BMFA - Is the 'A' for apathy?

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I think that proxy voting at a meeting where proposals are raised is totally wrong. The whole point of a proposal being made at a meeting is to discuss it, raise and clarify points and then vote based on a proper understanding and considered opinion.

As the proposal should have been published prior to the meeting then anyone with strong feelings will have the chance to make arrangements to attend.

[Lee Smalley]

FF you are miles away mate if you smash into anyone in your car and they sue you for damages does your insurance just protect your car...no that is a very small part of it, the majority of coverage is third party liability, bmfa insurance is just that third party only ! if you want the bmfa to get a scheme running for comprehensive coverage i am sure they will but the cost would be horriffic knowing how often we crash

[Lee Smalley]

as for the AGM i hardly ever know when it is on and it is generally too far away

[Erfolg]

I totally agree with KC, in this era, there should be no problem with all members having a vote. There are only circa 36,000 members.

With respect to clubs voting on members behalf, in a similar way to a trade union, this disenfranchises all the country members.

The danger with current arrangements, proposals are made and voted upon by a small cadre of individuals. These could be voting with self interest.

My reservations with respect to the BMFA, would be alleviated, if decision making and workings were to be transparent. Rather than archaic Byzantine arrangements currently. Ironically greater transparency should improve appreciation of what the BMFA does on behalf of all members.

Contacting 36,000 people is not such an issue now, the majority have access to the internet. What ever the difficulties and failings of an electronic solution, it would be more democratic than 50 people voting.

Also an making an agenda available via the web, with all proposals, may enthuse more to attend, even with the present system.

As for the insurance, well, yes, that is why most are members in my opinion, is this good enough, for the BMFA. Surely their ambition is greater than that.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I'm all in favour of transparency and participation but we don't insist on packing the whole country into Westminster Palace for any important votes. What we do is elect representatives who we trust (that's the theory!) to make these decisions on our behalf. Isn't this what is meant to happen via club representation at area councils? In addition it's open to any interested member to attend the AGM so surely if your views aren't being represented and you're worried about it it's up to you to step forward and make a noise where it can be heard?

Endless moans and complaints - often based on hearsay and rumour - seem to pervade forums (or should that be fora?) like this. Mind you, if there's a specific concern that's not being addressed then perhaps it's a good way of raising their profile but so much of the negative comment seems vague and unsubstantiated.

[Alan Randall]

So you are quite happy to tripple your annual BMFA membership fee Erfolg, to pay for postal ballots and vote counting facilities to make it all democratic. I doubt that many members will, because I suspect that the only thing that the majority of members are concerned about is the annual rise in membership fees.

Out of a club of around 150 members we get around 20 that regularly attend our monthly meetings. The vast majority just want to fly. I am sure that we are not alone in this. Neither is it just a problem for model clubs. Drama groups, churches and all manner of groups have the same problem of getting prople to commit to organising and doing. The larger majority are quite happy to let them do it and then make use of the facilities they provide.

[FunnyFlyer]

Lee, you're miles away...
I don't mean my plane that crashes as my asset, but the money I will be liable for if I am sued. Insurance protects me from that loss.

[Erfolg]

Martin

We are talking of 36,000 not 63M about 1/750th, bit of a difference. Some countries are run by ordinary people making important decisions, for example Switzerland, a bit bigger than the BMFA.

Alan

There is no need for any increases in costs, using the Internet. I would hope that the BMFA is using modern technology to keeping its costs down, No clerks writing in copper plate, using the postal services as the sole means of communication. I expect the BMFA to use computers to run spreadsheets for accounting,the  Internet for communication, making information available etc.

The Internet will reach more than 50 of the members. This site runs many Polls to get an understanding of various issues and interests, opinions etc. Is the BMFA so much less capable.

If you believe in Democracy you want members to have the option to vote on those things what affect them. They do not have to, yet the option should be there. The assumption that people are happy may be correct, then it may not. The trouble with democracy is that the answer you get may not be what the administrators want to hear. Often there will be the lofty talk, that without the enlightened thinking of the few, we would still be in the stone age. This implies that ordinary people cannot be trusted to make the right decision. I could be provocative and highlight the two political philosophies which hold to this creed.

I believe that ordinary people have every bit much sense as those who believe we cannot be trusted. The apathy stems possibly from the believe that the lone or even the majorities views do not matter, only those who sit at the top tables views matter. This breeds apathy

Edited By Erfolg on 21/11/2012 21:07:06

[Paul Marsh]

The main reason why people won't go to the AGM, is cost of time and fuel. Would make it more worthwhile if a Swopmeet was held either before or after. At least it would attract more attendees.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Are the BMFA committee, area delegates and attending members some sort of super-beings then? Aren't they ordinary people who take an extraordinary interest?

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Paul Marsh on 21/11/2012 21:34:59:

The main reason why people won't go to the AGM, is cost of time and fuel. Would make it more worthwhile if a Swopmeet was held either before or after. At least it would attract more attendees.

That's an idea worth discussion!

[Erfolg]

I am a shareholder in a small number of listed companies. All send me a postal vote on an annual basis with respect to the board. Also as an individual i can vote at the AGM on a range of issues. This in a area not known for democracy.

The idea of delegates has more in common with trade unions, rather than democratic bodies. A draw back of delegates is that they may choose to vote as to there own interests, sometimes on the grounds of conscience, may be there was a compelling argument put forward and not necessarily as instructed by the members they purport to represent. In short they are a single entity, whose voting power is disproportionate in some instances.

Come on please, this is the 21 st century, not the 20th, the means is there, to bring more members into the decision making process, increasing their interest, commitment.

It is at a minimum disingenuous to suggest that all members are only interested in flying.

An Internet voting system would almost certainly engage more members than 50. The cost, well David Ashby would know how much his surveys cost, which ensure one person one vote. I would speculate that having an IT system commits the BMFA to a set cost, the additional incremental cost of Internet voting being very low, to not quantifiable.

There has to be something wrong with 50 attendees, out of 36,000, surely, isn't that 0.01% or thereabouts?

Edited By Erfolg on 21/11/2012 22:20:48

[Alan Randall]

The difference between the BMFA and a listed company is a lot of money I suspect and probably a similar result if what I rewad in the press is correct, as small investors do not get to achieve much at annual investors meetings.

I agree that 50 out of 36,000 is not right, but apathy does reign. The poll for what party rules us often has a poor turnout. It would have to take some pretty radical proposals which most flyers object to before the situation will change.

[bouncebounce crunch]

MY Views are that insurance and governing bodies are needed. but why are the third party insurance costs so high? you pay for a year but fly on a Sunday if the weather is fine.

Club rules guide the safety side of this equation. With club and governing body safety guidelines in place, risk of accidents are greatly reduced. Yes accidents do happen, but I have only witnessed one flyaway and that didn't get far, a couple of midairs, the usual crunch into a tree, fencepost, or the ground. Yes with the jetage and pylon racing they are a lot faster and cover more ground so the risks increase. but for the Sunday hack flyer pottering about level flight, maybe a roll or loop these are the guys I feel are being Gazumped.

In Oz a breakaway from the traditional Insurer and governing body so as to help reduce the cost of insurance to all flyers has caused a backlash, and this is where all the inuendo and fear mongering is going on.

We all want more flyers young and old, pensions don't go far and bringing yourself and two juniors to a club to fly one trainer type model on the occasional Sunday makes our insurance costs ridiculous.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I largely agree with Martin Harris's views expressed on the previous page, in that I believe that (by and large) the BMFA does a pretty good job of doing the things I want them to do. They represent model flyers, they arrange insurance for us, they help and advise if we have problems. All great stuff. The BMFA is a classical "British" sort of institution - desperately polite, reasonable and very "middle of the road". Which I happen to think is OK.

And I'm also tremendously grateful - truly - to all those people who give up so much of their time so that the BMFA can do all the things that we want of it. You see, if Saturday is a day of sunshine - I want to go flying. If its raining I want to build. I definitely don't want to go to another meeting - I do far too many of those at work! So I think its great that there these relatively few, very sensible people, that I feel I can trust not to pass anything stupid, who are prepared to go to the AGM and ensure that I can enjoy another year's flying with peace of mind.

Selfish? Yes - guilty. But that's why I don't knock those that do go or those that take up office - because I need them to keep the thing running so I can go flying.

I don't see this as apathy - on the contary, I think that my non-attendance should be seen as signalling that I'm happy with how its going, it's a vote of confidence in the people who do go and their eminent common sense.

It doesn't matter that there aren't thousands of us there. We show our love and concern for our hobby at the Nats - not the AGM! I don't think we need to be there to ratify every minute detail of BMFA business. We just need the "insurance policy of representative democracy", enshrined in the founding documents which gives us the right to be there and vote, just in case some loonies do take over and we need to stop them and ultimately get rid of them.

Until that day dawns, I'm more than happy to leave it to the dedicated few and ...Cheers, here's to you lads from a grateful fellow flyer!

BEB

PS Just don't get me on the subject of the BMFA mag! That's different!

[Andy Symons]

Posted by bouncebouncecrunch on 21/11/2012 23:00:34:

MY Views are that insurance and governing bodies are needed. but why are the third party insurance costs so high? you pay for a year but fly on a Sunday if the weather is fine.

I suppose it's a matter of opinion but you would struggle to convince me that about £8.50 per year for £25 million pounds worth of third party liability is high. It's amazing value!!

[John Privett]

BBC - I really don't think that the cost of our insurance is either an issue, nor could it reasonably be expected to be much cheaper.

It's reckoned that around £20 of our BMFA annual subs - that's around AU$30 - goes to pay for the insurance. What's that, about 40p/ 60c a week? It is cheap because it's the same product for everybody and the overheads in supplying it are low. What additional admin charges would have to be added if it had to be determined whether Charlie who only flies on Wednesdays when the sun is shining should pay £10 or £15? And whether Fred, the club ace who's at the field most days and test files most members' new planes, should pay £40 or £50? Many car insurance companies over here will charge you an "admin" fee of about £25 just to make a minor change to your car policy!

[Edit] OK, Andy has posted whilst I was typing saying that the cost of the insurance is even lower than I believed to be the case - and he's in a better position to know than I am.  So - even better value!

Edited By John Privett on 21/11/2012 23:46:03

[WolstonFlyer]

Err it is 36 pounds to join the BMFA and cover is 10 million third party insurance ??

Still very reasonable and good to know the protection is there and the support the BMFA offers is great should you need it.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Yeah, but what folks are saying WF is that just £8.50 of that is for the insurance.

BEB

[Andy Symons]

Posted by WolstonFlyer on 21/11/2012 23:45:28:
Err it is 36 pounds to join the BMFA and cover is 10 million third party insurance ??

Still very reasonable and good to know the protection is there and the support the BMFA offers is great should you need it.

It's £32 Pounds for 2013, cover is £25 million for third party liability, the insurance element in total costs about £10 but that includes the personal accident cover which is about £1.50 of that £10 hence £8.50 for the third party cover. However joining the BMFA is a lot more than just insurance and you are correct it's very reasonable and the extra support is very good indeed.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

BBC - please accept that considerable insurance cover IS required in the UK. I doubt that anyone who lives here would disagree with this? What works in a country with wide open spaces will not necessarily work in a crowded country with litigious inhabitants.

[WolstonFlyer]

Ahh ok thanks for the explanation.

Wow that is a healthy amount of money for yearly running costs then, roughly.. 792,000 pounds if there are 36,000 paying members.

Perhaps the paper that the magazine is printed on could be better LOL

[Erfolg]

Wolstonflyer

The annual accounts should indicate quite clearly how the money is spent.

I just remember when I worked how much the company believed it cost to employ me. Or that is what they charged other companies. These astronomical costs covered not only wages, but all the additional services, such as wages and salaries department, Human Resources, accommodation etc. My salary was a very small fraction. On that type of basis, there could be as few as 10 people employed. It could be much lower if expenses are paid for delegates and the additional cost of hiring venues etc.

I remain less than convinced with respect to the BMFA, resolutions not being made freely available to the membership before the AGM. Most not knowing if there is something coming up that is of interest or concern. To my mind there is a whole lot wrong with how the BMFA is run in this day and age. Passable in the 20 th century, just not democracy, however you dress it up.

As with many I am a member because my club is affiliated to the BMFA and it became a requirement of membership. I much preferred it when we flew competitively with BARCS, had separate club insurance and those who wanted to fly BMFA competitions were country BFMA members. Now BARCS looked after us. Ahhhh halcyon days.

[bouncebounce crunch]

Now that i have got everyones back, up.

Club membership= ?Members X currency= total per year

BMFA membership and the cost= ?members x ?currency per year

costs of mix -administration / staff wages for your representation= ? currency per year

insurance= 32 pounds per year

Publication+handbook = ?currency per year

Total=

do flying areas get purchased with funds and how much goes back to helping a club build new facilities?

[Lee Smalley]

there was talk some time ago of a new national area/room dedicatedly built for the BMFA this i believe was going to incorporate a national museum or something, i was totally against this and would prefer that any money that the BMFA has spare be invested back into securing the future of Model Flying one of the main ways to do this is fields, without somewhere to fly our hobby is dead, and that is the main thing that gets squeezed these days