No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

[beardy]

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.

On reflection your tone is so condescending here that I have put you on foe.

[TonyR]

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).

Incorrect. Charity status is the responsibility of the Charities Commission which is accountable to Parliament not the Government.

And tax breaks are not Government funding anyway - or no more than the working population of this country is considered Government funded because of the tax break on the first £10k of income.

[Chris Jeggo]

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/

David Woods and Angela Byrne are not registered on the forum and have asked me to post the following:

TonyR is correct. David and Angela are with CJ's DA, but please note the following as David did follow correct protocol:

1) David had repeatedly tried to get a face to face meeting with Paul Tuohy
- phoning more than once but only getting as far as his PA who said Paul refused the meeting.
- and then also emailing Paul directly, more than once, and never getting a reply from Paul.

2) David and Angela did not hear the news of the redundancies at CTC from or via Chris Juden.
That reached them via other means entirely.

I can confirm that the news of the redundancies at CTC reached West Surrey CTC members not via Chris or Helen Juden.

Save our CTC!

[Ron]

It is bad form to enter into a thread without reading all that has gone before, but I just want to record my shock and disappointment on hearing of the loss to the membership of our Technical Officer. Chris Juden provided me with helpful and valuable advice after much searching in vain elsewhere,(I should have asked him first!) also it was always good to read his informative articles in Cycle magazine. A sad loss indeed to the CTC membership.
The fact that I gleaned the information regarding loss of the post from what is for me a rather obscure part of the CTC Forum reflects rather badly on the management of the organisation.

[pbfenton]

I share concerns and frustrations regarding the 'redundancy' of Chris J and down-scaling of the Touring and Technical Information team. I am not a regular browser of the forum but feel so strongly that this is a major backward step for CTC National Office to take that others might respond and add pressure to review the matter.


The T &TI team and Chris in particular are an extremely valuable and I would say pivotal service to the membership. The experience is enormous, detailed and freely given to members who read the magazine and search on line for answers to sometimes complex technical questions about equipment choice and compatibility and for planning tours at all levels of cycling activity. It is my most valued sections of the magazine and the only reason I occasionally keep back copies.

This experience, unbiased and commercially without prejudice, is extremely rare to new cyclists seeking answers to problems or wishing to extend their knowledge and ability to self service - both equipment and tours. Bike shops are a poor substitute. I can think of only two experienced retailers who come close - Spa and Madgets. Most either lack the frontline staff, or back room experience, or time to answer queries comprehensively. Normally they are quite happy to resolve problems by simply selling upgrades and are rarely interested in meeting the needs of the traditional leisure cycle tourist. Magazines are similarly no match for Chris's pages in our magazine. Most are orientated towards cycle sport rather than leisure equipment.

Whilst much information can be made available on line, I suspect this is not what a large proportion of our membership want or wish for. Like it or not we are an increasingly elderly membership where IT skills and web browsing are more challenging and less favoured.

We should not turn over our strengths in the chase for streamlining and efficiency. There are several examples around us of inefficiencies created where specialist expertise is sacrificed in the interest of cost cutting - Local Governement and the NHS in particular! I am baffled by where the idea that the Touring and Technical Information Service is not a main strength of our organisation has come from. It seems obvious to me that the main strengths the CTC has to offer the cycling curious world are;
An extraordinary depth of experience of the best choice of equipment for a whole range of cycling activity;
An extraordinary resource of touring information both home and world wide;.
continuity of companionship when we become 'fed up of the keeping up' in the sportier clubs;.
a nationwide network of similar minded leisure cycling enthusiasts, and organised group rides free to all.

Although the benefits of Insurance and legal aid, and a strong political campaigning team are very laudable and valuable I doubt many hearts of prospective members are won over on those aspects alone. Our political influence seems to me to be waining post 2012 as Cycle Britain is increasing in influence and voice, advising and providing for cycling opportunity. As a national organisation we should still press our influence, but this should not be at the cost of cutting services very valued by our membership such as the Technical and Touring Information team.

[Cyclome]

Having relegated ‘Cyclists’ Touring Club’ and the winged wheel in favour of ‘CTC the national cycling charity’, how long before another expensive rebranding exercise brings us to ‘Cyclists - Britain’s cycling charity’ and we go the way of ‘Ramblers – Britain’s walking charity’.

For its active group members CTC sometimes means café to café , but for some charity executives’ careers it could just mean ‘charity to charity’, so touring and technical advice for members (and non-members) has little benefit when money can be spent on raising the profile of the charity through marketing and communications instead.

[cyclome2]

Two of us have been allocated places at the meeting tomorrow but can not now go. Sue Cherry is not around to reallocate the places. If someone would like to take our places, please contact me at hundchen123 at gmail.com and I'll let you know the names they were booked under.

[CJ]

Even though I expected it to be a painfully awkward experience, I was going to take up that offer and attend today's meeting.

Yesterday however, Carol McKinley told us that David Cox has forbidden observer substitution. It would appear that he (or she) is absolutely determined to avoid my presence. So I did not go to London today. I had no wish to make a wasted journey.

This is how the people who now run this charity treat someone who's devoted the best part of their life to serving CTC - and though I say so myself, done a pretty good job of it.

[exlaser]

Am a little late to the party with all this. I been a member since the early nineties and joined ctc instead of British cycling because of the technical info/route planning and direct support that the ctc provided.

I will not be renewing by my membership when it comes up for renewal. I will join bc instead for the insurance and get my technical info/ route planning from a combination of bike radar and sustrans.

This is all very sad.

[johnmac]

I wonder if BC could be persuaded to offer a touring section to accommodate those of us who feel disenfranchised by CTC? At the moment, the insurance is all that attracts me to BC, though that may be enough on its own.

[Psamathe]

I wonder if BC could be persuaded to offer a touring section to accommodate those of us who feel disenfranchised by CTC? At the moment, the insurance is all that attracts me to BC, though that may be enough on its own.

I would be interested. (I've already left the CTC - a few days ago and I'm now getting their "reminders". I've still to get in an appropriate mood to send them an e-mail saying why).

Ian

[cyclome2]

Some one from BC in charge of "recreational cycling" is watching the Facebook discussion.

If you want cheap third party cover, you can join a CTC affiliated club and then purchase individual CTC membership for £16 pa which gives you third party cover, legal advice, the right to ride with any CTC Member Group and a regular email. The only thing you do not get is the mag (in which CJ's articles were the only thing worth reading) and the ability to lead rides and hold committee positions in a CTC Member Group. For example, you could join http://www.fortypluscc.co.uk for £10 (£18 for two years) and then buy the affiliated CTC membership through them. (Despite the name membership of the Forty Plus CC is open to anyone over 18). Other clubs are available. The risk is, if too many people do this, there will be no-one left to lead CTC Member Group rides, except for those of us who bought life membership.

[Psamathe]

Some one from BC in charge of "recreational cycling" is watching the Facebook discussion.

If you want cheap third party cover, you can join a CTC affiliated club and then purchase individual CTC membership for £16 pa which gives you third party cover, legal advice ...

http://www.ctc.org.uk/membership/affiliate-membership-for-cycling-clubs-and-groups-of-all-types-and-sizes says "Note only full CTC members have automatic access to legal claims advice.". But I don't know what the difference between "automatic" and non-automatic would be.

Ian

[Graham]

Some one from BC in charge of "recreational cycling" is watching the Facebook discussion.

If you want cheap third party cover, you can join a CTC affiliated club and then purchase individual CTC membership for £16 pa which gives you third party cover, legal advice ...

http://www.ctc.org.uk/membership/affiliate-membership-for-cycling-clubs-and-groups-of-all-types-and-sizes says "Note only full CTC members have automatic access to legal claims advice.". But I don't know what the difference between "automatic" and non-automatic would be.

Ian

If not automatic, it is probably discretionary. I'm guessing.

[thirdcrank]

the mag (in which CJ's articles were the only thing worth reading)

+1 Although there was a time when members' letters were the first bit I turned to, before reading CJ.

PS
Psamathe: CTC members benefit from a "collective conditional fee agreement" which means that a member pays nothing "up front" for the no win, no fee service from Slater and Gordon which is otherwise open to anybody. ( I have researched this in more detail before and I've forgotten the detail of what I found because the rules for funding cases in this way have changed. Somebody like gaz will hopefully deal with this lacuna - legal jargon for gap - in my memory. )

PPS

While I've been unsuccessfully searching for that, I've been reminded of a couple of other things. Third part insurance, as included in full CTC membership, can be helpful when making a claim if the other party counter-claims. The Cyclists' Defence Fund can help with some legal problems, such as a rider being prosecuted, but it's a charity and so available to everybody, irrespective of CTC membership