Page 4 of 7
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 8:02am
by thirdcrank
As I've posted before on wistful threads about disappearing youth hostels, it's a long, long time since I stayed in one, so I cannot grumble. Interested by the last couple of posts, I did a bit of a google. I see that the definite article has gone there too.
Is this some sort of equality issue ( it reduces the embarrassment of people who might otherwise refer to ze CTC or ze YHA?) or is it a requirement of the Charity Commission to be trendy?
Excuse my ignorance but is (the) YHA entirely a charity?
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 9:57am
by gaz
.
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 10:40am
by thirdcrank
gaz wrote:... AFAIK the YHA was established in 1930 as a charity and has always been a charity. ...
If so, the situation is not comparable with the changes proposed for the CTC. I imagine that one issue facing the YHA's trustees is how far they can move from the original aim ...
young people of limited means and all that ... eg to having some hostels which are merely tourist accommodation, without the Charity Commissioners or HMRC suggesting that a part of the operation does not qualify for tax exemption. What were once called 'school journey parties' the initials SJP being dreaded by some hostellers, are certainly charitable, competing in the B&B market may not be. Especially if any competitor paying their taxes complains.
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 11:58am
by gaz
.
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 12:18pm
by Regulator
The YHA is very similar to CTC, albeit with a slightly different timeline.
It was established in 1930 as a 'unincorporated association' membership organisation. In 1933 a charitable arm was established. In the 1980's direct management of the hostels was removed from the volunteer regional committees and a 'professional management structure' was put in place. In 2005, the membership company's aims were amended to make them 'charitable' and to unify the structure.
There's some interesting commentary on the effects of the changes on the
YHA's forums. Unfortunately, the discussions on the earlier changes are no longer available but were very similar to the discussions now going on within CTC.
The brief history provided on
Wikipedia also gives some insight into the problems faced by YHA members when the organisation changed its focus.
A comment on the UK Trail web-site is particularly prescient:
Unfortunately, even these hostels are being rapidly closed, as the YHA realises that it is more businesslike to close them and invest the money in flagship city hostels catering for all types of visitor. The YHA and SYHA are still registered charities and have 'members', but nowadays business considerations override the idealism of the traditionalists. Being a member now means nothing other than a reduction in the overnight price; the YHAs are run in business mode, and members' expressions of interest are answered in a businesslike manner that takes no account of the members' enthusiasms.
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 1:46pm
by gaz
.
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 2:11pm
by Regulator
gaz wrote:I've done a bit more homework.
The Youth Hostels Association (England and Wales) was begun in 1930 as an unincorporated charitable association. The Youth Hostels Association (England and Wales) registered with the
Charities Commission in 1963.
Youth Hostels Trust of England and Wales Ltd was
incorporated in 1933 and changed it's name to YHA (England & Wales) Ltd in 1993.
Youth Hostels Trust of England and Wales Ltd registered with the
Charities Commission in 1963. The current Charities Commission and it's system of registration was only set up in 1961.
The charitable association was established first, the charitable company shortly thereafter. Both were registered with the Charity Commission on 13 August 1963. The merger of the two organisations was completed in 2006.
In 2005 there was also discussion on alternative ways forward including becoming a commercial company or a membership club. Some details can be found
here.
Following these discussions and consultations the YHA chose to be a charity serving the public.
Just a point of clarification, gaz. When the Youth Hostels Association (England and Wales) was begun in 1930 it was not a charity as such - it was a membership organisation, an unicorporated association*, which happened to have a charitable objective - in the same way that the CTC has always had 'charitable' objectives but has not been a charity.
Although the Charity Commission came into existence in 1963, charities existed before then but the YHA (E&W) wasn't one of them (as it didn't actually meet the Elizabeth Statute charitable heads until their interpretation was widened slightly in the 1950s and 60s) - the YHA Trust (E&W) however was.
The YHA was one of the examples used on the ICSA Certificate in Charity Management course.
* I note that I called it the wrong structure in my previous post so I'll amend it.
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 2:57pm
by gaz
.
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 3:06pm
by robgul
We're deviating here .... Youth Hostels (i.e. the YHA ones) are really not much more than Travelodges nowadays - albeit that hostels in most cases are even more spartan (and sometimes more expensive) than Travelodges
I can recall being involved with the YHA "movement" in the mid-1960s and as they say, it's deja vu all over again with the apparently amateur management of both CTC & YHA
Rob
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 3:37pm
by Regulator
robgul wrote:We're deviating here .... Youth Hostels (i.e. the YHA ones) are really not much more than Travelodges nowadays - albeit that hostels in most cases are even more spartan (and sometimes more expensive) than Travelodges
I can recall being involved with the YHA "movement" in the mid-1960s and as they say, it's deja vu all over again with the apparently amateur management of both CTC & YHA
Rob
The issue that really put the nail in the coffin of the YHA wasn't amateur management - but the introduction of 'professional' management in the 1980s. It was these 'professionals' that moved YHA away from a strong membership-based organisation to a mass appeal, 'up market' organisation where members feel neglected and their interests are ignored...
...Sound familiar?
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 4:41pm
by AndyK
gaz wrote: I'm quite happy with the benefits resulting from my YHA membership and my English Heritage membership, both are charities but I certainly didn't join either to be philanthropic.
Minor aside: English Heritage isn't a charity. It's an "Executive Non-departmental Public Body sponsored by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS)". That's right, thousands of us are voluntarily paying good money every year to be non-voting members of a Quango. You've got to admire the cheek of the genius who came up with that dodge. Coming soon: English Military, the recreational arm of the MOD. For £50 a year, you get free entry to the war of your choice...
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 7:18pm
by Karen Sutton
swansonj wrote:gaz wrote: I'm quite happy with the benefits resulting from my YHA membership and my English Heritage membership, both are charities but I certainly didn't join either to be philanthropic.
I think the YHA example, as has been said before elswhere on this MB, is helpful in illustrating some of the issues in play over the CTC. The YHA has become more upmarket, more professional, more centralised. It cares less about appealing to its traditional membership and puts its efforts into appealing to a new market who are not members but who are believed to be more commercially attractive. It makes decisions which are commercially driven and seem to many traditional supporters alien to what they think its spirit is supposed to be.
Faced with higher prices; compulsory paying for bedding; compulsory paying for breakfast in more and more hostels; the spread of en suite; smaller rooms all the time; members kitchens progressively squeezed out in favour of hostel catering; hostels without cycle sheds or proper drying rooms; individual hostellers banned in favour of school parties; and above all, the decimation of the network, indeed the abandonment of any pretence of a "network" and the concentration on larger hostels in tourist honey-pot areas and the closure of simple hostel after simple hostel: if you feel that is all good commercial sense that has produced a higher quality service, well, you'll probably be in favour of the CTC proposals. But I'll bet it's many of the same people who feel YHA has abandoned its mission and abandoned them who will be the people who have reservations about CTC.
John
Indeed. When I was first elected to CTC Council there was a Council Officer who had previously held a high position with the YHA. It was clear that he was one of the instigators of the CTC Governance Review which sought to reduce the number of elected CTC Councillors. Happily that was voted out. It was easy to see the connection when I read about YHA reducing the number of elected Members on their Board ("In order to improve democracy???")
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 23 Apr 2010, 9:14pm
by gaz
.
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 27 Apr 2010, 2:32pm
by meic
Now the good weather is arriving and the big cycling events are approaching, which means that we will all be coming face to face at these events. I see many of the posters on this forum are running some or part of the events and i know many of the others will be attending these events too.
Just for the record I would like to point out that I am not in either the YES nor NO camps and wish to carry on going out on the rides HAPPILY with everyone just as I did in previous years.
At times like this I question the wisdom of posting on the forum at all.
I now understand the silence from my area committee member, the best choice in the long run.
I think in two years time, regardless of the result of the vote, we will be wondering what all the fuss was about.
Re: After the Vote
Posted: 27 Apr 2010, 2:49pm
by Si
meic wrote:I think in two years time, regardless of the result of the vote, we will be wondering what all the fuss was about.
I really hope so. The problem is that we'll neverknow what the alternative decision would have brought, whether better or worse.
meic wrote:At times like this I question the wisdom of posting on the forum at all.
I think that so much has been said by so many that only a few comments or commenters will be remembered once the dust has settled.