RPRA Rule Changes

[king]

I Wondered when the new union idea would surface again, my suggestion is as it always has been, if that’s what you want then get on with doing it give people a “choice” or as usual, will others be expected to do it for you? I suspect it will end up the same way as all the other times it’s been suggested with a big fat nothing as the proposers are never prepared to put the work in to achieve what they espouse.
Organisations necessarily evolve over time, to say that nothing has changed over 50 years is clearly wrong, some people detest the RPRA for whatever reason and nothing that the association does will ever suit them, the answer of course as this forum member has done is to resign and have nothing to do with the union ever again except to criticise when the opportunity arises.
Personally I think that the resistance to the propositions will occur because they will be considered to be too far too quickly.
We will know following the AGM.

Well with an monopoly on membership many are stuck with the RPRA. This 'get off your ar$e' line is always used by the RPRA when members want change. Many have tried but failed because the rules are in place to make it almost impossible to make changes. I'm no longer a member, but having read the CEO piece it's clear the RPRA wants to remain UNCHANGED from the 50+ years when I was a member.
It's clear that a declining membership, WILL just keep paying more for service as usual.
I do like your line, resistance to the propositions will occur because they will be considered to be too far too quickly? They've had a 100 years to change. The ONLY change I've seen since 1975 when I first joined is a rapid declining membership. If the membership were happy with the RPRA there wouldn't be so many propositions, for change? I too doubt many will be accepted.

[king]

I Wondered when the new union idea would surface again, my suggestion is as it always has been, if that’s what you want then get on with doing it give people a “choice” or as usual, will others be expected to do it for you? I suspect it will end up the same way as all the other times it’s been suggested with a big fat nothing as the proposers are never prepared to put the work in to achieve what they espouse.
Organisations necessarily evolve over time, to say that nothing has changed over 50 years is clearly wrong, some people detest the RPRA for whatever reason and nothing that the association does will ever suit them, the answer of course as this forum member has done is to resign and have nothing to do with the union ever again except to criticise when the opportunity arises.
Personally I think that the resistance to the propositions will occur because they will be considered to be too far too quickly.
We will know following the AGM.

Correct. The current team running the RPRA have turned things around brilliantly in the last 12 or so months. It is in a much better place than it was. And the CEO states that in time he knows smaller regions WILL have to merge. I can understand why people have put the propositions in but theres an old saying..all that glitters isn't gold. If they think big savings are gonna come off the back of it I think they could be in for a shock.

They haven't turned anything round. The members have bailed them out via a huge subs increase. The members have just balanced the books for now. Expect them to ask you for more in a couple of years.

[goose1]

I Wondered when the new union idea would surface again, my suggestion is as it always has been, if that’s what you want then get on with doing it give people a “choice” or as usual, will others be expected to do it for you? I suspect it will end up the same way as all the other times it’s been suggested with a big fat nothing as the proposers are never prepared to put the work in to achieve what they espouse.
Organisations necessarily evolve over time, to say that nothing has changed over 50 years is clearly wrong, some people detest the RPRA for whatever reason and nothing that the association does will ever suit them, the answer of course as this forum member has done is to resign and have nothing to do with the union ever again except to criticise when the opportunity arises.
Personally I think that the resistance to the propositions will occur because they will be considered to be too far too quickly.
We will know following the AGM.

Correct. The current team running the RPRA have turned things around brilliantly in the last 12 or so months. It is in a much better place than it was. And the CEO states that in time he knows smaller regions WILL have to merge. I can understand why people have put the propositions in but theres an old saying..all that glitters isn't gold. If they think big savings are gonna come off the back of it I think they could be in for a shock.

They haven't turned anything round. The members have bailed them out via a huge subs increase. The members have just balanced the books for now. Expect them to ask you for more in a couple of years.

You have your opinion and I'll have mine. The RPRA should have increased subs years ago but didn't. We now pay 67p a week due to the 'huge subs increase'. When they ask for more I'll be paying it.

[Ian Evans]

Correct. The current team running the RPRA have turned things around brilliantly in the last 12 or so months. It is in a much better place than it was. And the CEO states that in time he knows smaller regions WILL have to merge. I can understand why people have put the propositions in but theres an old saying..all that glitters isn't gold. If they think big savings are gonna come off the back of it I think they could be in for a shock.

They haven't turned anything round. The members have bailed them out via a huge subs increase. The members have just balanced the books for now. Expect them to ask you for more in a couple of years.

You have your opinion and I'll have mine. The RPRA should have increased subs years ago but didn't. We now pay 67p a week due to the 'huge subs increase'. When they ask for more I'll be paying it.

Personally the amount of the subscription is not the issue it's the way it has been done and the expenditure it is covering. The overheads of the association need to be addressed before any increase in subs are considered. We are simply paying to prop up, outdated systems and processes at HQ and including propping up the regional/council structure both of which are not reflective of the general memberships feelings with a tiny percentage of engagement.

When I left in 2022 the Annual Salaries and on costs at the BHW and RPRA 450k. They are now in excess of 600k. The cost of council last year was 16k. The regions cost £67.5k.
The cost of an executive committee and 1 member 1 vote will be a fraction of the cost. A far more efficient way of running.
The RPRA in its current format is unsustainable.

The loss experienced in 2023 of 280k lies at the feet of this outdated structure and it's inability to react quickly. They were told such a loss was coming 2 years previous but still they did nothing. Instead they had to use an emergency rule to bring in a levy. That levy has generated a profit of 116k. So they have charged each member around about £8.50 too much on the levy.

The finances have not been sorted out. You can't keep throwing money at an association without addressing the real issues otherwise your kicking the can down the road and building a bigger problem.

[Andy]

They haven't turned anything round. The members have bailed them out via a huge subs increase. The members have just balanced the books for now. Expect them to ask you for more in a couple of years.

You have your opinion and I'll have mine. The RPRA should have increased subs years ago but didn't. We now pay 67p a week due to the 'huge subs increase'. When they ask for more I'll be paying it.

Personally the amount of the subscription is not the issue it's the way it has been done and the expenditure it is covering. The overheads of the association need to be addressed before any increase in subs are considered. We are simply paying to prop up, outdated systems and processes at HQ and including propping up the regional/council structure both of which are not reflective of the general memberships feelings with a tiny percentage of engagement.

When I left in 2022 the Annual Salaries and on costs at the BHW and RPRA 450k. They are now in excess of 600k. The cost of council last year was 16k. The regions cost £67.5k.
The cost of an executive committee and 1 member 1 vote will be a fraction of the cost. A far more efficient way of running.
The RPRA in its current format is unsustainable.

The loss experienced in 2023 of 280k lies at the feet of this outdated structure and it's inability to react quickly. They were told such a loss was coming 2 years previous but still they did nothing. Instead they had to use an emergency rule to bring in a levy. That levy has generated a profit of 116k. So they have charged each member around about £8.50 too much on the levy.

The finances have not been sorted out. You can't keep throwing money at an association without addressing the real issues otherwise your kicking the can down the road and building a bigger problem.

Welcome to the site Ian. Good to have you onboard. Interesting to hear your views having been on the inside of the RPRA.
I do think that 1 member 1 vote is a much better way for members to get involved than the long process of club meetings followed by regional meetings before going to council. 1 member 1 vote can easily be done for the majority on line.

[Ian Evans]

You have your opinion and I'll have mine. The RPRA should have increased subs years ago but didn't. We now pay 67p a week due to the 'huge subs increase'. When they ask for more I'll be paying it.

Personally the amount of the subscription is not the issue it's the way it has been done and the expenditure it is covering. The overheads of the association need to be addressed before any increase in subs are considered. We are simply paying to prop up, outdated systems and processes at HQ and including propping up the regional/council structure both of which are not reflective of the general memberships feelings with a tiny percentage of engagement.

When I left in 2022 the Annual Salaries and on costs at the BHW and RPRA 450k. They are now in excess of 600k. The cost of council last year was 16k. The regions cost £67.5k.
The cost of an executive committee and 1 member 1 vote will be a fraction of the cost. A far more efficient way of running.
The RPRA in its current format is unsustainable.

The loss experienced in 2023 of 280k lies at the feet of this outdated structure and it's inability to react quickly. They were told such a loss was coming 2 years previous but still they did nothing. Instead they had to use an emergency rule to bring in a levy. That levy has generated a profit of 116k. So they have charged each member around about £8.50 too much on the levy.

The finances have not been sorted out. You can't keep throwing money at an association without addressing the real issues otherwise your kicking the can down the road and building a bigger problem.

Welcome to the site Ian. Good to have you onboard. Interesting to hear your views having been on the inside of the RPRA.
I do think that 1 member 1 vote is a much better way for members to get involved than the long process of club meetings followed by regional meetings before going to council. 1 member 1 vote can easily be done for the majority on line.

Thank you for the welcome. If you have time and interest you can learn more here about my thought here

https://youtu.be/EHCvTYe1GTY?si=ZqIvv_PhjJt7JE0H

And here

https://youtu.be/tDkIBjCjem8?si=mdxFIT8uW_N0U4sg

[Andy]

Thanks Ian.

[Diamond Dave]

Hi Ian, yes, good to see you on here.
It will be a big day for us all this coming Saturday at the East mids agm and others around the country.
The thing I noticed most of all at the last meeting was that people are READY for change and I am hoping that will sway the vote in favour of the proposals.

[CHARLTON34]

Hello Ian, & thank you for putting on the YouTube video last week with Dan, the expenditure was a staggering amount going out, how do they ever think that without modernization, & an organisation that's fit for purpose, plus a falling membership that this is every going to be financially operational without drastic changes.
Regards Dave.

[goose1]

They haven't turned anything round. The members have bailed them out via a huge subs increase. The members have just balanced the books for now. Expect them to ask you for more in a couple of years.

You have your opinion and I'll have mine. The RPRA should have increased subs years ago but didn't. We now pay 67p a week due to the 'huge subs increase'. When they ask for more I'll be paying it.

Personally the amount of the subscription is not the issue it's the way it has been done and the expenditure it is covering. The overheads of the association need to be addressed before any increase in subs are considered. We are simply paying to prop up, outdated systems and processes at HQ and including propping up the regional/council structure both of which are not reflective of the general memberships feelings with a tiny percentage of engagement.

When I left in 2022 the Annual Salaries and on costs at the BHW and RPRA 450k. They are now in excess of 600k. The cost of council last year was 16k. The regions cost £67.5k.
The cost of an executive committee and 1 member 1 vote will be a fraction of the cost. A far more efficient way of running.
The RPRA in its current format is unsustainable.

The loss experienced in 2023 of 280k lies at the feet of this outdated structure and it's inability to react quickly. They were told such a loss was coming 2 years previous but still they did nothing. Instead they had to use an emergency rule to bring in a levy. That levy has generated a profit of 116k. So they have charged each member around about £8.50 too much on the levy.

The finances have not been sorted out. You can't keep throwing money at an association without addressing the real issues otherwise your kicking the can down the road and building a bigger problem.

The CEO states that if the regions were done away with the RPRA would have to employ 2 full time staff to deal with the workload increase that was previously dealt with by the regions so the cost you quote as being a saving would be cancelled out. I'm not massively for or massively against either side of this, just in my opinion if people think getting rid of the regions will be the magic fix their wrong. My own personal preference would probably be to merge the smaller regions so all are dealing with a similar workload in terms of membership. This way you would make a saving without the need to employ any extra staff.