A Challenging Future

[wkb21]

I would like to list the interesting challenges (I nearly called them problems, but I don’t want to be accused of negativity) faced by our committee under our re-affirmed state of affiliation:

1. The challenge of fragmented calendar coverage if you’re interested in races through out the UK.
2. The UKA Rules Appendix E Graded Officials challenge – needing a solution acceptable to race organisers which doesn’t lead to loss of most of our organisers.
3. The challenge of UKA “unattached” levies (race tax) coming to English races soon.
4. The challenge of “governing” body per-capita club members’ registration fees being used to help the clubs and FRA rather than helping the Olympics or other UKA priorities that have nothing to do with fell racing.
5. The challenge of UKA risk assessments compared to our well established best practice of using the FRA Safety Requirements.
6. The challenge faced by a race organiser in country A organising a race in country B (e.g. Yetholm) – the organiser cannot insure through his home “governing” body, nor through the “foreign” governing body without major administrative hassle and extra cost.
7. The challenge whereby a race on non-English soil cannot be insured through registration and inclusion in the FRA Calendar.
8. The challenge of solving all these challenges without alienating the other athletic disciplines because they see our required solution being sops to “awkward fell runners”.

I wish the committee all the best. I presume they are well on with the solutions. A progress report before the AGM would be very helpful to all the negativists.

Keith Burns

[Wheeze]

Too early! Let the dust settle on the ballot and let the committee meet again to catch their breath!
I dunno, you scots, ye cannae keep yer pooder dry!!

[brett]

Why not join the Committee?

[Chris K]

To me it looks like :-
1,6 & 7 are the same point - yes ideally we'd all probably like to have just one comprehensive calendar.
2 - was sorted last year - doesn't apply to fell running.
3 & 4 - we could only challenge if and when they are proposed.
5 - the FRA rejected RA many years ago this is possibly why UKA adopted our safety rules. I think we also advise them of any changes.
Other disciplines - Race Walking, Ultra, Trail Running, Road Running and Cross Country are with us on the Endurance Forum. There that must be a bit of progress, sorry its not a report, miracles take a bit longer!

[Yorkshire Thug]

While it’s quite easy to have some sympathy for Keith – after all he started the ball rolling when he came down with his SHR chums to the FRA AGM and tried to derail the agenda – and received a great deal of support from what I hear.

But, as Chris has readily demonstrated, if he wants a progress report, he probably needs only to ask the Chairman, the Secretary, or whoever, directly.

I bet he hasn’t – but, if he had, I’m sure that he’d have got a straight and prompt answer.

In the same way that, instead of tabling his motion at the AGM correctly (which he could have done – after all, he’s been railing on about this for years) he left it until it was too late for the agenda, when it would have no chance of succeeding – oh, but it would create the maximum fuss.

Why the need for all this publicity, Keith? Is it just an ego trip? I feel it must be, because, in almost every instance, the alternative would have been more successful, and would not have stirred up so much aggro among the FRA membership.

Well, I’m all for debate. In fact, I’m all for self-determination, so long as the sport sticks together coherently.

But I’m damned if I’m going to sit back and watch cross-border FRA-bashing by SHR upstarts who are simply playing at politics as a kind of replacement for the competitive running from which they retired long ago.

As an FRA member, I would like to know how much this latest ego trip of Keith’s has cost. I’d like the full financial cost, and an indication of the number man hours which my elected representatives on the FRA committee (all volunteers) have had to contribute ... while Keith has sat back, with his feet up, doing absolutely nothing for the cause to which he says he is so committed.

I think all FRA members have a right to know what this little jolly of Keith’s has cost.

And I also think that they need to know what the committee are going to do to prevent this kind of stupidity from happening again and again and again.

[wkb21]

We have had the ballot. I was surprised how one sided it was, BUT surely that shows it's time to move on and forward as a group. I agree there has been so much time and effort and money spent on this ballot and the ones trying to overturn the committee's decision have FAILED LOST ETC .
Surely we don't need another ballot to resolve the issues 1 to 8 exactly what are saying Keith?

Just seen this and it deserves a response.

1. As an ordinary member, I am unapologetic for using my right to disagree with the committee.

2. I am saying that we are entitled to a progress report on the issues that were a source of concern to me and a far from negligible number of other members.

3. My concerns are growing rather than fading.

I look forward to further progress reports.

[Max]

All.
BEWARE, remember that we in Scotland have had this compulsory membership scheme forced upon us for many years now & we speak with a bit more experience of governing bodies trying to force things their way.
For example at this year's Scottish Athletics Ltd. A.G.M. on 11th. August once again the Board of Management are proposing a vote entitling individual members the right to vote at future AGM's. This will dilute the clubs' power & give the B. of M. proxies to use as they will, as not everyone attends AGMs.
I am all for no taxation without representation but this is what can happen when money rules, professional administrators take over sport & apathy takes root at club level.

Regards,

Max.

[Yorkshire Thug]

Management are proposing a vote entitling individual members the right to vote at future AGM's.

If they are indeed diluting club power in favour of individuals, then I’m all for it.

Club votes were always reminiscent of the old 20th century union block votes – usually not in the best interests of individuals at all. More to do with power-hungry individuals. It’s basically bad democracy, and best left behind as a historical experiment that went wrong.

I was particularly impressed by the recent FRA vote which solicited the views of members only – that’s the way to go. The FRA representing and acting on behalf of runners and not institutions.

Lets hope this practice continues.

[Max]

Club votes were always reminiscent of the old 20th century union block votes – usually not in the best interests of individuals at all. More to do with power-hungry individuals. It’s basically bad democracy, and best left behind as a historical experiment that went wrong.
I was particularly impressed by the recent FRA vote which solicited the views of members only – that’s the way to go. The FRA representing and acting on behalf of runners and not institutions.
Lets hope this practice continues.

That is exactly why my club is proposing an amendment to the effect that all club members should have individual voting rights. You really can't have a rule for individual Scottish Athletic Members & not for club members who also may be Scottish Athletic Members.

Regards,

Max.

[Yorkshire Thug]

That is exactly why my club is proposing an amendment to the effect that all club members should have individual voting rights. You really can't have a rule for individual Scottish Athletic Members & not for club members who also may be Scottish Athletic Members.

Regards,

Max.

Don’t club members who are also Scottish Athletic Members get a vote anyway?