BMFA News

[Erfolg]

I have a very strong dislike of the preferential votes of the fellows, then their are the votes of the technical committee members etc.

For many of us where the journey to the east midlands is well over 100 miles, almost 200 from my present address in the west, or plus 200 when I lived in Cumbria, the proxy vote is a must, a right. It really does make me angry to read that their is a dislike of the proxy vote. The argument is best understood by examining the facts, not being swayed by a presenter with honeyed tones of being reasonable and all the rest.

Some recent discussions at the recent BMFA regional meeting, seems to indicate that the views of the regions, never mind the country members are irrelevant. It would seem that the centre knows best, any ruffled feathers can be smoothed by a personal presentation of one of the full time officials and the administration of Valium words.

Bah humbug!

PS. I understand that Fellows Votes etc are not 1, but 6. Now if that is not gerrymandering the vote, or building in a bias, what is.

Edited By Erfolg on 21/05/2016 18:33:15

[John Privett]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 21/05/2016 12:21:30:

Maybe its time for the rank and file members to thnk the previously unthinkble, maybe we would be better off forming our own association that is aimed soley at representing and serving the interests of the ordinary club members and solo flyers? An association that had no involvment with competition or grand national schemes, that didn't have a committee structure linked to competion disciplines, that didn't think the the most important event of the year was a "black-tie dinner" to which 99.9% of the membership won't attend or even know of. Instead it would focus on delivering purely what most of us actually want - ie a insurance scheme made cheaper and more compehensive by collective bargaining, representation with external bodies and advice on running clubs etc. And maybe it could an up to date and responsive organisation that was truely democratic? Ah - a dream!

BEB

It's been done before. Remember the MPA?

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Colin Leighfield]

Percy, I've seen it all before. I'll sit back and watch what happens. I still don't personally think that the idea of a national centre is a bad thing if it is done right and it could even be a money-spinner with a bit of brain applied to it. However if it comes to the need for members to put money in and they won't it isn't going anywhere is it? In the meantime subscribing to an alternative that dilutes our representation at crucial levels and will eventually go the same way isn't something that I will support. I'm patient.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Erfolg on 21/05/2016 18:21:19:

It really does make me angry to read that their is a dislike of the proxy vote. The argument is best understood by examining the facts, not being swayed by a presenter with honeyed tones of being reasonable and all the rest.

I may not have made it clear, but my dislike is based on a system which makes proxy voting necessary - a system open to possible manipulation and misrepresentation. A meeting which produces a voting response needs to be attended by the voters, in my opinion. Facts may be presented that have a great deal of relevance when explained by that honey tongued presenter - and challenged by intelligent attendees...

[Erfolg]

Martin

For a time my boss was a honeyed toned manager, who listen to clients, sympathise, explain how there was a misunderstanding, that he would personally put things right, how he could understand the upset of not delivering the project as specified.

I have even heard the client acknowledge that they were being had, and that nothing had changed. Even having syphathy for the difficulties we also had to manage.

Away from the meeting, that honeyed voice would say, yep, job done.

The only person i ever saw or heard bring him into line, was a hard nosed manager. Who told him straight, do not insult me, do not tell me anything that comes near to being half true. Look at the contract and tell me what you are going to do to deliver it. Anything else, I will tell you to stop. Absolutely brutal. But it seems that it cuts through all the smooth talking.

I will admit I dread meetings with him as the the Chairman. Yet I came to see, that just look at the facts, what the contract contains, the snake oil words of a presenter should not be taken for anything else other than what they are, excrement of bull.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

One bad experience with a manager in one to one meetings has coloured your views on proxy voting?

[bert baker]

My siser inlaw is over from America, she sat in front of me this saying, I like to watch model flying when I go for a jog around the local model club perimiter fence, and the best bit is I can have a shower in their facilites and get my breakfast in their resturant before going home.

So perhaps in this country we should have better facilites and be more pro active and have full local council suport for our hobby. and support a NFC with Goverment backing.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

I like your outlook Colin I love to get behind things and have a go myself, and if it comes to the need for asking members to put their hands in pockets I think they'll get a no.

So then we'll have a field...that might be good enough for comps, genny's n marquees.

Last meeting agenda..silent flight technical committees proposes charge new members an extra £1

Silent flight technical committee request up to £900 for a compact digital display unit ?

I ask for your trust, not under my watch.

John

Edited By john stones 1 on 21/05/2016 20:42:26

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Erfolg]

Martin

It is not proxy voting that is a problem.

The problem is that some are confident that if they are permitted to make a presentation to a group, that they will be able to to change their collective position and view. It is not that the argument and presentation are valid or necessarily credible, they have learnt or have the art of convincing you black is white.

My later days in industry was spent in the company of such groups, where presentation, trumps , substance.

It is often the reason behind the eagerness for face to face meetings and presentations.

Am I cynical, perhaps, but having being part of such a community, you realise that all is not always what it seems. The further up the greasy pole you get, the more you come to realise, that substance is less important than many would expect.

[Colin Leighfield]

I trust you John.

Sadly every organisation like this fails to get the active participation of more than a minority. There is never sufficient interest to get anything like a majority actively involved in the decision making process. As a consequence decisions invariably get made by a minority that then is subject to criticisms of being self-interested or unrepresentative. In these circumstances it requires some dedication for them to bother at all. Lucky for us that they do.

You can mess around all you like with the voting systems, it won't solve the fundamental difficulty.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

There's no perfect system other than an all-knowing benevolent dictator, Erf. Any system can be influenced by a strong personality with an agenda - whether in a face to face meeting or by alternative media. I fully understand the power of "spin" and strong personalities and have seen it in action many times.

My objection to proxy/block voting is that they are flawed systems. New information cannot be considered, proxy instructions can be ignored, votes can be cast against the opinion of the enfranchised...

I applaud the BMFA for running the EGM - as was pointed out during the meeting, there was no constitutional requirement to refer the matter to the membership - the committee already had the power to commit to spending money as they saw fit. I'm afraid that Colin is quite correct.

[Erfolg]

There should be no new information that materalises at a decision making meeting.

My last employer used a system that I understand was borrowed from ICI. A evaluation document was produced by the evaluation team. The board considered the document in conjunction with a presentation made by the proposers.

No new evidence was allowed. The board then would ask for explanations of the believed short comings, how they would be managed or eradicated, which the evaluation document had discovered. Perhaps not surprisingly, many proposals did not make it to the presentation stage. Of those that did many were also rejected. Those making it through, would often still have to report back on how highlighted issues were to managed.

My own suspicion is that a NFC would not have made to the presentation stage. If it had, the proposer would now be sweating at the thought that they would be having to explain , how issues of potential estimate breaches were going to be viewed and how their career was going to be affected. Many rightly assuming they were on their way down the ladder of success or is that a snake or the proverbial the greasy pole.

Using such a system a proxy vote or a one member one vote is less open to abuse. As nothing new would be allowed to colour judgement. The present system is badly flawed, hands the initiative to those at the centre, with a bias built into the voting system, to the detriment of the clubs and country members.

[Peter Jenkins]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 21/05/2016 12:21:30:

 

Maybe its time for the rank and file members to thnk the previously unthinkble, maybe we would be better off forming our own association that is aimed soley at representing and serving the interests of the ordinary club members and solo flyers? An association that had no involvment with competition or grand national schemes, that didn't have a committee structure linked to competion disciplines, that didn't think the the most important event of the year was a "black-tie dinner" to which 99.9% of the membership won't attend or even know of. Instead it would focus on delivering purely what most of us actually want - ie a insurance scheme made cheaper and more compehensive by collective bargaining, representation with external bodies and advice on running clubs etc. And maybe it could an up to date and responsive organisation that was truely democratic? Ah - a dream!

BEB

Well BEB, I look forward to such an organisation and then to reading about how it's been hijacked by those awful people who are running it in this forum. It will happen as sure as day follows night.

As for a completely democratic voting system - one member one vote on all decisions - how else did Boaty McBoat end up being the most popular name for the new Antarctic Research Vessel. It required the "few" to make a sensible decision to restrict that silly name to the small unmanned vehicle on the Sir David Attenborough. How would people who have to work on a ship called Boaty McBoat feel about their fellow citizens who landed them with a name that brings ridicule on them when they enter any harbour or say they work on Boaty McBoat?

Politics, with a small p, are always going to get in the way of any organisation. Remember that the BMFA is run by volunteers who give up a lot of their time to do this. You know from trying to get Club members to take on Committee jobs that the vast majority do not want to and it comes down to the same hard core who soldier on for years. The full time staff in the BMFA head office are, as you know, not the folk who make the key decisions as that is down to the volunteers. So, you will be looking for a group of volunteers who will put in the work necessary to build up such the organisation you are proposing and then to run it.

Remember that voting for the BMFA Executive is a one member one vote affair when there is a competition for posts. How often is there just one name and so no need for a vote?

I suspect that you'll find there will be a very small number of volunteers who will have the time, energy and knowledge to put this new "down to earth" organisation together and they will become the elite who the rest will start moaning about in fairly short order.

So BEB, I agree with your final phrase - Ah, a dream!

Edited By Peter Jenkins on 22/05/2016 01:09:23

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Well thank god we have the "few" amongst us as modellers then Peter who have a bit of sense. Careful you don't need the likes of BEB when you need to make headway and need a bit of coal shovelling on the boiler though.

John...land ahoy dept

[Peter Jenkins]

John, I wasn't having a go at BEB, merely pointing out that creating an organisation to replace the BMFA would end up with a very similar situation - this is the human condition from which we all suffer. Would that it were otherwise.

[MattyB]

Posted by Colin Leighfield on 21/05/2016 17:47:21:

All that bothers me is the risk to ourselves from fragmenting into smaller disconnected associations and losing the one-voice representation that is essential to our national recognition as a sport. I'll guarantee that whatever association you join there will always be a substantial number that complain about it, for whatever reasons.

I've never seen any social activity yet that succeeded in getting a continuing commitment to active support from a majority of the members or praise for those that do put in the time and effort to keep it going. I don't imply that's true for everyone of course, there are guys contributing to this thread who put in a lot of effort, far more than I've ever done I'm ashamed to say. I appreciate what they do but I'm sticking with BMFA membership, not just because of the insurance.

Indeed - whilst my dislike of the way we have reached this point and BMFA governance in general is significant, I do not believe fragmenting at this point is a good idea. We have plenty of real challenges to address at present, not least potential knee jerk legislation in response to the "drone threat", and in that respect I acknowledge the BMFA is the best placed organisation to interact with the authorities on our behalf. Any new org would dilute our overall negotiating influence and would have no exist relationships with the CAA etc.

Having said that I can see a very real chance that a splinter organisation created solely to provide insurance and oppose the NFC could yet emerge, or alternatively a major increase in LMA membership. The vast majority of BMFA members I meet simply don't give two hoots about the NFC - they just want insurance to fly at their local patch. If fees start to rise significantly to support a project they have no interest in you will see club members putting pressure on committees to disaffiliate and get their insurance elsewhere, particularly in places furthest from the NFC. Country members are even less likely to stay members in such a scenario - after all they had no vote and don't normally fly at an affiliated club site, so almost their only direct benefit of membership is insurance.

At least the lease method has a smaller financial risk associated with it, but if a reduction in membership amongst these two groups cut the BMFA's numbers by 20-30% that could still make a huge difference to the economics of the NFC project.

[MattyB]

Ps - Has anyone heard anything about the proposed changes to BMFA governance that were promised at the EGM? I have heard nothing through my area or the Comms pathways to members. Disappointing, though not exactly surprising...

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Funnily enough, I was about to ask the same question! The Chairman gave the impression that he was very committed to the idea.

Erf, your comments may be relevant to a large organisation, but the BMFA is very much a "cottage industry" sized one. There are probably no more than a dozen full time staff and the committees are run by interested volunteers so the level of organisation and preparation you are championing just will not happen. As such, new information may well come to light at meetings and to simply accept pre-prepared statements of facts will hand the initiative to any interested parties with their own agendas. Let's accept that we have different views on proxy voting but please don't state that my opinion makes you angry as per the earlier post - let's agree that the whole system has flaws and must be improved...

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by MattyB on 23/05/2016 01:50:06:

Ps - Has anyone heard anything about the proposed changes to BMFA governance that were promised at the EGM? I have heard nothing through my area or the Comms pathways to members. Disappointing, though not exactly surprising...

If yourself and Martin are referring to Country members, no not heard/seen anything, numbers in our club buying online this year increased again, partly due to weather putting field out of use for months and change of ownership at pub we met at asking for a big fee for room use, so not many meetings.

John

 

Edited By john stones 1 on 23/05/2016 13:02:12

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]