Right to Ride

[h0bol0bo]

This post is about the right to ride (RTR) with CTC groups. I suggest that this benefit should only be enjoyed by CTC members with voting rights(VRMs) and not by affiliated members(AFMs). (N.B This argument is not considered relevant to one year duration £12 introductory membership schemes or guest riders)
Shortly before the holiday, in response to an e mail query made to N.O I was advised that AFMs have the benefit of RTR with any CTC group in the same way as VRMs. This issue is not addressed in the "CTC Membership Benefits Table " nor the Policy Handbook for CTC Groups. in fact the Policy Handbook states that only CTC members within affiliated groups have the benefits of individual membership of CTC. accordingly I was surprised by the response the source of which, I was advised. was a verbal directive from the Operations Director.
My perception of AFMs has been that they are members of a non CTC cycling club(Affilited Club) or perhaps BUG group who become AFMs primarily to take advantage of CTC insurance cover but without the RTR benefit enjoyed by VRMs. My perception was based on the apparent absence of any written benefit or policy statement. This recent directive obliges group riders to welcome AFMs to their group notwithstanding that under CTC rules AFMs cannot lead group rides or hold office. They cannot make any meaningful contribution to the running of the group other than to participate in rides.
I consider the significant difference between AFM and VRM member subscriptions (perhaps a separate issue) when combined with the benefit of the RTR presents AFMs with an amazing deal. It was suggested in justification that AFMs would soon opt to pay an additional £25 to enable them to enjoy the benefits of being able to lead rides or hold office. Should that be the case then show me the statistics as i suggest that the above combination is more likely to lead to cost driven VRMs moving to low cost affliated membership. In addition it will be seen by some as a low cost means of obtaining insurance cover and the benefits of group riding, two of the main reasons put forward by members for joining CTC. but without any group responsibilities.
This directive seems to me to be a very significant devaluation of VRM benefits and I seek opinion from interested members if they also see this directive as unfair to VRMs or am i missing something?

[meic]

Thanks for that information, we always like to welcome people to ride with our group and it is nice to know that if they have this affiliated membership then we dont have to hassle them to join CTC individually too, in order to carry on riding with us.

The more the merrier.

[gaz]

Affiliate members don't get the full range of membership benefits.

What they do get is summarised in the Affiliate Club application form.

· third party insurance with liability up to £10 million
· a CTC membership card giving access to a wide range of discounts and benefits (excluding access to CTC’s legal, touring and technical helplines)
· the weekly CTC email newsletter, “CycleClips”

The Policy Handbook, my emphasis.

Member Groups

CTC Member Group membership is free to CTC members on payment of their annual subscription and all Member Groups must be open to all CTC members within the practice and spirit of CTC equal opportunities policies.

Based on that RTR is a universal benefit of all membership categories.

The category of membership is irrelevant, Junior, Senior, Unwaged, Adult, Family, Life, Affiliated and any others that I haven't mentioned. Membership rates vary across all those groups.

[h0bol0bo]

Hi gaz and thanks for your comments. However the affiliate Club/member application form does not tell the whole story. N.O have a document called CTC membership Benefits Table which shows the benefit entitlement of all categories of CTC membership. It also shows the various benefits that certain membership types do not enjoy.
Referring to your quotation from the Policy Handbook, if you are offering this as written confirmation that AFMs can participate freely in CTC group rides, I respectfully suggest that it does not. In my experience of CTC documents the term "Member Group" is not always used consistently and does not always mean the same thing to all. In the context of this discussion the term "all member groups" can refer only to those Member Groups who enjoy voting rights. My rationale for this interpretation is in the paragraph following yours in the Handbook. This paragraph discusses CTC Members, their right to vote and qualification for subscription levy. As AFMs do not enjoy these benefits, it cannot rationally be the intent of the authors of this section titled Member Groups to apply to AFMs. The rest of the section also refers to issues which would not apply to AFMs.

[gaz]

Hi gaz and thanks for your comments. However the affiliate Club/member application form does not tell the whole story. N.O have a document called CTC membership Benefits Table which shows the benefit entitlement of all categories of CTC membership. It also shows the various benefits that certain membership types do not enjoy.

Can you provide a link to that document on-line? It could be useful for other discussions, however I fully appreciate that not all documents are available on-line.

Referring to your quotation from the Policy Handbook, if you are offering this as written confirmation that AFMs can participate freely in CTC group rides, I respectfully suggest that it does not. In my experience of CTC documents the term "Member Group" is not always used consistently and does not always mean the same thing to all. In the context of this discussion the term "all member groups" can refer only to those Member Groups who enjoy voting rights. My rationale for this interpretation is in the paragraph following yours in the Handbook. This paragraph discusses CTC Members, their right to vote and qualification for subscription levy. As AFMs do not enjoy these benefits, it cannot rationally be the intent of the authors of this section titled Member Groups to apply to AFMs. The rest of the section also refers to issues which would not apply to AFMs.

It's not the only mention in the handbook.

What CTC Council might expect of Groups
...
To be open to all CTC members within the practice and spirit of CTC equal opportunities policies.
...

I couldn't agree more with regard to the term "Member Group", it's seemingly inconsistent usage and the huge scope for misinterpretations. I expect the term "Member Group" has rigid areas of doubt and uncertainty included in it's formal definition.

To come back to the paragraph you've referred to,

CTC members will be able to choose to be listed as a “member” with any Member Groups that may cover their interests. They must however specify one group which will be their “main” group, this will be designated their “main” membership. The main group is the only group in which they may vote at general meetings (refer to Procedure at General Meetings, page 16), nominate to take part in national competitions and claim subscription levy (refer to Formal Procedures: Financial, page 20).

My interpretation of the above paragraph with regard to AFM's would be that the Affiliated Club is their default "main" membership and that there is no option to change it. We are both in full agreement that AFM's have no voting rights at CTC Member Group meetings.

Ultimately I can only offer my interpretations for you to consider and would have to accept that I cannot apply them to all membership types (e.g. I really can't imagine how a Corporate Member, often a local authority joining to receive technical advice, could attend a club ride). I can also understand how you have reached your interpretations.

Hopefully National Office can give you further guidance on the official policy and it's raison d'etre. Good luck.

[h0bol0bo]

Hi again gaz.
I am afraid I am unable to provide the link you request. I can only suggest you contact your Councillor for help.
Regarding your penultimate paragraph, I should clarify that my comments refer only to individual affiliated members (Type AFM) . Thanks for you input.

[Karen Sutton]

AFAIK the the affiliate member form is available only from Affiliated Clubs. The secretary of the affiliated club used to process all the AFM memberships but I beieve AFM's now renew directly with CTC Membership, but get their initial joining form via their Affiliated Club.

As Member Groups do not get the subscription levy on either Affiliated Clubs nor Affiliated members I don't believe AFM's should have access to Member Group activities. In our Member Group we have somebody who is also a member of an affiliated Club. He pays a membership fee to the affiliated club but has always had full CTC membership as we expect this of our regular riders. He has recently been registered as a ride leader for our Member Group.

Twenty plus years ago we had riders in our CTC group who were not CTC members. At that time it was considered that CTC membership was only demanded due to the fact that it provided Third Party Insurance. So CTC membership was not demanded of those who were members of British Cycling (or BCF as it was then) or other racing clubs whose membership afforded Third Party Insurance. Today we insist on all riders being full CTC members no matter what other insurances they hold.

In my view, a rider who is an AFM and wants to ride with a CTC Member Group should upgrade to full membership. if they pay their subs to their affiliated club they would still be able to vote at the meetings of that club.

[meic]

Does it actually cost the DA anything if somebody turns up to ride with us?

Our DA spends its money on the background activities like the website etc. This is all paid for mainly by the subs of people who dont ride with us. Often to advertise the rides and to get people to join us, it would be a waste of our time and the CTC's money to make them unwelcome.

The amount that I contribute through my CTC subs which goes to the running of my DA is almost negligible and to claim that affiliate members are not paying their way is splitting hairs.
If they are covered by insurance from their membership then they should be welcome to ride with us.

[Karen Sutton]

Does it actually cost the DA anything if somebody turns up to ride with us?

Our DA spends its money on the background activities like the website etc. This is all paid for mainly by the subs of people who dont ride with us. Often to advertise the rides and to get people to join us, it would be a waste of our time and the CTC's money to make them unwelcome.

The amount that I contribute through my CTC subs which goes to the running of my DA is almost negligible and to claim that affiliate members are not paying their way is splitting hairs.
If they are covered by insurance from their membership then they should be welcome to ride with us.

No, it doesn't cost the Member Group anything if somebody turns up to ride with the group. However, if your Group receives the subscription allocation from CTC then CTC members are paying towards the running of the Group. Some say that those who benefit from the Group's activities should be paid up members. If your Group considers an affiliated member to be a paid up member then then that is fine.

There doesn't seem to be any hard and fast rule on this from what has already been said. Therefore each Group could decide for themselves how they wish to deal with it, and call it a "Local rule" as permitted in the CTC Policy and Rules for Groups

[h0bol0bo]

...Today we insist on all riders being full CTC members no matter what other insurances they hold.

hi Karen,
I was peticularly interested in the above statement. Would I be correct to interpret this as a "local rule." If so has the local rule received approval as required in the third paragraph of page 24 of the Group Policy? If it has then it surely constitutes a CTC policy. If it has not then how do you know that it is "legal" i.e acceptable by the Council of Subsidiary Companies or am I interpreting page 24 incorrectly?

[Karen Sutton]

...Today we insist on all riders being full CTC members no matter what other insurances they hold.

hi Karen,
I was peticularly interested in the above statement. Would I be correct to interpret this as a "local rule." If so has the local rule received approval as required in the third paragraph of page 24 of the Group Policy? If it has then it surely constitutes a CTC policy. If it has not then how do you know that it is "legal" i.e acceptable by the Council of Subsidiary Companies or am I interpreting page 24 incorrectly?

h0bol0bo,

Sorry I didn't reply to this post of yours. I obviously ddidn't get notification of your post as I normally do when a reply is made to a thread I've responded to. I came back to look at this thread after reading the agenda for the CTC AGM in May; I noted that there is a motion on this very subject.

So, in reply to your question. No, it is not a "local rule" that riders with our group must be CTC members. I suppose I phrased it badly. What I should have said is that riders with our Group must be CTC members, not actually full CTC members. As I mentioned, we do have a rider in our Group who is a member of an affiliated group, but he has full CTC membership. I suppose if he had just affiliated membership via the other club we would have to accept him in our Group. After all he has a CTC membership number so he is a member. And CTC policy is that all members have access to the CTC member Groups.

Suppose you go somewhere on holiday and wish to ride with the local CTC group. If you are an affiliated member you would not be on the database of CTC members in that area; just as you would not be on the database in your home area. So nobody can claim the subscription grant for you. But you are still a member and there is actually nohing in the Rules and Policy for Member Groups which excludes affiliated members from riding with any CTC member Group.

Are you by any chance involved with the motion on with regard to this issue on the agenda for the AGM?

[Simon L6]

The Harrogate Wheel Easy have published a very useful guide. http://www.wheel-easy.org.uk/EventArticle.asp?ID=64

Here's the text of the resolution to the AGM

That by the 2012 AGM, Council should review which classes of CTC member should enjoy the benefit of an unrestricted right to ride with any CTC member group, recognising the rights of Full Members and the burden on volunteers of allowing participation by those who do not have Full Membership.

Now I think that people have to ask themselves if they want people on their rides or not. The Fridays has become an Affilitate and we only take five non CTC members on each ride. Membership of the Fridays is a quid for the year, so we don't have any problem at all persuading 'full' members to join up. http://fnrttc.blogspot.com/ We've been going about a month and we've got members from all over England, and one from Wales.

Our club rides will probably average 100 riders this year - we're getting thirty to a ride that starts 200 miles from our notional base. We aim to raise £100,000 for the Martlets Hospice this year. We publicise other rides, including the Cheam and Morden CTC rides and the Lambeth LCC rides, and if any of our lot turn up on these I'm sure they'd be welcomed.

The full subs are going up to £39 next year. The price of affiliate membership will stay at £12. My guess is that more and more member groups will go for affiliate status. When you look at the Wheel Easy sheet you realise that £12 buys you almost all the benefits that are worth having. Forget the free legal advice schtick - RJW's website offers a free meeting to anybody who needs it. Affiliates do miss out on the mag, which is a pity, but since the mag's fine editorial is stuffed between reams of ads for mail order organisations that undermine the bike trade I'm personally not crying about it.

The CTC has a bit of a problem. Their USP is the insurance. They make a profit on that, which is fine and dandy, but if the price of affiliate membership goes up the bigger affiliates will simply defect to another insurer. The question that Messrs Lowe and Thompson should have been asking is 'what are we getting for our £37?' Add up the value of the benefits in the Wheel-Easy sheet.........

There's one bit of this that makes me almost weep (or laugh) with frustration. Last year's AGM passed a resolution calling for a bigger slice of the subs to go to local groups. It used to be about 18p a member. How much is it now? Compare that to the affiliate that can charge a quid, or three quid, and, for a total of £13 or £15 or whatever offer rides to members and have money in the kitty. After a month we've got sufficient money to pay the £12 CTC sub for some of our members if they can't afford it. How many full Member Groups can say the same?

[Karen Sutton]

The Harrogate Wheel Easy have published a very useful guide. http://www.wheel-easy.org.uk/EventArticle.asp?ID=64

Here's the text of the resolution to the AGM

That by the 2012 AGM, Council should review which classes of CTC member should enjoy the benefit of an unrestricted right to ride with any CTC member group, recognising the rights of Full Members and the burden on volunteers of allowing participation by those who do not have Full Membership.

Now I think that people have to ask themselves if they want people on their rides or not. The Fridays has become an Affilitate and we only take five non CTC members on each ride. Membership of the Fridays is a quid for the year, so we don't have any problem at all persuading 'full' members to join up. http://fnrttc.blogspot.com/ We've been going about a month and we've got members from all over England, and one from Wales.

Our club rides will probably average 100 riders this year - we're getting thirty to a ride that starts 200 miles from our notional base. We aim to raise £100,000 for the Martlets Hospice this year. We publicise other rides, including the Cheam and Morden CTC rides and the Lambeth LCC rides, and if any of our lot turn up on these I'm sure they'd be welcomed.

The full subs are going up to £39 next year. The price of affiliate membership will stay at £12. My guess is that more and more member groups will go for affiliate status. When you look at the Wheel Easy sheet you realise that £12 buys you almost all the benefits that are worth having. Forget the free legal advice schtick - RJW's website offers a free meeting to anybody who needs it. Affiliates do miss out on the mag, which is a pity, but since the mag's fine editorial is stuffed between reams of ads for mail order organisations that undermine the bike trade I'm personally not crying about it.

The CTC has a bit of a problem. Their USP is the insurance. They make a profit on that, which is fine and dandy, but if the price of affiliate membership goes up the bigger affiliates will simply defect to another insurer. The question that Messrs Lowe and Thompson should have been asking is 'what are we getting for our £37?' Add up the value of the benefits in the Wheel-Easy sheet.........

There's one bit of this that makes me almost weep (or laugh) with frustration. Last year's AGM passed a resolution calling for a bigger slice of the subs to go to local groups. It used to be about 18p a member. How much is it now? Compare that to the affiliate that can charge a quid, or three quid, and, for a total of £13 or £15 or whatever offer rides to members and have money in the kitty. After a month we've got sufficient money to pay the £12 CTC sub for some of our members if they can't afford it. How many full Member Groups can say the same?

One of the points in Simon's post which has just been adressed in our Group is that which refers to only 5 non members on a ride. If those who only hold affiliated membership are claased as non members and you have a few who ride with the group on a regular basis then you are restricting the number of genuinely new riders who want to try out the rides before joining CTC.
Our Group holds rides which are aimed at new riders. To avoid the problem with the 'Rule of 5' we have registered those particular rides with CTC as "events". But we would not accept non members on the regular full day rides for more than the usual number of 'guest rides'.