It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Discussion of the re-branding of CTC as Cycling UK.
JohnW
Posts: 6249
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby JohnW » 20 Nov 2014, 6:46pm

mjr wrote:
JohnW wrote:..........Yes but viewtopic.php?f=48&t=78803&p=839011#p839011 or in other words, high cost and low benefit to me............. I do take an interest in CTC.


then why not pay your subs like the rest of us do?

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13785
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby gaz » 20 Nov 2014, 8:14pm

Rest of "us"?

Much of the CTC website and all of the CTC Forum is freely available to members and non-members alike, many of "us" aren't paying any subs to participate or simply take an interest.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

JohnW
Posts: 6249
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby JohnW » 20 Nov 2014, 8:44pm

gaz wrote:Rest of "us"?

Much of the CTC website and all of the CTC Forum is freely available to members and non-members alike, many of "us" aren't paying any subs to participate or simply take an interest.


Fair enough Gaz - when I said "us", I meant, of course, "us members".

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13785
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby gaz » 20 Nov 2014, 8:47pm

That makes the question easy to answer, mjr doesn't pay his subs like "us members" because he's not a member :lol: .
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

JohnW
Posts: 6249
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby JohnW » 20 Nov 2014, 8:58pm

He still uses the facility that we (members) pay for though - and please don't misinterpret that, I know that's partly what the forum is for, but a high level of expressed 'interest' and a frequency of making comments surely justifies a suggestion that a person would be as well to join and contribute.

thirdcrank
Posts: 28684
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby thirdcrank » 20 Nov 2014, 10:54pm

The wonderful thing about charities is that the altruism of the members extends the benefits to everybody. :D You don't have to be a paid-up supporter of the RNLI to be rescued by one of its lifeboats. :D

(That altruism is augmented by a generous tax treatment for which we all pay.)

JohnW
Posts: 6249
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby JohnW » 20 Nov 2014, 11:03pm

thirdcrank wrote:The wonderful thing about charities is that the altruism of the members extends the benefits to everybody. :D You don't have to be a paid-up supporter of the RNLI to be rescued by one of its lifeboats. :D

(That altruism is augmented by a generous tax treatment for which we all pay.)


Well that's not the point tc. The rescued wasn't involved in any decision making process.........they didn't discuss the colour of the lifeboat. The decisions were made before the lifeboat did it's job.

I don't expect others to agree with me, but I think what I think.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14213
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby mjr » 21 Nov 2014, 10:57am

JohnW wrote:He still uses the facility that we (members) pay for though - and please don't misinterpret that, I know that's partly what the forum is for, but a high level of expressed 'interest' and a frequency of making comments surely justifies a suggestion that a person would be as well to join and contribute.

Well, if you want me to pay, then propose cutting the subscription to something closer to other groups and opening the governance up. (I'm uncomfortable with flat rate subscriptions while we have such inequality, but I wouldn't block it solely on that reason.) I'm naturally sympathetic to CTC but those are what's meant I've not joined.

Did you know that CTC members (at least according to their signature blocks) post to Cyclenation-Forum too? I've no way of checking whether they are members of a Cyclenation group as well as CTC (I don't have access to other local area membership lists) and it doesn't really matter: this is part of collaboration; and more importantly, most of these matters concern all cyclists regardless of which part of the cycling alliance we pay our money to.
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
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15036
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby Si » 21 Nov 2014, 11:24am

We don't have a flat rate do we? Least ways we didn't last time I paid subs which was years ago. Back then it was something like a choice between standard, retired, unwaged, professional, affiliate, and possibly a student too.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14213
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby mjr » 21 Nov 2014, 12:44pm

Si wrote:We don't have a flat rate do we? Least ways we didn't last time I paid subs which was years ago. Back then it was something like a choice between standard, retired, unwaged, professional, affiliate, and possibly a student too.

http://www.ctc.org.uk/join-membership for the full list but affiliate's not a real membership (no vote and I don't know what other restrictions), so let's strike that out straight away. Like most people, I'm not retired, young or a student. I work but in a co-op and I'm not sure whether that counts as unwaged (which I think is what I asked a few years ago without reply, which I alluded to earlier) but really, there are riders employed on zero-hours and casual contracts and the like around here who are far worse off than me who have to pay the £44 rate. There's no "from each according to their ability/belief" range of rates like BC or CN offer. The only discount ordinary riders can get for sure is if they pay 5 years up front - discounts only for the richest? Are the membership rates fair?

At best, I feel CTC membership rates are not helping to solve a demographic problem: the 2013 survey reckoned over 80% of CTC members are over 40, 32% retired, 28% professional occupations - not who I see riding and not like me.
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
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15036
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby Si » 21 Nov 2014, 1:13pm

So, in essence, it's not a flat rate then. Just not as varied as some, but still more varied than others. But it's a bit of a tightrope - if we were to be the subject of means tested membership rates then there'd be a general outcry and the extra admin costs would drive membership rates up. Whereas, as you state there are many more people who do not conform to traditional earnings patterns these days.....how do make sure that they are not alienated? And where is the line drawn?

As for affiliate memberships - let's not discount them as they offer one of the best ways into the CTC if handled correctly.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14213
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby mjr » 21 Nov 2014, 2:46pm

Si wrote:So, in essence, it's not a flat rate then. Just not as varied as some, but still more varied than others. But it's a bit of a tightrope - if we were to be the subject of means tested membership rates then there'd be a general outcry and the extra admin costs would drive membership rates up. Whereas, as you state there are many more people who do not conform to traditional earnings patterns these days.....how do make sure that they are not alienated? And where is the line drawn?

To any given person, CTC is flat rate, unless they'll pay four years in one go. It's possibly worse than flat, showing discounts for richer people to minimum-wage and zero-hours workers. What comparable is CTC more varied than? I think I could pay anything between £20 and £69 to join BC or between £0 and £38 to join a CN group. None of those are means tested - it's purely my choice. Please don't use unattainable perfection to argue against improvement.

Is CTC still acting like a club where the current disproportionately old and professional members offer discounts to people like themselves and perpetuate the problem? Despite the Diversity Policy, is it seen as a problem? And actually, how does linking membership fee to age not result in "less favourable treatment" for 18-65s, especially the lower end of that range? Finally, it's still OK for CTC to discriminate against working class riders, isn't it? :twisted:
As for affiliate memberships - let's not discount them as they offer one of the best ways into the CTC if handled correctly.

Affiliates aren't full members. I think even calling it membership is a bit misleading.
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
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15036
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby Si » 21 Nov 2014, 3:14pm

Affiliates aren't full members - no one said that they were, yet they benefit from many of the advantages that full members do. And given that the majority of members do not bother voting at CTC elections/AGM/etc under normal circumstances then the major disadvantage of being an affiliate would not apply to most.

To any given person, CTC is flat rate

No it is not, as already explained. This particular given person has, I believe, paid five different rates since joining.

Your comparison with BC: yes you can pay different rates, but you also get different benefits, thus just as you dismiss CTC Affiliate membership should we also dismiss BC Bronze, Silver & Ride and state that BC has a flat rate of £69? Although I have found a BC Family rate (which I believe the CTC also does) I've not managed to find a BC zero-hour contract worker rate - if you could point me to it I'd be interested in seeing how they administer it.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14213
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby mjr » 21 Nov 2014, 3:57pm

Si wrote:Affiliates aren't full members - no one said that they were, yet they benefit from many of the advantages that full members do. And given that the majority of members do not bother voting at CTC elections/AGM/etc under normal circumstances then the major disadvantage of being an affiliate would not apply to most.

How many members vote? That seems like a pretty big problem. Anyway, the reason a few people above seemed to be suggesting I should join is to work to change things and it'd be harder to do that as a non-voter.
Si wrote:
To any given person, CTC is flat rate

No it is not, as already explained. This particular given person has, I believe, paid five different rates since joining.

OK, add "at any given time". As I explained, most people don't have much choice.
Si wrote:Your comparison with BC: yes you can pay different rates, but you also get different benefits, thus just as you dismiss CTC Affiliate membership should we also dismiss BC Bronze, Silver & Ride and state that BC has a flat rate of £69? Although I have found a BC Family rate (which I believe the CTC also does) I've not managed to find a BC zero-hour contract worker rate - if you could point me to it I'd be interested in seeing how they administer it.

I'd not dismiss them because BC Bronze, Silver & Ride are all real (voting) memberships, aren't they? To me, all the frippery like insurance, dead tree magazines and discount/offer schemes are largely irrelevant because I get those other ways already. Zero-hours workers joining BC could pay £20, or less to join some CN groups, but CTC would ask for £44 - doesn't anyone else think that's a mistake and hurting 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
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15036
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Postby Si » 21 Nov 2014, 4:09pm

But BC doesn't have a scheme for zero hour workers - what you are talking about is just the base race benefit scheme. Just as with the CTC you can pay whatever it is for the full monty or around £16 for affiliate (reduced benefits). I think that what you are really talking about is a choice of different benefit packages open to all, not different rates depending upon the member's financial situation.

If on zero-hours I'd rather have access to the full package for a reduced sum than just a cut down package. But to do this I would need to demonstrate my income as some people on zero-hour contracts earn much more than others in full time employment. This is even more so for those of us who are self employed.

You seem to value voting as a major benefit which is fair enough, but I'm betting that the majority would not.

However, if we are discussing different packages with different benefits for different fees then I would be quite happy to see that. But remember, a number of people have said that they'd happily forego the magazine for a reduction in fees, but the problem is that the magazine is, AIUI, virtually self financing so the reduction would be minimal.