BOF at its very brilliant best

[Becks]

AA - not strictly true. Management came up with what they thought was a reasonable and cost effective figure, which was then challenged by the Treasurer at Management Committee as he thought money could be saved. It is their area to come up with these proposals considering the membership and the paid staff.

The place where we all come into this is at council - through Councillors or your regional reps. If people aren't happy with the preliminary ideas of costings, they need to say so. Then it goes back to Management to look again, if the process isn't passed.

If the chain of communication went members - council - management - council - members then things would take even longer! Management manages and comes up with these proposals, that's what they're there for (John would say something about the difference between strategy and implementation but I'm at work and too confused to get it right) and that's why we pay them. If we don't proposals, we stop them at Council and then they (Management) go back to the drawing board.

And until Zoom zoom's post, nobody had said anything to me about the price of the furniture. Any comments are welcome though, as always.

[HOCOLITE]

Becks
Probably noone had any idea about it. The minutes are usually late and hidden so often only the reps at council read them. Also of course most members don't have the time or inclination to research these therefore these matters only get challenged when someone like Zoom Zoom brings them to the attention of a forum. I'd hold my hand up and say that I don't read all the minutes of bof committeees. I read those directed to me and then raise points that I feel are relevant. This is of course what happens,and obviously many people may have not thought the furniture budget significant, or not having any knowledge of costs skimmed over it.

[Becks]

Hocolite - exactly, and this is one of the things that the Communications review has been looking at over the last three months. The minutes are not hidden as such but do take some finding, and no one expects everyone to read all of them. It's figuring out what's important to everyone and how to communicate it that's the issue.

[gross2006]

Just read the item on the BOF Minutes.... at total of £20000 for the move looks ok when the breakdown is viewed;

Removal costs are likely to be of the order of £20,000 to include
Furniture(£7000), Interior walling(£5000), Rental overlap(£2000) IT
provision (£2000) and legal costs (£2000).

[HOCOLITE]

Hocolite - exactly, and this is one of the things that the Communications review has been looking at over the last three months. The minutes are not hidden as such but do take some finding, and no one expects everyone to read all of them. It's figuring out what's important to everyone and how to communicate it that's the issue.

Becks - I expect this is unworkable but perhaps members could register an interest in a particular area and then maybe have the minutes e-mailed. I know in my profession you can join interest groups should you wish to be activly involved or work in a particular area.
Now Gross has put the figures up the furniture does look high compared to the rest however the figures however without quantification these figures are meaningless. As previously mention for 7 members of staff they are high but for 70 they are low. The IT costs look low in comparison to the furniture but again there is no quantification. I would not expect this to be in the minutes but available to a member querying it through their councillor. If a member were concerned and referred their concern to the councillor, would the councillor be able to get the information prior to the council meeting at which the budget is presented.

[John Morris]

Hocolite wrote:-

"If a member were concerned and referred their concern to the councillor, would the councillor be able to get the information prior to the council meeting at which the budget is presented?"

The answer has to be: "In principle, yes."

For it to work in practice, we need:-

(i) enough time for the Councillor to react, to analyse/understand the need and to return what he/she has found;

(ii) enough time and resource and data-accessibility at BOF Office for a member of staff to respond to the Councillor's request (should the Councillor not have the answer to hand).

(iii) enough time for the original enquirer to sort out the meaning of the answer...

To reduce the load on our hard-pressed (and expensive!) staff, it makes sense (imho) to have dumps of frequently-requested information available for individuals to download, search through and analyse for themselves.

It also makes sense to pre-digest some of the data, in order to squeeze the information out of it. (See my comments about an induction guide in a post on Sunday 30th (3.43) in this thread.)

You'll have worked out by now (or not?) that the current batch of Councillors are focussing on different areas. I'm happy to pick up questions on finance, governance and practical systems. So ask away...

(But you'll need to be damn' quick to get any info before Saturday's Council, as I'm out of the country from Thursday morning. )

[awk]

Surely though, it's your decision to belong to different clubs? Your family might be the exception to the rule but what Becks said was generally true - orienteering membership fees are nothing compared to other sports.

Yes it was our decision to join different clubs, but I'm joining BOF, not a club at that point.

Most families I have worked with in schools have found orienteering a more expensive option than other sports they do. We aren't the exception in my experience.

[roadrunner]

I agree with awk. For example, the membership fee I pay to my running club - including SEAA affiliation - is only £7 per year, and that isn't the cheapest one locally. Compare that to £24 (next year) for my orienteering club (although I'll admit that this isn't the cheapest locally either). I'm sure many other sports charge more, as becks says, but orienteering certainly isn't the cheapest.

I know that athletics also obtains funding from event levies (I've no idea what the split is), and charges non-members a surcharge of £1 (increasing to £2 next year), which is not dissimilar to what BOF is proposing, although there's a lot less formality - no need to show membership cards etc.

Of course, these two sports (like any others) have different costs, and I don't begrudge the amount I presently pay to BOF, but like many others I'm not keen on seeing it increase significantly.

One area where I think running has got it right and orienteering has got it wrong is how we pay the fees. For the running club, I pay a membership fee to my local club, who pass some of it on to SEAA. So I pay the organisation that I have the greatest contact with. But in orienteering, I send my membership form to BOF, who send the details and relevant part of the fee on to my club - often some weeks later. This seems illogical - I'm membership secretary of my orienteering club, and it means that when people join we often don't find out for a few weeks - hardly welcoming!

[Ed]

@Mharky: FRA membership itself costs 12quid for adults, 8 for children, 18 for family. That doesn't cover club membership though (although you don't have to be a member of a club) - I was paying 15 quid to Kendal AC which included NOEAA and AAA and got me nothing in return except the odd relay run and can of beer from team prizes...

Here in Germany I pay 8 euros a month membership fee for my club (there is no German OF fee, or the club pays it, or something (I think there may even be no German OF per se as it seems to fall under the athletics governing body - individuals don't pay an OF membership fee at any rate). For the 8 euros I get all my domestic race entry fees paid (and accom., and maybe a bit towards the travel if they've got money left over at the end of the year) - since the championships cost around 25 euros a race then you pretty quickly get your money's worth from the 8 euros...

[SeanC]

You might be interested in the subscription fees for my partner's hockey club:

Full Member £140
Concessionary (f/t student 16-25, unemployed) £70
Junior (U16 as at 01.9.05) £25
Social Membership £25

I'm not sure on the match fees but it's either £10 or £20 a game. She plays at quite a good level, say the equivalent to gold standard at orienteering.

They also raise money by various fundraising activities.

These might be eyewatering amounts, but for this they can pay for coaching staff and a development officer. Their hockey field is full of juniors on a sunday morning. They also have a club house which needs to be subsidised but which generates plenty of income. They also spend a lot of time arguing about money!

I'm not sure how much benefit there is in comparing fees between sports, but my point is that for what you get in Orienteering, the fees we pay seem very good value, and that a significant number of us can afford to pay more (not students, newcomers or children).

It seems to me that our expectations of the sport have increased since when I started in the early 80's (electronic punching, quality coaching, high quality maps, smart websites etc), but the money we pay for the sport has not increased by the equivalent. Some of us would like to see more (paid) development officers to stop the membership decline and help clubs that are going through difficulty. I think there is a case for paying more.

[graeme]

I agree with awk. For example, the membership fee I pay to my running club - including SEAA affiliation - is only £7 per year,

Just you wait till the Foster report kicks in! Governing body membership is £27 up here since we introduced a membership.

And while you're bashing BOF for not listening, here are the results of the poll for the Foster report on athleticsMembership and Data
YES: 41.4% NO: 53.6% NO VIEW: 5.0%

And here's whet the management said....

Jack Buckner, Project Director, said: “We are delighted with the expression of support from clubs. The debate and indeed the whole process has now reached a positive conclusion. It’s time to unite to raise standards for 2012, and build a stronger sport at the grassroots level.�

“At the same time we need to recognize the messages clubs are sending us. Firstly the turnout suggests the majority of clubs are tired of the politics within our sport. It’s time to move on.

“Secondly there is more work to be done on membership. Membership is never likely to be popular until the benefits are clear and we have a responsibility to deliver a scheme that offers great benefits and outstanding value for money.�

David Moorcroft, Chief Executive, UK Athletics said: “I’m really delighted with the result. It has been a long time coming but we have finally been given an endorsement for change. We can now move forward without hesitation – let’s really make it work.�


You couldn't make it up!

Graeme

[HOCOLITE]

Sean Your partners hockey membership was interesting. When I was quoting figures it was for junior hockey with no clubhouse, no home pitch just pitch hire and yes the coches and refs were unpaid.

It does depend on what you get for your money Do any clubs have their own clubhouse? Do clubs pay their coaches? As for club development officer it might help clubs get what they want from a dev officer. I'm certain there is a great disparity in what the dev officers do in O as there probably is in hockey but if paid directly the remit is do it or lose the position.

[Guest]

Did you know that golf is actually cheaper than orienteering!

I played on Saturday and by the end on the year I will have paid out less than £4 a round - mind you I will have played 150+ rounds! The course is 8 miles away. On Sunday I orienteered and it cost me £4 and the event was 15 miles away.

Mind you I guess the golf equipment is a bit more expensive and when you hit the ball over 12000 times a year it wears out. At least that is my excuse for regular replacement.

It all depends what you are used to paying and what your values are. Both sports are great in different ways but I reckon orienteering has to be one the cheapest I have played - ignoring the cost of trips to Austarlia, Canada, Scadinavia etc!

[SeanC]

I'm completely jealous of their club house. Some people in the club build their whole social life around it. If you've got an injury you've still got somewhere to go. The parents sit there on sunday morning watching the kids training. There's a social event on every friday/saturday night during the hockey season. The teams get to meet after matches instead of shuffling off alone as we often do in orienteering.

It seems in hockey you get the choice (in urban areas at least) of joining a big hockey club with all the bells and whistles, or a smaller one (where you have a good chance of making the first team). The same doesn't usually apply in orienteering. Only the big clubs can afford their own development officers and coaches. In the south east maybe only Southdowns. They don't need it, they win everything anyway! Maybe paid coaches and development officers are better at a regional level? For example there are lots of small clubs in the London area. Individually they don't have much manpower for publicity (which AIRE say is a main reason for their recruitment success - see the "orienteering in 20's and 30's" thread). A regional development officer could organise cross London publicity.

[gross2006]

Is guest golfer from Robin Hood land?