About a month ago, I wrote about the ARRL Board’s draconian “Code of Conduct” and the censure of Southwest Division Director. I’ve also written about some new bylaws amendments that, if adopted at the upcoming January board meeting, will make the ARRL even less democratic.
But, wait, there’s more. CQ is reporting on a number of other proposals, that, among other things, will
- Give the board of directors the power to revoke individual memberships “for cause … after affording the member an opportunity to respond in writing” by a simple majority vote.
- Remove a specific dues rate from the By-Laws, instead stating that the dues shall be an amount set by the board of directors (effectively making it possible for the board to raise dues by a majority vote rather than the two-thirds to three-fourths vote required for changing the By-Laws).
- Remove the right of vice directors to attend board meetings, except by invitation of the directors.
- Prohibit members recalling directors during the first 6 months of a three-year term of office or after June 1 of the term’s final year.
- Incorporate the board’s conflict of interest policy and code of conduct into the By-Laws.
- Give the board the power to remove from office – by 2/3 vote – any officer, director or vice director “for cause” by revoking that person’s ARRL membership; after providing the subject of such action with an opportunity for a hearing prior to the board vote.
- Give the board the power to reprimand or censure a member in lieu of removal; but in this case, “No advance notice or opportunity to be heard shall be applicable to the censure vote.”
- Prohibiting current, future and past board members from taking the League or any of its officers or directors to court as a result of disputes among board members or between a board member and the League as a whole; rather, any disputes would be required to be submitted to binding arbitration; and “As a condition of service or continued service as an Officer, Director or Vice Director, all Officers, Directors, Vice Directors and candidates for such office will expressly waive any right to sue anyone acting on behalf of the Corporation in court either during their term of office or thereafter.”
I really would like an answer from someone at the League why they think these proposals are good for the ARRL and good for amateur radio. I don’t know about you, but they don’t really make any sense to me, and they’re just going to drive members away. Instead of “making the tent bigger,” these measures are only going to alienate people.
Already I have heard from a number of ARRL members who say they’re not going to renew their memberships. The one that hit me the most was one of my Elmerees. A couple of years ago, we had a long talk about why it would be a good idea for him to join the ARRL, and he did so. Yesterday, he emailed me, “I’m pretty irked by this. I’m 100% sure I will not be renewing my ARRL membership.”
I’m not so sure that I disagree with him. Money talks, and while not being a member may give me less of a voice within the League, I’m not sure they’re listening anyway.
Having said that, I am going to contact my director with the hope that he will oppose these changes to the by-laws and articles of association. I would encourage you to do so as well.
tom AJ4UQ says
The Charleston (SC) Hamfest on Saturday 3 February 2018 gets a speaker from ARRL. We were told that it would be CEO Tom Gallagher. I wonder if he’s still coming or if we’ll get a staffer….
Dan KB6NU says
Whether it’s Gallagher or a staffer, ask him or her about these latest Board moves.
tom AJ4UQ says
Our Vice Director usually shows up too, so it could get interesting :-)
Kevin Sanders K0KDS says
Um… is it too late to take back my lifetime membership?
a ham says
This always happens with bureaucracy.
Goody K3NG says
I’d like to know who on the board is originating these proposals.
Jim KJ3N says
You’re not allowed to know. That seems to be the whole point of what they’re doing.
Mike KD2KOG says
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I will not be renewing. You can take that to the bank. Way to much drama and I don’t want to be a part of it or help fund it.
Noel Lee - KF5SLK says
Due for renewal this month. Don’t think it’s going to happen.
Any insight on how to express our displeasure with their proposals?
Bob Wilson says
They were introduced by Delta Division Director David Norris, K5UZ, and apparently written by ARRL Counsel Chris Imlay, W3KD.
ARRL is for suckers says
Screw ’em… Let ’em burn…
Steve C - KE8HXM says
As Goody K3NG has put it, I think that the board members who are behind this need to be brave enough to identify themselves. It is all to easy for people cloaked in secrecy to make sweeping decisions without regard for their impact. I can’t help thinking Mr. Maxim would be a bit offended by all of this. This is not how we do things in America, this is more like eastern bloc authoritarian rule. What next? Annual dues of $1,000.00 to support the board in the lifestyle they wish to be accustomed to? You don’t see this behavior from elected officers of limited terms but it is exhibited by people who wield power that is virtually un-checked. While this is not a government entity, some seem to be acting like it.
Pete Babacheck says
Steve:
Your $1000 a year dues may not be too far off the mark, but not for the reason you say.
What jumps out to me as I read Dan’s latest missive on Newington is litigation cost. Who pays when someone wants to take one or more ARRL official to court? Who pays half the cost of any arbitration?
Member dues.
Tim - K6ACF says
Dan, I did modify your template about a week back to write my write my director, but haven’t heard back. Perhaps he doesn’t feel like he can respond without adverse reaction? I’m waiting to see if there is a response from the board regarding these issues after the next board meeting. If there is not, my membership comes up for renewal about then. I’d like to hear the board’s response before making a decision. There are a lot of good services provided by the ARRL, but these recent actions are not what I would like to see in the board representing my membership.
Eric M - KB1HYV says
I didn’t renew this year after 15 years of membership. I decided that the annual fee wasn’t really buying me anything. Looks like I made the right choice.
Nate says
Who is behind it? All the marks of a liberal Democrat, find the Liberal Democrats and you’ll find who is behind it
Tony says
They’re all old white guys…. they’re Republicans… :-)
WD4ED says
That’s called “Spin”. Based on your comments there are no “old white guys” in the Democratic Party! We both know that it’s not true. That’s who really runs the Democratic Party. Do better next time.
Jim E. - WY5Y says
Apparently, the ARRL has a long history of abusing those who try to make a difference in amateur radio, even when it’s their own. https://qninewsletterdotnet.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/qni-2016-8-4.pdf
Tom Ciciora says
So, I was told by a Director that the “Code of Conduct” wasn’t a “gag order”. The conversation is ongoing, and I’d personally like to know why, if it’s not a “gag order” did this particular Director introduce the censure motion? Either someone is talking out of both sides of their mouth, or there is some personal animus by a majority of the BoD against Mr. Norton and the “Code of Conduct” is a convenient vehicle by which to play catchup on him. Either way, something stinks like yesterday’s fish, and the membership needs to keep the BoD’s collective feet to the fire so as to contain the stupid now in circulation. And, the author of the Hitlerian nonsense described in the blog entry needs to be identified and unceremoniously dropped over the side. There is the person who requires censure. Even if the proposal is supposedly not being taken seriously by the BoD (so I am told by the same individual who I noted above), it is odious and has no place in any organization except perhaps a totalitarian nation. And, that person needs to be forcibly ejected from the Board, along with his copy of Mao’s Little Red Book or whatever he dredged the stupid idea from.
Tom Usher says
It’s time for my renewal. I will renew, mainly because this is the only really effective voice we have. It’s kind of like the NRA; I belong because they have the most ability to sway the argument in my general direction. But, they consistently do things that aggravate the hell out of me.
Perhaps the best course of action would be to re-join and demand answers. Let the Board know that if these answers aren’t forthcoming then this the last year of membership.
Just quitting leaves us without any voice at all. The threat of a direct impact to future income would probably hold more sway.
KD0QKK
Jim says
My many renewal notices have been languishing on my desk for months. Amateur radio, while it undeniably has a service side to it, is a hobby. Hobbies don’t demand this type of distraction. We can carry on without it.
73 all.