- This topic is empty.
- Posts
The proposal announced in “Wayfarer News” to change the membership structure has prompted me to spend a little time looking at the Constitution and proposed fee changes in more detail:
• The Constitution only allows those mentioned on “a certificate” (para 3i) to be an “owner” (so far as UKWA is concerned) and only UKWA owners to be Full Members (8). So, although our own boat was jointly purchased by myself and my wife (making us equal owners, financially), I am the only one named on the Measurement Certificate and so under the UKWA constitution this bars my wife from joining the Full Member grade. This is not a problem under the current Family Membership grade which specifically over-rides this by (8) by stating that a Spouse is a Full Member (contrary to (3i). Interestingly, if the person named on the Certificate is currently a Family Member who no longer sails or does not wish to become a Full Member, no-one else in that family group could become a Full Member either, due to (3i).
• Only mentioning “Spouse” is a bit old fashioned – what about non-married partners? Also “any family member” (8) is a very loose restriction – does it include grandchildren, wider family, etc?
• Aside from the feeling of all bar one Family Members being excommunicated by the proposed membership grade changes, a problematic aspect is deciding whether it is worth the excommunicants becoming Associate Members. The difficulty is that nowhere does the Constitution describe the benefits of each existing or proposed grade of membership, viz, what are the benefits of each membership grade in respect of [tried to insert a table here but couldn’t):
– Become a Full Member if now a Family Member but not named on certificate
– UKWA AGM speaking rights
– UKWA AGM single voting rights
– Membership of WIC
– Wayfarer News
– Right to enter UKWA race events without another Full Member on board
– Right to enter UKWA cruising events without another Full Member on board
– Wayfarer Merchandise Discounts
I would suggest that it is impossible to make a rational choice about becoming an Associate Member on the basis of the Constitution.• One of the stated aims of simplification is reduced admin– but you could end up with more memberships to deal with if a significant number of ex-Family members were to take up Associate membership. Also, at changeover time there may to be a short-term flood of admin queries, etc.
• Members could end up with the silly situation of a future Full plus Associate Membership couple receiving two Wayfarer News, compared to one when they were a Family Membership. One will go straight in the bin. What a waste: hardly the Green-Blue.Finally, has a business case been developed to predict the effect of these changes on membership, income and admin costs? Have current and potential members been canvassed for their thoughts and needs?
I believe that the Constitution needs a thorough overhaul to rationalise it, deal with the points above and bring it out of the 1950s and contemporary with great new rejuvenating boat design that we now have. This should be done before changes to fee structure are proposed, or unexpected problems are likely to emerge.
SWD,
I used to belong to a club that was as complicated as your post above, it almost put me off sailing. Relax and have fun man.it’s 20 quid!
@tempest51 wrote:
SWD,
I used to belong to a club that was as complicated as your post above, it almost put me off sailing. Relax and have fun man.it’s 20 quid!
Hear hear +1
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.