# CTC Membership Services - and the run-up to the 2010 AGM



## dellzeqq (5 Oct 2009)

http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=29847

I joined the CTC National Council in Jannuary 2006, knowing that the membership system was poor and not improving. I anticipated that my fellow councillors would know that this was the case, and that the National Office would be working to fix it. In both respects I was mistaken.

A majority of National Councillors thought the subject of the membership service unworthy of their attention. National Office were clueless and in denial. In pretty short order Karen Sutton and I were receiving 20 e-mails and calls a week from disgruntled members and organisers. I continued to complain, and, in April 2007 proposed a motion to the AGM describing the service as unsatisfactory. 

The Chair, having little option, accepted the motion and supported it. A report was promised, a report that would be presented to the 2008 AGM. 

An interim report was commissioned and presented to Council. We hoped for the best, and awaited the final report.The 2008 Annual Report presented to the 2009 AGM included the following text

_We commissioned a full, independent service review in 2008, seeking the views of a wide range of members, CTC staff and CTC contractors. The review concluded that outsourcing of membership services was the right approach for CTC, but identified some procedural problems that had an adverse impact on the services provided to members. All the issues have now been addressed with changes made where necessary. We will continue to monitor the service levels achieved closely._

There is no mention in the Annual Report of the final investigation, and it transpired that, as of April 2009 this had yet to be commissioned. When it was commissioned and presented to tne current council I asked for a copy. My request was denied - my three year stint on Council ended in December 2008. I and some councillors contested the matter - we pointed out that the report had been promised to the membership. We didn't prevail. The more astute of you will surmise that the final report had turned out to be not exactly thrillingly good.

And you'd be right. I have a copy. It's eye-wateringly bad. Scarily, bad given that it's as easy to lose members than it is to gain them. You can have a copy too if you care to e-mail me on simon_legg@yahoo.co.uk . Obviously I can only send it to members.

Two things are clear. The Annual Report to the AGM is misleading. There is, as I have said, no mention of the final report and the assertion that service levels would be monitored closely simply cannot be supported by the facts. As for 'all the issues have now been addressed'......read it and weep.

I think the Chair has a duty to apologise formally to the membership. I think the Management Committee has to take the task in hand in a serious way. And I think the National Office has to realise that the first priority of this Club must be the membership.

Ever-fancier proposals for converting the Club in to a Charity are now being drawn up. This is a vain exercise. Before setting off on a journey to the stratosphere it would be as well to check that the kitchen cupboard is well stocked. Those councillors who have preferred to drift with the Chair have got to wake up. If we can't get the basics right, we're sunk.

The hiding of the report goes to the heart of the relationship between the core and the membership. It's about transparency. The CTC doesn't have enough of it. I don't believe that Councillors have the full story on the business dealings that the CTC has entered in to, and I fear that a very great deal of the members funds is being used to bail out those that go wrong. I'm pleased to say that there are Councillors applying skills, both professional and inquisitorial (and far greater than my own) in pursuit of the truth. I'm not sure they have entirely succeeded, and, while I wish them well I suspect that in the event of a Council-sponsored resolution for Charity status going on the agenda of the 2010 AGM it is unlikely in the extreme that members will receive sufficient information to enable them to make up their minds with confidence. It's time for Councillors to tell the Chair that they cannot support a resolution until they are satisfied that the membership is in full posession of the facts.


----------



## Twenty Inch (5 Oct 2009)

I'd love to be a member, but after the pain of my last attempt, I just don't feel I'm ready to try again.

However, 1 of the 2 membership cards I was eventually sent shows my membership as expiring in Dec 2009, so if you still want to send me the report, PM me.


----------



## Bollo (5 Oct 2009)

I confess to being intrigued by all this intrigue. I do hope receipt of a copy won't end up with me being pursued by hired goons in helicopters or worse, Chris Juden.

I've got very clear ideas about why I'm a CTC member and how my money should be spent, so if it's being pissed up against a bike stand I'll happily cancel the DD. It's a great pity, because even an cynic like myself can feel that times are a changin' and cyclists need an effective voice. A bout of clubbish twattery and petty ego wafting serves no-one.

Contact details on their way tomorrow, Simon.


----------



## Bollo (5 Oct 2009)

Jesus! Just looked at that CTC forum link. You can hear the eggshells!


----------



## yello (6 Oct 2009)

From the CTC forum



"Jimmy The Hand" said:


> Mindful of Si request not to make personal comments I will just say that I have not read such an egotistical letter for some time.



Bite your lip del!! (or should that be bind your hand??)


----------



## dellzeqq (6 Oct 2009)

Jimmy the Hand is entitled to his view. He's just not very bright


----------



## Hilldodger (6 Oct 2009)

I was asked to become the archivist and, at my own expense, went to a number of meetings to discuss how to use the huge resource the CTC archive is.

That was over a year ago and despite numerous emails and messages, I haven't had a single reply to my questions. So I've let my membership go and am doing other things, now.


----------



## Origamist (6 Oct 2009)

Hilldodger said:


> I was asked to become the archivist and, at my own expense, went to a number of meetings to discuss how to use the huge resource the CTC archive is.



Now that's a job I might apply for...


----------



## Hilldodger (6 Oct 2009)

You don't get paid and there's no money

But go ahead - hope you have more luck than I did.


----------



## Origamist (6 Oct 2009)

Hilldodger said:


> You don't get paid and there's no money
> 
> But go ahead - hope you have more luck than I did.



If I could find the time, I'd do it _pro bono..._


----------



## Bollo (6 Oct 2009)

yello said:


> From the CTC forum
> 
> 
> 
> Bite your lip del!! (or should that be bind your hand??)



The CTC thread's warming up! A shiny gold sovereign says that it disappears like an '80s Chilean trade unionist by this time tomorrow.

Comments on their way, Simon.


----------



## Twenty Inch (7 Oct 2009)

Cheers Simon.

This has spurred me to register on the CTC board and I shall be making comments about my own unhappy experience.

TI


----------



## Cab (7 Oct 2009)

Another ex-ctc member here, but to my shame I was dissuaded from continuing my membership by a single lack of success in renewing.

We need a strong cycling campaign body in the UK. Is the CTC going to be it?


----------



## Origamist (7 Oct 2009)

Cab said:


> We need a strong cycling campaign body in the UK. Is the CTC going to be it?



The alternatives are not very appealing though. That said, I hope the inner-workings of the CTC become more transparent and it is held properly accountable to its members.


----------



## John the Monkey (7 Oct 2009)

Cab said:


> We need a strong cycling campaign body in the UK. Is the CTC going to be it?


Better than the alternatives I can think of.


----------



## peanut (7 Oct 2009)

I'm far from sure that this is the proper time and place to discuss CTC issues .

I would be interested to participate in a discussion about CTC membership and policy etc but in the proper place on the CTC forum


I don't know how many CC members are also CTC members but I would imagine it is less than 10%

In view of the fact that CC members are not allowed to view the contents of the CTC report (rightly so) I think this discussion should be moved to CTC forum. 

The CC membership can hardly be expected to debate this issue when they are not permitted to view the contents of the subject of the post .

If this thread and discussion must exclude the majority of CC members from the full facts then this forum is clearly not the appropriate place to discuss the issue and I propose that it should be removed .


----------



## John the Monkey (7 Oct 2009)

Peanut, I think the problem maybe that the discussion can't take place on the CTC forum.

Lots of things interest some members of CC and not others - I can't participate knowledgably in the Fixie/singlespeed section because I own neither. (Don't have a recumbent, or know anything about them, which is probably even more exclusive).

As a CC member and CTC member, I'm interested in this though, fwiw.


----------



## Cab (7 Oct 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> Better than the alternatives I can think of.



I dunno. A campaign organisation that doesn't get things right may well be worse than no organisation at all.


----------



## Cab (7 Oct 2009)

peanut said:


> If this thread and discussion must exclude the majority of CC members from the full facts then this forum is clearly not the appropriate place to discuss the issue and I propose that it should be removed .



Peanut, we discuss an amazing range of things on this forum. We don't delete threads on the Tory party proposing cutting speed cameras because most Tories can't post here. We don't delete threads on whether or not the BBC should invite a BNP spokesperson onto question time because most employees of the BBC haven't heard of this site 

Its fair to discuss how the CTC act and whether or not their conduct is good or bad for the furtherance of cycling in the UK. That isn't a direct challenge to the CTC, it isn't an implicit criticism of the CTC, its an exchange of views and exploration of an issue that is (I think) important.


----------



## BigSteev (7 Oct 2009)

I think this is a suitable place for the discussion seeing as there are many ex-CTC members who would be unable to contribute on the CTC forum with information regarding why they are now ex-members.
As someone who joined for the first time this year I've found it useful if only to discover that I should have a membership card. No sign of one of those though.


----------



## Cab (7 Oct 2009)

Its a shame that so many of us have been put off the CTC by relatively little things; membership cards not turning up, difficulty renewing membership, that kind of thing.


----------



## peanut (7 Oct 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> Peanut, I think the problem maybe that the discussion can't take place on the CTC forum.
> 
> Lots of things interest some members of CC and not others - I can't participate knowledgably in the Fixie/singlespeed section because I own neither. (Don't have a recumbent, or know anything about them, which is probably even more exclusive).
> 
> As a CC member and CTC member, I'm interested in this though, fwiw.



yes I agree there are lots of subjects that I also am also interested in on CC but perhaps lack the knowledge to discuss and contribute usefully.

The point here is that no CC member, that isn't also a CTC member, is permitted to join this discussion on an equal footing, with the full facts available because the subject of the discussion, ( the report) isn't available to read.

More importantly in my opinion this subject is explicitly related to CTC Policy and Proceedure and membership issues and as such the CC forums is in my view not an appropriate place to discuss these type of CTC issues.I'm sure that CTC membership small print probably prohibits puplic discussion of these sort of issues outside of CTC

I ask myself if this is a legitimate discussion why is it *not *taking place on the CTC forums?


----------



## Origamist (7 Oct 2009)

peanut said:


> yes I agree there are lots of subjects that I also am also interested in on CC but perhaps lack the knowledge to discuss and contribute usefully.
> 
> The point here is that no CC member, that isn't also a CTC member, is permitted to join this discussion on an equal footing, with the full facts available because the subject of the discussion, ( the report) isn't available to read.



Peanut, you do not need to be a CTC member to join the CTC forum.


----------



## Cab (7 Oct 2009)

Origamist said:


> Peanut, you do not need to be a CTC member to join the CTC forum.



Nor is this a site that charges for membership or which is hard to join. You just... join. Practically there is no exclusion of CTC members from here.


----------



## Twenty Inch (7 Oct 2009)

peanut said:


> yes I agree there are lots of subjects that I also am also interested in on CC but perhaps lack the knowledge to discuss and contribute usefully.
> 
> The point here is that no CC member, that isn't also a CTC member, is permitted to join this discussion on an equal footing, with *the full facts available because the subject of the discussion*, ( the report) isn't available to read.
> 
> ...



Not having the full facts about a subject doesn't stop the vast majority of members posting on this forum, on all sorts of subjects from immigration to fixing brakes.

Look, it's in the part of the Forum called "Campaigning and Public Policy" and it's about a campaign to make the public membership of a campaigning organisation more effective so that they can influence public policy better. If you're not happy with it, don't read the thread.


----------



## dellzeqq (7 Oct 2009)

Peanut, you're missing the following. I run the FNRttC in part to persuade people to join the CTC - and I've been reasonably successful, although when they tell me that their membership card has the wrong date on it I do get a little disheartened. So I can start this thread wherever I choose, and, since I'm well aware that a good number of CTC members use this forum and don't use the CTC forum, I chose to start it here.

And I did start it on the CTC forum as well, where, as you will see, it remains. And is unlikely to get closed down in a hurry because..........I'm a mod there.

Now I've had to refrain from sending the report to a CC member because he/she wasn't a CTC member. That doesn't mean that they're unable to contribute on the basis of my first post.

No doubt, anybody who receives the report and reckons that I've misunderstood it will be quick to say so.


----------



## johnsie (7 Oct 2009)

Worries me too, as my £58 renewal is due in the next three weeks. I, like earlier posts, joined for insurance, mag, and discount at the CTC shop, which was with Evans.

Now the shop's with Wiggle and with a redesigned CTC web site, anyone, regardless of whether or not they are logged in as a CTC member can follow the links to the discounted Wiggle range. When I queried this with CTC, I was fobbed off with a less than satisfactory answer which I didn't have the energy or inclination to follow up. 

Good job the 15% at Cotswold still works!

Having re-read this it looks like all I'm in CTC for is the financal gain - not really so, I'd be very upset if I'm not contributing some funding to cycle training and increasing the number of cyclists on the road.


----------



## dellzeqq (7 Oct 2009)

in fairness, Johnsie, I reckon I get most if not all of my £58 back in the form of bike shop discounts. And none of the above means that I don't think the £140,000 the CTC spends on campaigning every year is not money well spent. It's an excellent investment.

But when the Club has given the Charity its principal asset, then lent the Charity £370,000 on top of that, I'm concerned that a charity that is bigger in turnover terms than the Club could, with a few misconceived contracts, wipe out a considerable prorportion of the members's subs. If, for example, the CTC did £120,000 worth of work for the DfT and didn't get paid for it, the members could find themselves picking up the bill.

At the moment there is a distinction between the two, and those of you who read the annual accounts will have seen that the Charity and the Club are accounted for seperately. It's therefore possible to see that the one has lent the other £370,000. When two become one (youtube linky req'd) there will be no telling - especially since transparency is at a premium


----------



## Bollo (7 Oct 2009)

I've had a look at the document in question and I'll be emailling Simon with my detailed opinions when I get the chance (possibly not today soz).

But to summarise, I think it demonstrates a certain naivety on the part of the CTC when entering into commercial contracts with third parties. Extend this naivety and lack of accountability across a range of CTC projects and I think there could be potential to bugger the finances quick-sharp.


----------



## peanut (7 Oct 2009)

dellzeqq said:


> And I did start it on the CTC forum as well, where, as you will see, it remains. And is unlikely to get closed down in a hurry because..........I'm a mod there.



I'm sure it is there and doubtless I would view the post were it not for a lifetime ban,for which I believe you were in part responsible for


----------



## peanut (7 Oct 2009)

dellzeqq said:


> Peanut, you're missing the following. I run the FNRttC in part to persuade people to join the CTC - and I've been reasonably successful, although when they tell me that their membership card has the wrong date on it I do get a little disheartened.
> And I did start it on the CTC forum as well, where, as you will see, it remains. And is unlikely to get closed down in a hurry because..........I'm a mod there.



not trying to knock the very commendable work you do in promoting CTC and trying to bring about much needed improvements. You are one of the few people I know that is prepared to spend a lot of your own time for the benefit of other cyclists and I respect and applaud that whole-heartedly.

I am one of the many couch potatoes that sit and criticise others that are prepared to get of their arse and do something constructive. 

Thank god for the Dell's of this world .


----------



## StuartG (7 Oct 2009)

I'm troubled that the CTC appears to have a problem with transparency. I didn't know about the membership until I considered joining (as a result of a FNRttC). I can only read the report of why I might find it problematic joining after the navigating a problematic membership process?

No thank you. I don't do the secrecy thing. 

What possible justification could there be? Paying the membership gets you insurance, discounts and the right to vote. it shouldn't be some sort of Masonic access to secrets of a cycling organisation (or not unless you are on Council).

Thinking harder I am genuinely confused about whether the CTC is primarily a Cycling Club (in competition with smaller friendlier? clubs) or a campaigning organisation representing all cyclists (or at least the touring variety). Or, as Jimmy would say - an insurance/travel business.

Looks like I may remain a member of my local CC and when i want to ride further afield rely on the hope of reciprocity between clubs which is the way many other sports work.


----------



## theclaud (7 Oct 2009)

StuartG said:


> I'm troubled that the CTC appears to have a problem with transparency. I didn't know about the membership until I considered joining (as a result of a FNRttC). I can only read the report of why I might find it problematic joining after the navigating a problematic membership process?
> 
> No thank you. I don't do the secrecy thing.
> 
> ...



I sympathise, but the reasons to join still stand, and are pretty well summed up in what, though it pains me slightly to use the phrase, you might call their mission statement. No other organisation fulfils this function on this scale, and it is something we can only do collectively:

"CTC has been protecting and promoting the rights of cyclists since 1878. [...]. By joining CTC you are supporting UK cycling and giving us a louder voice when campaigning locally and nationally on the issues that are important to you"

It is troubling when membership problems don't appear to be taken seriously or remedied, and troubling for individuals if a membership problem leads to problems accessing a particular benefit. However, these problems are more likely to be dealt with effectively by members insisting on accountability. And membership is the bottom line there, I'm afraid - you can't hold CTC accountable if you don't join. It's not like a utility company - we're not just customers and you can't just switch to some other indistinguishable provider whenever there's a problem. Oh, and I've just checked, and my direct debit seems to be working!


----------



## theclaud (7 Oct 2009)

By the way, is Peanut's last post for real? Has he been on the sauce?


----------



## peanut (7 Oct 2009)

theclaud said:


> By the way, is Peanut's last post for real? Has he been on the sauce?



I forgot my meds this morning.  normal service will be resumed tomorrow


----------



## Origamist (7 Oct 2009)

theclaud said:


> By the way, is Peanut's last post for real? Has he been on the sauce?



It's characterised by self-awareness, perspicacity and a real sense of fraternal admiration. All things considered, I reckon 3 bottles of Buckfast have cleansed the doors of perception...


----------



## Origamist (7 Oct 2009)

peanut said:


> I forgot my meds this morning.  normal service will be resumed tomorrow


----------



## Bollo (7 Oct 2009)

Nurse Ratched and an Aldous Huxley reference in almost one go. Origamist, you are a scamp.


----------



## peanut (7 Oct 2009)

Origamist said:


> It's characterised by self-awareness, perspicacity and a real sense of fraternal admiration. All things considered, I reckon 3 bottles of Buckfast have cleansed the doors of perception...




if I had a nurse like that i think I'd feel a lot better sooner


----------



## Bollo (7 Oct 2009)

peanut said:


> if I had a nurse like that i think I'd feel a lot better sooner



Watch what she does to Jack Nicholson in 'One flew over the cuckoo's nest' and you may want to change your mind.


----------



## Bollo (7 Oct 2009)

Back On Topic, I think the CTC fulfils its core mandate well, particularly on the campaigning front. But there appears to be a growing tendency to diversify the service that it offers. All well and good, as long as this doesn't have a negative impact on the core stuff.

The are clearly members of the CTC council who have ambitions for the CTC that, depending on your viewpoint, are either farsighted, a betrayal of traditional values or wildly misguided and overreaching. Its a worrying sign that these members don't seem too keen to have their plans subjected to scrutiny, or that they're uninterested in the mundane details of service delivery once all the sexy strategy has been written.

Ultimately, the skim from the Wiggle shop isn't going to keep the CTC going so they still need the subs to see their plans through, misguided or not.


----------



## dellzeqq (9 Oct 2009)

Bollo said:


> Ultimately, the skim from the Wiggle shop isn't going to keep the CTC going so they still need the subs to see their plans through, misguided or not.


I've always taken the view that if you take on a DfT contract then it should wash its face. That's stage 1. If it's a loser then there is absolutely no justification for it. 

We've got a nice little earner in Holidays and Tours, but some of the government work is sporting red ink.

And, yes, management time has been diverted from running the club.


----------



## Bodger (12 Oct 2009)

TBH, like birth, death and taxes I've always accepted the CTC's inability to organise a piss up in a membership services dept. as an inalienable fact of life. Indeed, it is a testament to the CTC that they are still able to achieve so much with such a shaky foundation (I'm sure that I have aired my views on the CTC and it's relationship with the DAs before).

However, after reading the document in question and the surrounding discussions across three forums, I'm starting to become very afeared of , and feel very uninformed about, the move to charity status. Perhaps someone who understands it better than I, and is in a position to give a critical overview, might like to outline the whys and wherefors for us? If such a person exists?


----------



## Bodger (13 Oct 2009)

No? I guess everyone is as mystified by it as me then :-(


----------



## dellzeqq (13 Oct 2009)

Bodger - sorry, I've been unwell.

It's about the vision that people have for the CTC. There's a vogue for using the voluntary sector to deliver local and national government services. The idea is that the voluntary bodies offer willingness and flexibility, together with experience and knowledge. The Council is predominantly of the view that the CTC can fulfill a role and make money while doing so.

The problem with this is that the CTC is not capitalising on the willingness, flexibility, experience and knowledge of the membership (which is considerable) because the contracts they are winning have no connection with the volunteer base, and, in any case, the support for volunteers is close to zero. Charities for the elderly, hospices and political parties look upon retired people (let's face it, the bulk of the volunteer base) as vigourous assets and sweat them. We send them forms to fill in. To add insult to injury not all of these contracts are making money. Some are big losers.

Stick to the core activities, and build organically off those. There's nothing wrong with the CTC being a membership organisation running campaigns for cyclists. Nothing at all. Getting involved in a disparate collection of business activities pretty much on an ad-hoc basis simply puts the members funds at risk. And, at the last AGM we learned that the club had not only given the Charity our principal asset, but loaned it £370,000 as well. Once the Charity swallows the Club we will be well and truly stuffed.

If people have a yen to do all this government contracting then good luck to them - they can go off and do it somewhere else.


----------



## untitled (14 Oct 2009)

I only hope the Member Groups (former DAs) who have funds in the CTC deposit account make sure they withdraw their dosh before the Club is swallowed by the Charity. The funds of the Club will be at risk. Especially if the grants dry up but the schemes continue. Our Group has no money with CTC but lots of others do. Of course it is not inevitable that we lose the Club to the Charity. We CAN vote against it!


----------



## Bodger (14 Oct 2009)

Thanks dell that makes it worryingly clearer. 

I think that we use our own mattress, erm, I mean bank account for storing our riches.


----------

