following the next Board meeting.
I noted from the recent Board minute we are needing to consider restructuring staffing at the National office ~ the Chief Executive post for example may have to become part-time. This suggests to me that the roles (and demands) need to be slimmed down. We cannot expect any salaried officer to do the same in a shorted time.
I don't think this review is necessarily a bad thing ~ it's time to take stock and question what we really need National Office to provide. We must ensure we continue to operate within the constraints that the new financial situation demands.
Minutes can never detail what was actually discussed, but what doesn't quite add up at the moment is the statement that the costs will remain at a similar level ~ surely if a part-time Chief Executive does less and has a reduced working week there should be a salary cost reduction. If we end up paying the same we haven't achieved any financial benefit to compensate for the slim down of services.
Perhaps things might become a little clearer during the autumn following the next Board meeting.
http://www.savesandlingsforest.co.uk ~ campaigning to keep and extend our Public Forests. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Save-Our ... 4598610817
-
Clive Coles - brown
- Posts: 554
- Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:22 am
- Location: Almost as far east as you can get in UK
Re: BOF membership
Well if the funding is definitely coming to an end (are we a hundred percent sure that it is?) Then the paid staff will not have to spend a great deal of time chasing it and making sure that the rest of us fulfil the criteria to obtain it - that should be a sort of self-fulfilling saving don't you think. It would be interesting to know what the equation of staff time is to pursuing funding and making sure qualification requirements are met.
But now it seems to me that the requirements of the pay masters will be replaced by the requirements of the insurers and the real rub there is that we are actually paying them and yet they are managing to dictate the direction of the sport.
But now it seems to me that the requirements of the pay masters will be replaced by the requirements of the insurers and the real rub there is that we are actually paying them and yet they are managing to dictate the direction of the sport.
-
Mrs H - god
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 3:30 pm
Re: BOF membership
RS wrote:Is this really the place to discuss this?
I have no idea. I don't know what there is to discuss other than cryptic reference in minutes and was curious. Happy to get back in my box.
hop fat boy, hop!
-
madmike - guru
- Posts: 1703
- Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 7:36 pm
- Location: Retired in North Yorks
Re: BOF membership
Obviously external funding is beneficial but at a cost of time and effort by National office who have had to strive to follow an agenda which appears to be dictated by the funding providers. Perhaps life is about to become more straightforward.
Speeking as a club focused man what I want BOF to do is to:
a) negotiate sensible insurance cover with someone who does not impose inflexible constraints which will make it more difficult to find volunteers to organise.
b) negotiate a national agreement with the Forestry Commission.
BOF made a mess communicating the need for and rationale behind Event restructuring ~ they came unstuck and are now are engaged in sorting this out. An awful lot of time and effort has gone into this . Hopefully once this task is completed we can put it to bed ~ job done.
Even if we retain some external funding for our International programme I still believe we need to review all our plans going forward and limit expenditure. We used to exist with a leaner infrastructure ~ we even had International podium places before the days of Sport England.
Speeking as a club focused man what I want BOF to do is to:
a) negotiate sensible insurance cover with someone who does not impose inflexible constraints which will make it more difficult to find volunteers to organise.
b) negotiate a national agreement with the Forestry Commission.
BOF made a mess communicating the need for and rationale behind Event restructuring ~ they came unstuck and are now are engaged in sorting this out. An awful lot of time and effort has gone into this . Hopefully once this task is completed we can put it to bed ~ job done.
Even if we retain some external funding for our International programme I still believe we need to review all our plans going forward and limit expenditure. We used to exist with a leaner infrastructure ~ we even had International podium places before the days of Sport England.
http://www.savesandlingsforest.co.uk ~ campaigning to keep and extend our Public Forests. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Save-Our ... 4598610817
-
Clive Coles - brown
- Posts: 554
- Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:22 am
- Location: Almost as far east as you can get in UK
Re: BOF membership
madmike wrote:Wonder whether Gross knows anything
I've been in Austria since the middle of June & as far as I'm aware SOT has had no communication from BOF....
Go orienteering in Lithuania......... best in the world:)
Real Name - Gross
http://www.scottishotours.info
Real Name - Gross
http://www.scottishotours.info
-
Gross - god
- Posts: 2699
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 11:13 am
- Location: Heading back to Scotland
Re: BOF membership
Clive Coles wrote:Obviously external funding is beneficial but at a cost of time and effort by National office who have had to strive to follow an agenda which appears to be dictated by the funding providers. Perhaps life is about to become more straightforward.
Agree with the sentiment; government funding is provided on the basis that we carry out programmes that respect the equality, inclusiveness, interventions and protections they deem important. Commercial funding has its own agenda, and some of their stipulations can be more onerous.
Will be be able to remove all these if we are no longer big G funded?
I don't think so, but we may be able to tone them down a little. Why not, cos unfortunately some of our key suppliers (landowners) are public bodies, and things like national agreements will be granted based on conformance to the social agenda they have to work under.
Clive Coles wrote:Speeking as a club focused man what I want BOF to do is to:
a) negotiate sensible insurance cover with someone who does not impose inflexible constraints which will make it more difficult to find volunteers to organise.
b) negotiate a national agreement with the Forestry Commission.
a. the less constraints (ie risk is increased) the greater the cost. I'm sure that there are insurers out there who will offer something along t he lines you want at a price you are prepared to pay, but the actual cover will be decreased. That lowering of cover may not be a problem, maybe what we have is too overarching. Worth reviewing.
b. surely a wider organisational scope than this?
Are you suggesting that each and every club goes out and secures its own development funding and does not rely on national budgets? I'm already seeing restrictions on LA funds being made available, and the conformance to social objectives hurdles are being raised quite severely. I think we will find a 30-50% downturn in our securing award of these funds in the next 3 years
Clive Coles wrote:Even if we retain some external funding for our International programme I still believe we need to review all our plans going forward and limit expenditure. We used to exist with a leaner infrastructure ~ we even had International podium places before the days of Sport England.
Agree. A no holds barred review does need to take place, and it has to be led by the Chair, not the CEO.
Not sure that previous international performance should be linked to the previous infrastructure level. Competition has moved on. What we don't want though is a culture that says 'they have 'x' coaches in 'y' country and look where they are, so we need 'x' coaches too (or similar type argument).
As for sport england I can't say what apart from money they really bring to the table that we can't get elsewhere, but maybe its too pricey there.
orthodoxy is unconsciousness
- geomorph
- green
- Posts: 378
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:38 pm
Re: BOF membership
and yet it appears that BOF are prepared to walk away from the FC negotiations if the going gets too tough and leave clubs to do it for themselves according to the minutes "
I suppose you could suggest the same over insurance as well. What else do people think a slimmed down BOF should be doing?
If negotiations broke down regarding costs for using Forestry Commission land it may be worthwhile for British Orienteering clubs and regions to negotiate local arrangements as they have done previously.
I suppose you could suggest the same over insurance as well. What else do people think a slimmed down BOF should be doing?
-
Mrs H - god
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 3:30 pm
Re: BOF membership
Clive Coles wrote:b) negotiate a national agreement with the Forestry Commission.
Hardly a national imperative when access to the majority of FC land is free

because the majority of FC land is in Scotland
-
greywolf - addict
- Posts: 1423
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:45 pm
- Location: far far away
Re: BOF membership
Mrs H wrote: What else do people think a slimmed down BOF should be doing?
Or a BOF 100% paid for by membership and subscription. Because that may be where we're headed.
At a time when we're cutting nurses and teachers, should the government be funding a middle-class amateur non-olympic sport?
OK, I made that one up. But these come from Cameron's Big Society speech
The Big Society is about a huge culture change…where people, in their everyday lives,
…don’t always turn to officials, local authorities or central government for answers to the problems they face
It’s time for something different, something bold – something that doesn’t just pour money down the throat of wasteful, top-down government schemes
top-down, top-heavy, controlling – has frequently had the effect of sapping responsibility, local innovation and civic action.
We must push power away from central government to local government – and we shouldn’t stop there. We should drive it down even further…to the ‘nano’ level…to communities, to neighbourhoods and individuals.
We’ve got to get rid of the centralised bureaucracy
Coming soon
Boston City Race (May, maybe not)
Coasts and Islands (Shetland)
SprintScotland https://sprintscotland.weebly.com/
Boston City Race (May, maybe not)
Coasts and Islands (Shetland)
SprintScotland https://sprintscotland.weebly.com/
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4744
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Re: BOF membership
Greywolf - FC access may be free in Scotland currently - but Westmister is already squeezing Scotland - don't expect that situation to last for ever. And anyway if you are in England and 80 % of your clubs' land (including all the areas suitable for L2 (newest style) events is FC a national agreement is pretty useful. [In fact in the 30 + years I've being orienteering I think there always has been some sort of national agreement).
If you have local agreements you are very much at the whim of the local manager (with NT we have gained and suffered because of this in the past) and I know that in my region a club felt forced to go over the head of the FC local manager who was being very unreasonable when persuing his own agenda.
We should also remember that the last time the Tories were in power FC was on the list for being sold.
If you have local agreements you are very much at the whim of the local manager (with NT we have gained and suffered because of this in the past) and I know that in my region a club felt forced to go over the head of the FC local manager who was being very unreasonable when persuing his own agenda.
We should also remember that the last time the Tories were in power FC was on the list for being sold.
-
Red Adder - brown
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:53 pm
- Location: Suffolk
38 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests