Cycling UK Forum

Mick F wrote:PS:
Just renewed.

I think they need your money.

Still got to have all those management review meetings, rebranding progress meetings, PR consultant meetings, rebranding materials (stationary, web site, stickers, etc.) and that all costs a lot.

And all on top of having to pay CJ redundancy ...

They need your cash.

For me, I will be sending my money to an organisation who will spend it on campaigning and improving things for cyclists and cycling.

Ian

Mick F wrote:...
PS:
Just renewed.

Good call IMO. Don't forget to cast your vote at the AGM.

Psamathe wrote:...
Still got to have all those management review meetings, rebranding progress meetings, PR consultant meetings, rebranding materials (stationary, web site, stickers, etc.) and that all costs a lot.

And all on top of having to pay CJ redundancy ...

They need your cash.

For me, I will be sending my money to an organisation who will spend it on campaigning and improving things for cyclists and cycling.
...

When you find this organisation that you consider to be well managed because it doesn't have meetings to review it's progress, has never changed it's brand, doesn't consider it's public relations, never updates it's materials (stationary, website, stickers, etc.) or does so without spending a single pound and still successfully campaigns and improves things for cyclists and cycling please let us know who it is.

In the meantime could you remind me how long you've already been looking for such an organisation since you left CTC.

gaz wrote:

Psamathe wrote:...
Still got to have all those management review meetings, rebranding progress meetings, PR consultant meetings, rebranding materials (stationary, web site, stickers, etc.) and that all costs a lot.

And all on top of having to pay CJ redundancy ...

They need your cash.

For me, I will be sending my money to an organisation who will spend it on campaigning and improving things for cyclists and cycling.
...

When you find this organisation that you consider to be well managed because it doesn't have meetings to review it's progress, has never changed it's brand, doesn't consider it's public relations, never updates it's materials (stationary, website, stickers, etc.) or does so without spending a single pound and still successfully campaigns and improves things for cyclists and cycling please let us know who it is.

In the meantime could you remind me how long you've already been looking for such an organisation since you left CTC.

No organisation is perfect. But CUK has shown surprising incompetence in handling several things (since the new CEO took over). Not difficult to find an organisation that is better run.

I have always joined organisations for activities and sports I participate in (difficult to justify why and not really the point). And I have never come across one that is such a disaster as CUK. And after leaving the CTC, I've not yet got round to joining an alternative cycling one, partially because the CTC/CUK has made me rather suspicious/cynical/etc. of cycling organisations - which is a real shame and maybe illustrated the damage that a badly run organisation can do. And I am outspoken about it and as a principle, like with people who complain (faulty goods, poor service, etc.) organisations should welcome such people as for ever outspoken person there are many many others who feel the same but just "go elsewhere". (We always used to love people who complained as it made us aware of our shortcomings and gave us the opportunity to put things right. And you can bet the person who complains is far from the only person to feel that way/have that experience)

Ian

gaz wrote:Don't forget to cast your vote at the AGM.

I won't/can't attend.
How do I cast a vote?

Don't tell me to send off a form enclosed in Cycle, because the first thing I do when I receive it through the post, is to empty all the loose bumf onto the hearth to light the fire with.

Can I vote on line?

Yes you can vote on-line.

You will need your personal security code on your voting form included in the April/May edition of Cycle which you should have received last week.

Oops.

Alternatively you can call our membership team during office hours for help with electronic voting and to retrieve your personal security code, just call us on 01483 238 301.

More here: http://www.cyclinguk.org/agm

Thanks Gaz.

FWIW, having sounded off at great length about this topic, I agree with John, Mick and Gaz that - whatever the result of the poll may be (and I can really only see it going one way) - we need to continue to support the CTC in what it does. This is because what it does is more important than what it is called. The vocal criticism has been justified but there comes a time when pragmatism needs to take over. We cannot remain perpetually in opposition.

Bicycler wrote:FWIW, having sounded off at great length about this topic, I agree with John, Mick and Gaz that - whatever the result of the poll may be (and I can really only see it going one way) - we need to continue to support the CTC in what it does. This is because what it does is more important than what it is called. The vocal criticism has been justified but there comes a time when pragmatism needs to take over. We cannot remain perpetually in opposition.

Even I can see your point, but IMHO the new modal of operation is flawed.
The failure / inability of CTC HQ to implement policy agree by council that concerning the development of the ctc right to ride network is typical of how the senior staff at CTC HQ views the council, an irrelevant.
The idea was developing our own councillors from the grassroots.

It permitted the development of individuals on areas of policy review, communication and marketing that that may have led to their election to ctc council.

The new modal will either mean over time the new council will become London/South East England centric or the councillors will have little or no contact with members.
CTC HQ say there will be alternative means of communication with members, I assume just like the YHA or Sustrans, it will be of little value.
In the short term the only solution is to vote against motion 5 (five).
Or the medium term CTC will fail. What do I mean by fail?
Continual reduction in membership
More member groups will convert to affiliate groups
Age profile will continual even older
Reduction in income
The need to make compromised with HMG/NGO in order to receive contract /grants
Lack of income from contracts/grants
Loss of influence with the government/local authorities
Reduction in public awareness of the CUK
Reduction in volunteers at local level
Fail to attract any new blood on to council that is significantly better than the existing council
CEO become even more forceful towards council
CTC Council will become a laughing stock

Bicycler wrote:FWIW, having sounded off at great length about this topic, I agree with John, Mick and Gaz that - whatever the result of the poll may be (and I can really only see it going one way) - we need to continue to support the CTC in what it does. This is because what it does is more important than what it is called. The vocal criticism has been justified but there comes a time when pragmatism needs to take over. We cannot remain perpetually in opposition.

I shall be watching very closely as to what it does do in the future. I will rejoin if I see any worth.
At the moment there are no member benefits for me, no local group rides, and I've asked three quite specific questions of HO. I've had replies but every reply was a unsatisfactory answer. Full of a great big picture but no evidence.
Not good enough for me.

Philip Benstead wrote:

Bicycler wrote:FWIW, having sounded off at great length about this topic, I agree with John, Mick and Gaz that - whatever the result of the poll may be (and I can really only see it going one way) - we need to continue to support the CTC in what it does. This is because what it does is more important than what it is called. The vocal criticism has been justified but there comes a time when pragmatism needs to take over. We cannot remain perpetually in opposition.

Even I can see your point, but IMHO the new modal of operation is flawed.
...

I agree. It may be important but not putting things right will mean the organisation will achieve little. Get them to sort things out now and the organisation could achieve a lot. So to stop identifying their failures will just allow things to continue in a flawed manner and cyclists and cycling will be the ones who suffer. And if seeing a short term drop in membership/income helps get them to look at their operation then that is a good thing - membership would recover once things are put right. Similarly, getting feedback from "negative gits" might just point out that at least something needs to be addressed.

And it actually would not take much to turn things round. There are some good people at National Office. Trouble is that those running things don't seem able to identify the problem (maybe because of where it lies). Given the lack of motivation to sort out things I am hopeful that the "natural way of things" from proven history will continue to operate which will give the organisation an opportunity (provided those with the responsibility don't mess-up again).

Ian

Well.........it could be that there is one person who is very important indeed (ask them, they'll tell you how important) who just has to have their own way. Don't ask me if this is certainly so, and don't ask me to identify an individual if it is, but there is a pattern here.

JohnW wrote:Well.........it could be that there is one person who is very important indeed (ask them, they'll tell you how important) who just has to have their own way. Don't ask me if this is certainly so, and don't ask me to identify an individual if it is, but there is a pattern here.

who is the most important in the ctc?

Bicycler wrote:....there comes a time when pragmatism needs to take over.....

Does not considering rejoining until Paul Tuohy has left the CEO post count as pragmatic?
At least it avoids rewarding his actions.
(It would mean missing the right to vote at AGM but I suppose its to late for that now anyway)

Philip Benstead wrote:

JohnW wrote:Well.........it could be that there is one person who is very important indeed (ask them, they'll tell you how important) who just has to have their own way. Don't ask me if this is certainly so, and don't ask me to identify an individual if it is, but there is a pattern here.

who is the most important in the ctc?

In my opinion, and speaking purely ethically, all of us.