MSA - Giving marshals more voice

[Piglet]

Originally Posted by Startline Ed

Fortunately, I am not too worried by this because we as marshals have Chris & George in our corner doing their utmost to promote our interests.

You should be worried. Chris, George and the BMMC can talk all they like, but if the MSA won't listen then what can be achieved? Who will listen?

What concerns me most is that I know that Chris would only have made the post that he did after much consideration, he knows the effect it will have and he knows what it says about the state of the sport that we all love. That really does worry me.

Can someone (Chris? George?) confirm exactly who is sitting on the sub-committee or is that still to be decided?

[The STIG]

(The STIG goes all dull for a moment...)

Who is Barrie Williams anyway?

And Ed, like Piglet says, you should be worried, because by the sounds of it Chris, for all his good intentions - isn't on the panel which liases with the MSA...

[Chris Hobson]

The constitution of the sub-group is still a mystery to me - I have been given no details as to the membership of either the ViM subgroup or the marshals sub-group. I can also only assume I keep my seat on the Race Committee alongside Barrie Williams.

As soon as I find out I will let everyone know.

Regards

Chris Hobson
National Chairman BMMC

[JimW]

Originally Posted by The STIG

Who is Barrie Williams anyway?

President of the BMMC, long standing, rather entertaining racing driver and great supporter of marshals. (That's why we invited him to be our President.)

http://www.brdc.co.uk/brdcarchive.cfm/flag/3/picid/320

His driving style causes new marshals to duck or reach for a yellow flag until you realise it's just his exuberant (but effective) way of driving. Never dull!

All the same, not able to be as inward of day-to-day issues as Chris or George.

Jim

[Stephen Green]

It is a huge shame that, after all the work that has been done by Chris and George, it comes to this sorry state of affairs. I know more than most how much time and effort they both give to the club, it puts my and others efforts in the shade. We all thought that the MSA were listening to what we had to say, when in fact it would seem there is a little 'empire building' going on behind the scenes.

While I applaud the efforts of VIM, you have to question the rather large cost compared to results. Money spend on VIM could have been better put to use by giving the BMMC a budget and targets to work to. At the very least they would have had free labour rather than employing people to do what could be done equally well by others. I have to stress here that the comments I am making are as an individual and not wearing my National PRO hat.

Maybe it's time we all took the time to write to the MSA expressing our sorrow that the work of two dedicated people has been rejected. Could it be because they are prepared to stand and be counted rather than cow tail to those in power?

I feel more now than ever the BMMC needs your/my support. We ARE making headway in other areas (now speaking with my National PRO hat on). We are by far the largest marshals club and are independant of any racing club. That said, I would hate you to think that BARC and BRSCC amongst others do not support our efforts and help where possible. I think we need to look to Chris for direction now and give him all the backing we can muster.

It is a sad day indeed....

[The STIG]

Thanks for the expanation Jim.

The really annoying thing is that without the MSA, we can do pretty much nothing - otherwise I would love to say "stuff it" and go my seperate way...

I'm going off the topic again aren't I...?

[chezza]

There is life after the MSA.

Spedeworth, RDC, INCARACE...just because they do things differently...

Its a shame that the MSA has a hold over these things, they can charge what they like for permits and things.

Isn't there something that can be done under the rules of competition, about companies having more than a certain share of the market?!

[b1ackcr0w]

Steve, Chris,

I think I speak for a large sector of us when I say that while the MSA's position is frustrating, it is nice to be able see the BMMC working on our behalf.

My perception is that the presentation Chris & George gave to the MSA restored a lot of faith within the rank and file, that at least the BMMC were saying the right things to the right people. And I think that if the MSA's response is found lacking, then the BMMC have every right to openly criticise.

Nobody wants to see meetings disrupted because of marshalling issues. I only hope the MSA stop giving it the long enough to realise that the BMMC are just about their only hope of stopping that happening.

[numbersix]

Originally Posted by Woolley

....
Maybe we should all just take a year out and see what happens, other than at those places that really show they appreciate us...

I think, slowly but surely, that we're doing that already. My volunteering form for next year is seriously reduced to days helping helping out where I get a hint of appreciation. So it's bye-bye TOCA for a start.

[MacGWC]

Originally Posted by Mark Mitchell

Wouldn't we be better off having Chris or George speaking for us?

Apologies for being so late in on this one to support what Chris Hobson has said. I am in "the Colonies" at present and temporarily (I hope!) out of direct touch with my UK e-mail service.

Mark, you may well ask why Chris or George cannot speak for marshals on MSC! It is a question Chris and I have asked ourselves repeatedly over recent months as the duplicity surrounding marshals’ representation on Motor Sports council has unfolded. You may have to ask Colin Hilton that very same question.

Colin, it seems, does not consider Chris or me as “appropriate” for membership of Motor Sports Council. Why? We do not know.

Away from marshalling, Chris is a successful business consultant with exemplary presentation skills. As our representative on MSC he would put the marshals’ case well and probably improve immeasurably the level of presentation within MSC. He has been an active marshal for more than 35 years, was National Training Officer at the time our T&G Scheme was really developing and is currently a very active MSA Steward at a very wide variety of motor sport events.

Running alongside 30+ years as Director and Treasurer of the Marshals’ Club I have been a reasonably successful businessman. I was co-founder and Managing Director of a plastics manufacturing company which by the time we sold it in 1995 had annual sales of over £20M, employed 400 people and was consistently profitable. I was senior Board member and elected President of the British Plastics Federation (£17Bn UK turnover, 270,000 employees) and appointed by Barclays and NatWest banks to the Boards of several companies following the sale of my business. I am just completing the sale of my shares in another business I set up in 1995, to the other Directors and staff who make up that business. As Treasurer I have battled with the MSA over the years to be properly compensated for marshals’ training expenses and fought to ensure that Officials’ Personal Accident cover remains reasonably current.

What more do we have to be to be thought “appropriate”?

The idea of representation at this level for marshals came from a slide we used at our presentation to MSC in February 2006. This showed that by virtue of the £2M in free labour marshals provide to the sport each season, marshals represent probably the single biggest “sponsor” of motor sport in the UK. Yet, they were not represented at Board level within the MSA.

Keith Douglas, as a founder-Director of the MSA Board and, of course, principal founder of the BMRMC, represented us well at this level until his retirement three or four years ago and subsequent sad death last year. John Felix was a member of MSC while he was the elected Chairman of the Marshals’ Club.

It did not seem inappropriate, therefore, to nominate Chris Hobson, current BMMC Chairman, to be marshals’ representative on MSC, with myself as deputy and appointed Officials’ Representative on the Association of British Motor Racing Marshals’ Club. The ABMRC is an MSA-inspired body to look at the future of Club motor racing in the UK over the next few years. Yet, the ABMRC was not informed nor consulted on the selection procedure for a marshals’ representative on MSC. This appears to have taken place behind closed doors, almost three months ago, but no one was told the outcome until Chris and I raised the issue afresh two weeks ago.

So, yes, you might well ask why Chris or George could not represent marshals on the MSC! Every other faction within the sport is represented by a member of that section, why cannot the marshals be represented by a marshal?

Again, I refer you to Colin Hilton at the MSA for an answer. We do not have one!

Thanks to all those who have offered support. Jim W was involved in preparation of our paper on alternative marshalling methods and knows just how much effort all this has taken over the past few years – to no avail, it seems, as far as certain folks at the MSA are concerned. This must change.

Figures recently released show recorded race marshalling days down from a peak of 50/55,000 per annum to 22,000 last year and possibly less this year. With the same number if not more racing days per season, is it any wonder that the banks are thinly manned on occasion. Some two-thirds to three-quarters of those days are still done by Marshals’ Club members, another reason it would be fitting for the marshals’ representative on MSC to be the currently elected Chairman of the Marshals’ Club.

Vote for that – you know it makes sense!!

George

PS: Where in Heaven’s name did the MSA find 13,000 marshals and volunteer officials? Have they been taking names off the headstones again? I suspect the true figure is rather less than half that number.

[Piglet]

Blimey. This doesn't happen very often but I have to say that I'm speechless.

George, Chris, I can't imagine any two people more appropriate to represent Marshals at the MSA. I'd like to thank you for the work that you put in, I can't imagine how bad the situation must be for you to be posting statements such as these.

If one of you has the time could you outline the structures in place at the MSA with regard to the MSC, its committees and the new Marshals Working Group? Or is there somewhere online that oulines the set up of Committees? I struggle to work out what is what?

Keep up the good work please, we need you!

[Sheila M]

Chris, George, I am horrified at the stance taken by the MSA over this. In my personal opinion, you two are more than "appropriate" to put forward the marshals cause anywhere.

Might I suggest that as the Regional AGMs are now approaching that the members contact their Regional Secretaries and ask that a discussion take part in Any Other Business regarding this appalling state of affairs.

I'm not sure when any of the other Regions are holding their AGMs but Midlands is at 6.30 pm on Saturday 11 November at Mallory Park.

Rather than hi-jack this thread, I shall start a new one where the regions can put dates of the AGMs for people to make note.

[Woolley]

OK, now I'm really worried about where the MSA is heading, and I'd like to add to the others above: Chris, George - thank you for your tireless efforts, you have my total support. Looks like it's time to get out the writing paper and make my feelings known to Mr Hilton.

What more do we have to be to be thought “appropriate”?

Not telling them the truth, I guess? Seems they don't want to hear it.

What I certainly won't do next year is marshal for an MSA series of any kind. The usual 'marshal friendly' clubs, of course, will retain my support.

[Mark Mitchell]

Right then......

George, many thanks for that post.

I think every Marshal - irrespective of what Club they are members of will be astounded and down-right ****ed off at this ludicrous MSA ruling!

It's time for action!

EVERYONE -
Please consider writing to Colin Hilton at the MSA and express your views on this matter.

Please try to attend your regional AGM or lobby your regional committee to get behind this (If they're not already)

(A tough one now) Please consider not volunteering for the GP next year and the BTCC

Like all others before me on here, CH & GC are the MOST appropriate people to represent us on MSC - and I thank them both again for their continued efforts.

I know I dodged the Autocensor - but I'm mad! Sorry!

[mod]I know you did too, and however much I agree with you I can't let it stand. Anyway, it's more fun to type the word![/mod]

[James Elder]

I thought I would see how this thread was doing, started on page 5 and as I tracked backwards to see what people are talking about, I was astounded (as I think everyone else is) - and I don't get astounded very often!

To leave out the BMMC Chairman and George - two people who have years of marshalling experience and who represent us in the BMMC - out of an MSA committee for marshals is absolutely stupid (I have other words in my head, but won't write them here).

How can we be represented by one of the MSA's people? The whole point of representation on any committee is that you appoint people who are relevant and who better than George and Chris? The MSA seem to be in their own bubble and should re-consider - any subject that creates a particularly negative 5 page thread like this one can't be a good idea.

Reference to Mark's remarks about not volunteering for the GP - no problem for me really - I stopped in 2002 after we were put on that daft campsite behind Copse on the side of a hill. I've done loads of more enjoyable meetings since.

All we can ask is that Chris and George keep lobbying on our behalf (I am sure they will) and thanks for their efforts so far.

[The STIG]

What good would not voulenteering for the GP do? supposing it's cancelled due to lack of Marshals (this would doubtless cause mayhem at the FiA) all that happens is that we lose the public's support - something we vitally need!

[chezza]

You have a point Stig. It would just give Bernie more ammunition and would encourage him to run the meeting without marshals.

[Startline Ed]

Perhaps a possibilty is attending such meetings under protest. For example, there could be a letter available at sign on which people could sign. This would say that there is a feeling amongst the marshalling community that the only way the MSA will take notice is if a meeting were boycotted by the marshals. However, this is not being done due to the fact that it would damage the sport that marshals love.

Just an idea. Feel free to comment

[chezza]

Oooh that is a good idea.

Its a shame we can't do a work to rule or something.

[b1ackcr0w]

This issue has changed an opinion that I have held for a long time. I've never supported the suggestion that disruption of meetings would do us any good at all. And I do agree with Stig that the GP would be a bad event to disrupt because it would portray us in a bad light.

BTCC though? Yup, i think they would be high profile enough to make the point, and with the right publicity and our case made cogently to the media, on the specific point about representation on the MSA Council, might be a good thing.

I would encourage everybody who cares about this issue to write to the MSA this winter, before the 07 season volunteering lists are posted out by the clubs. But if that has no effect, maybe the time is right for an organised boycott / non volunteer.

[Suze]

As an outsider really here (but still think what's happening is completely wrong), I don't think the disruption of meetings - whichever meetings - is a good idea. For example, a [F Ren / BTCC / F3 / FF / insert formula make here] driver has not caused this, the MSA has, so why disrupt a meeting and affect them / sponsors / media / spectators etc etc?

A letter easily available at sign-on sounds to me a better idea. But then, sometimes you do wonder if people ever take notice of these letters

[Woolley]

Well, there's a huge difference between 'disruption' and 'not bothering to volunteer'. I wouldn't consider a boycott of meetings once volunteered, however, not supporting the series run by the man who runs the MSA and has made a point of not supporting us seems a reasonable response. (Made easier by the fact that I've stopped doing them anyway!)

[chezza]

No the drivers haven't caused this, but they may support us if they knew what was going on, after all I'm sure they'd kick up a stink if they didn't have a rep on their committee. I think that disruption, whilst now showing us in a good light might make the MSA take some notice.

I have to agree there Woolley, and a boycott of such meetings will be reatively easy for me as after last weekend I have most certainly considered not doing another BTCC meeting. Especially after the behaviour of Mr G himself.

[Suze]

The latter sounds reasonable if that's what people decide to do, the former does not, in my opinion.

[Suze]

They would most likely support marshals, I'd like to believe, but not necessarily if the marshals decide to boycott the meeting after volunteering - that's not the right way to go about things and would shed a very bad light on marshals in general.

Whilst there's understandably strong feeling on this, I just don't believe boycotting meetings is the right answer.