No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13782
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby gaz » 5 Jan 2015, 10:45pm

JohnW wrote:In answer to your question however - I was at the AGM in Sheffield a couple of years ago, where there was a motion to endorse the (finally successful) application for charity status.

There were 3 tranches of votes : 1). Show of hands by those present. 2). Votes cast by members by returned voting forms. 3). Votes which members who had not indicated a preference and vested in the chairman.

In both of tranches 1 and 2 the voting was decisively against the motion. Those members who had expressed a preference, and cast their vote, had voted against and indicated the mood of the membership - my memory (which can easily be confirmed as correct or otherwise) is that the majority against the motion was about 70% in each case. The quantity of votes vested in the chairman exceeded the votes cast by voting members, and the, motion was carried.

...


I wasn't there, but I've found the ERS records for the vote which suggest the room was strongly in favour (90%) as were the majority of returned voting forms that gave directed proxy votes.

If the Chair's undirected proxy votes had been left uncast the result would have been 3978 For, 646 Against (86% in favour). If the Chair had then cast the undirected proxies against the mood of those who'd expressed an opinion the motion would have been lost. Unsurprisingly he cast them in favour.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby TonyR » 6 Jan 2015, 8:53am

gaz wrote:Unsurprisingly he cast them in favour.


And, contrary to allegations strongly made, in line with the floor vote and not overturning the expressed wishes of those who attended. I think someone owes an apology to the Chair

It also demonstrates why the proxy votes are important and should not be over-ridden by the floor as some have suggested. There were about 40 votes at the meeting out of about 9,000 votes. How democratic would it be if the 40 voters (0.5% of the votes) over-ruled the 99.5% of the voters?

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby beardy » 6 Jan 2015, 9:11am

Meanwhile the enormous bulk of the membership didnt bother voting in person or even filling in the proxy form.

SA_SA_SA
Posts: 1811
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby SA_SA_SA » 6 Jan 2015, 11:50am

CJ wrote:I'll give you a recent example of something pretty important that Roger was very happy to leave to me.
Here is the conclusion of my work in response to the government's 'Red Tape Challenge' as applied to the simplification of cycle regulations. If you care to read through all of that you will see that a very deep knowledge of cycles and the technical standards and regulations...... here is the concluding report from TRL, to whom DfT delegated the task of gathering responses and drawing conclusions on this matter.....

Thanks for all that kind of work (and question answering :) ) . An example of why the Head Office rejection of even your consultancy service offer seems very strange to me.

NB I read the CTC report in full then, being me, jumped straight to the final TRL report's lighting/reflector related sections, then the other bits :)
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)

User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby meic » 6 Jan 2015, 4:37pm

Somebody is agitated enough to have taken action. So for those of you that are not on the mailing list (or if your group doesnt forward it) this is what has been sent out.
Hello to all CTC Group Secretaries,

Please can you pass this onto all your membership.
If they feel as we do, then we would like them to complain to CTC HQ and to their local Councillor so that they know the membership is not happy with the changes as summarised below.

As the Councillors have a meeting scheduled on 17th January with CTC Executives,
it would help if any response from the membership was received before that date.

Make your voice heard.

Angela Byrne and David Wood

================================================================================
CTC is Changing

The focus of CTC has changed dramatically with the elimination of vital member benefits. This has been progressing over a number of years, culminating in Decmber 2014 with CTC making redundant positions that provided technical and touring support (Chris Juden, Andy Hawes).

After the February issue of Cycle, there will be no more of the comprehensive, well researched reviews and technical articles supplied by Chris Juden, which (he says) take longer to produce than can be justified by the fees paid by 'Cycle' magazine for freelance journalism. By ceasing to engage directly with cyclists on technical matters and making this role redundant, CTC loses the ability to identify issues, and discards its competence to address such issues, as unsafe mudguards and the reform of lighting regulations.

CTC seems almost ashamed of 'the T-word' nowadays. Its campaigns have an overwhelmingly urban focus: energetically tackling the 'problem' of sharing bus-lanes in London with motorbikes, whilst failing to say much about the lethal lack of good quality cycle tracks by rural main roads, that create cycling no-go areas for tourists and rural commuters alike. For whilst most cycling is surely for transport in towns, what inspires the daily grind for most CTC members and keeps them doing that, is the anticipation of riding somewhere more pleasant sometime! CTC has done little or nothing at a national level to promote cycle-touring for several years, whilst gradually withdrawing resources from the gathering, updating and dissemination of touring information. Gathering and updating virtually ceased three years ago, when CTC neglected to replace Mark Waters upon his retirement. Having now made this role is redundant, CTC's National Office appears to have left it to someone else - Sustrans perhaps - to do for cycling what the Ramblers Association does for walking.

Furthermore, our elected Councillors have been sidelined from CTC business. National Office has cancellied meetings with our Councillors, citing a lack of agenda items; and only the three cabinet members (out of 18 Councillors) are being advised of and thus are in a position to object to these strategic CTC changes.

When the CTC changed to a charity the CTC Council gave assurances that:
"Therefore no change in benefits to members is planned as a result of these proposals."

Extra support for local groups may be welcome (depending upon what form that support may take), but the overwhelming majority of cyclists prefer to tour alone or with family and/or informal groups of friends. These independent members need the support of a national touring organisation even more than those who are also part of a local group. But we are organised, so it's up to us to challenge these changes: changes that clearly result in CTC no longer serving its membership as it assured us it would. Contact your Councillor and the CTC Executive. They need to know how much you value good technical advice and support for touring, be that local leisure rides, all-day or weekend trips, or longer holidays and adventures not only in the UK but also abroad.

SAVE OUR CTC !!!
Yma o Hyd

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby TonyR » 6 Jan 2015, 5:48pm

meic wrote:Somebody is agitated enough to have taken action. So for those of you that are not on the mailing list (or if your group doesnt forward it) this is what has been sent out.


Of course it should be noted that it comes from fellow ride leaders of CJ's DA so not exactly a spontaneous independent action. But with the CTC HQ being in their patch you might have thought they would have wandered round and had a word first.

http://westsurreyctc.co.uk/ride-groups/ride-leaders/

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14203
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby mjr » 6 Jan 2015, 8:58pm

Having now made this role is redundant, CTC's National Office appears to have left it to someone else - Sustrans perhaps - to do for cycling what the Ramblers Association does for walking.

I understand the suggestion of Sustrans in this context even less than BC. Its technical advice and its support for touring cyclists in general has never been quite as good as CTC (even the current reduced CTC) and if you're concerned about the charitable status and democratic member control, then I think Sustrans has been a charity for longer and has only invited members. It does what it does fairly well most of the time, but it doesn't seem like a solution to any of the problems facing CTC.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
Chris Jeggo
Posts: 150
Joined: 3 Jul 2010, 9:44am
Location: Woking

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby Chris Jeggo » 7 Jan 2015, 6:58pm

Re meic's recent post, posting.php?mode=reply&f=45&t=92645#pr854272, here is a copy of a further email from Angela Byrne, quoting Paul Tuohy's response to her and David Wood's email.

=========================================================

Hi Chris,

This is what Paul did in response to the missive we sent to the Group Secretaries.
- asked to NOT forward it to members
- said our statement was inaccurate - without any specifics at all.
- used the official contact emails for these secretaries, but did not allow them to see those email addresses
(some of the email addresses David could not find, and others bounced)

So he is trying to stop any member from communicating with other members, OR any secretaries from communicating with each other.

I will forward to the Councillors too

Angela

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Tuohy <paul.tuohy@CTC.ORG.UK>
To: Paul Tuohy <paul.tuohy@CTC.ORG.UK>
Sent: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 18:39
Subject: FW: Message from CTC Chief Executive

Dear CTC Group Secretaries,

Following David Woods round robin email we feel it necessary to clarify the position of the CTC as much of Mr Woods email to you is factually incorrect, therefore please do not send it on to members. Matt Mallinder shared the message below identifying the background to recent changes in his team to increase our support for Groups, we will be doing the same to the full membership in Cycle magazine. To reiterate;

With leisure and recreational cycling increasing significantly in the UK, the first change that we've made is to create a team dedicated to supporting CTC member groups, campaign groups and other cycling groups. Julie will be joined by Mark Slater and Ben Rowley.

In order to help us all reach out to these new cyclists the team, over the next few months will be talking with you and be putting together a programme to support and facilitate the diversity of CTC events, rides and member activities. We plan to provide you with additional marketing support and training and we'll also be looking at specific IT tools to help you maximize your own promotion and social media reach to these new cyclists.

Another change is the creation of a new Communications Manager and marketing support which allows us to publicize the wider achievements of CTC's groups, through all of our comms channels- Cycle, website and social media.

To be able to make these changes we've had to look at the limited resources that CTC has and how we can best support our 67,000 members. With every greater access to online information and with demand significantly decreasing, we've decided to cease a dedicated technical/info helpline.

Members will continue to enjoy Technical and Touring features, Q&As and reviews in Cycle magazine, on CTC website and by dipping into the breadth of CTC members' experience via the CTC forum.

We will also looking at how we can increase participation in CTC's various Touring competitions and 'reasons to cycle' such as the British Cycle Quest. The IT team are already making improvements with individual pages dedicated to your group on the CTC website so visitors can easily find out about you and a search box for group rides and events directly on the homepage.

It is unfortunate that a small minority of people feel unable to support these changes but with so few people actually using technical and touring telephone support we felt justified in redirecting our limited resources for greater member benefits outlined above. These are tough economic times and we need to make choices about how we use our resources to support all our members but clearly we can't keep everyone content.

Best wishes

Paul Tuohy

Paul Tuohy
Chief Executive
CTC, the national cycling charity

=========================================================

So " ... much of Mr Woods email to you is factually incorrect ...". That is the sort of blanket denial sent out by a totalitarian government, but surely the CTC Chief Executive is not like that. Surely you can do better, Mr Paul Tuohy. Please correct the inaccuracies for us.

And, as we know from Mark Waters' post, if we didn't know already, the technical and touring services were far more than manning a helpline. CTC top management say the web pages supply the information people need in this wonderful information age. Not if there is no-one to keep those pages up to date.

Thirdly, how many member groups have asked for these wonderful new appointments to support them? I would really like to know.

=========================================================
Cross-posted from the facebook group page, since not all of you are on facebook.

jb
Posts: 885
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 12:17pm
Location: Clitheroe

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby jb » 7 Jan 2015, 8:50pm

These are tough economic times and we need to make choices about how we use our resources to support all our members but clearly we can't keep everyone content.


Eh? members pay their fees irrespective of the economic situation, & membership is up isn't it?
Cheers
J Bro

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby beardy » 7 Jan 2015, 8:53pm

There is another hand that feeds them and they are rather more worried about that than us.

jb
Posts: 885
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 12:17pm
Location: Clitheroe

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby jb » 7 Jan 2015, 9:28pm

Oh the charity watsit thing, I thought that was supposed to be a bonus.
Cheers

J Bro

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14203
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby mjr » 7 Jan 2015, 9:38pm

Those three bullet points at the top do seem like classic "Executive Capture" of a membership organisation. Divide and conquer. I hope I'm wrong and the Council will assert member control before it's too late... and that Paul Tuohy is capable enough to work in a member-controlled organisation instead of trying to wrestle control away.

http://bobcannell.blogspot.co.uk/2010/0 ... ondon.html has the usually-great Bob Cannell talking about executive capture, but I can't actually find a clear description online. It seems to be used in the USA for both 1. executive headhunting; and 2. when Congress and Senate is controlled by the same party as the Presidency -- which makes searching rather complicated.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby beardy » 7 Jan 2015, 9:43pm

jb wrote:Oh the charity watsit thing, I thought that was supposed to be a bonus.


I was thinking more about government grants etc. I have copied this from somewhere back in the thread.


http://www.ctc.org.uk/about-ctc/policie ... d-accounts says CTC is funded by £1.8m of membership fees, £1.1m of grants, £1.1m of sales and services, £1.1m of holidays, £174k of donation and investment income and £36k of other income. Of those grants, some are from private and civil organisations including Asda and Big Lottery. There's an ongoing fund from Cycling England who aren't in a position to run anything any more!

There are a few projects funded by the public sector such as Belfast Strategic Partnership, Transport for Greater Manchester, Lancashire County Council and so on, but I don't see much sign that CTC is really "run by the Government" or "funded from Whitehall".


So it appears we are the biggest source of income but we are a myriad of small people not united in a common cause. The government may offer less funding but they are much more able to dictate terms or, in tough economic times, make cuts.

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby TonyR » 7 Jan 2015, 10:11pm

beardy wrote:The government may offer less funding but they are much more able to dictate terms or, in tough economic times, make cuts.


You are clearly unfamiliar with and misunderstand the way Government funding works. Government funds specific programmes and the resources needed to deliver them, nothing more, nothing less.

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Postby beardy » 7 Jan 2015, 11:12pm

Yes, I am unfamiliar in some ways.

However I know enough to know that they have requirements that they can set and can choose who and whether they fund. Though they may rename things to make it less obvious.

For example they can give you tax concessions (which is money) if you become a charity (which has conditions that must be met).