MRAA (ie MRAV) bashing

Smee said....

How do you think that this model would work any better than the current
one that's in place in Victoria? The problem, as it appears, seems to be
down to personalities. If much the same people end up on the "council",
and much the same level of non-committment is exhibited by Victorian
motorcyclists, would it do any better?

Hey, I'm not knocking the idea. In fact, I even suggested to the board
that something like it be considered, a couple of years ago. I just
don't know how it'd work any better than what we have now.

 

G-S said....

I might just do that, the next time he blasts the MRA_Forum list with
his "under my leadership we had 20,000 members..."

 

In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:47:55 +1000

THe big problem is indeed personalities.

The MCC of NSW wouldn't have got anywhere without the bloody hard work
and good committee skills of Guy Stanford and Brian Wood amongst others.
Their professionalism has brought in others, so more and more bods are
coming in who wouldn't have been caught dead near previous incarnations
of NSW lobbying.

I wasn't around in NSW earlier, so I might be utterly wrong, but my
understanding is that the change from the Greg Hirst/Bikers Australia(?)
old guard wasn't all that difficult, but I also understand it only
happened when everyone had just about given the game away. So changing
style of play in both Council vs Association and nethod of doing
business wasn't as hard as it otherwise might have been.

I think a council model might work if a) people got it into their heads
that it's about representation and collective decision making, a different
concept, and b) there was a couple of bods people trusted to try to make
a go of it who weren't dreadfully tainted with all that had gone before.

The big difference between the MCC of NSW and the MRA style group is
that it's clearer that it's a federation, not a government per se.

That it isn't the executive deciding everything but club reps turning
up to make sure their clubs get a fair go and are represented. I think
it makes for a different mindset, people at meetings feeling they are
representing others not just themselves. And those people not members
of a lobby group, but mainly focused on what they and their mates do,
and coming to a lobby group for a purpose. At least that's how it feels
to me, compared to the way I thought when I was in MRA-SA.

THere's definitely a feeling of more accountability, of more involvement
and questioning, of more openness. Much less "this is what we are doing,
now be good little soldiers". (Which isn't a really fair pic of MRA-SA,
but the contrast is clear.)

Perhaps one useful thing going to a different structure might do is get
people thinking "It's different enough that I'm willing to try again"
and get enough different people in as delegates that the exec wouldn't
be the Usual Suspects.

Zebee

 

Hamish said....

My view of the MRA is that it should be supported by the members and
anyone else who wishes to get involved. I try to avoid the personality
issues, but, to be honest, it does get hard. In other words, I'm "loyal"
to the MRA, not the personalities that run it. I support the
democratically elected board, no matter who it is. I'll object, as I'm
allowed to as a member, if I think that it' warranted. I'll try to lobby
to have those decisions, policies changed, as would anyone in any
organisation would do, whether it's the MRA, local footy club or
whatever.

I do my bit by editing the MRA's newsletter. I attend the occasional
meeting when time/work permits. Hard to do when you're 2 hours away.

The current board or committee has no ties to any of the previous boards
and its members have been doing their best to right the wrongs of the
past. But there are some who continually sledge them as if they're the
"old guard" or whatever.

Perhaps Smee is right. Disband the MRA. See if anyone has the energy to
put some alternative body together and watch it get sledged by the lazy
critics who refuse to help out, but are only too willing to shitcan
their efforts from the sidelines.

The issues that the MRA is dealing with may seem like non-issues to
others, particularly non-riders. However, clearly some DO regard them
seriously enough for them the encourage the MRA to deal with them.

Footpath parking - yeah, so what? Riders take it for granted. Yet, the
Propertly Council of Australia which has a lot of members who own
buildings in Melbourne's CBD were lobbying to have the practice
outlawed. In Perth, for example (correct me if I'm wrong Theo), bikes
can't park on footpaths nor in normal parking bays. They're restricted
to bike specific bays of which there are few. To take away this
privilige would discourage riders from commuting. They either jump in
their cars, which adds to conjestion, no matter how insignificant, or
they use public transport which may not be convenient.

Front number plates - again, something that people consider as a
non-issue. But there are those who have safety concerns, particularly on
naked bikes where there is no convenient place to mount them. Faired
bikes, it's a fairly straightforward thing. Stick a decal to the
fairing. Then it becomes an asthetic issue, which people on their
pristine R1s or 999s would cringe at the thought.

Lane splitting - this one's fairly obvious, particularly to those who
commute in city traffic. The MRA's been lobbying for it to be
"legalised" formally.

TAC Levy - riders see it as a discriminatory tax, given that multiple
vehicle crashes (bike v car) see the rider not at fault most of the
time, and that it's a further monetary imposte on people's ever
suffering salaries. The benefits are questionable, too. You can argue
that police forces' vehicles are subject to really high taxes, but is
that relevant? Bikes aren't used in high speed pursuits (unless your
chasing your mate up the Reefton and come a gutsa...)

The MRA's main role is to promote motorcycling. It does this by lobbying
the government depts. that make policy that affects bike riding. What
would happen with we didn't have an MRA? Would we still be riding around
on P plates at 80 km/h, or if you have a pillion, despite your licence
status, be stuck at 80 km/h. Other laws that were mooted were the
banning of modifications to bikes - your Akropovics would not be
allowed, for example, The MRA helped stop that one going through. That
and lights on (a federally lobbied issue, not just an MRA Vic one),
mandatory reflective bike gear. There's even talk about bike gear being
subject to AS requirements like helmets are. That'll jack up the price
of jackets, pants, boots and gloves significantly if they're required to
meet minimum standards. They may do now, but it's the testing that will
force the costs up.

In the end, though, it's up to the riders if they think that lobby
groups are worthwhile orgs to join. If they don't, that's fine. It's a
choice that's freely made. If they do, that's great. My personal bitch
though, is about the critics who criticise but fail to come up with
viable alternatives, or who refuse to help out. Armchair critics,
basically. And as it's a personal bitch, I'm allowed to have it.

That is, until the new terror laws come in, and because I belong to a
union, the combined terror-IR laws will see me sentenced to
crucifixion...

 

In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 30 Oct 2005 15:55:04 +1100

The line about "don't have to be a carpenter to see a table is badly
made" springs to mind.

What I've found is most people don't think they are capable of helping.
They don't have the time or skills to sit on government committees in
working hours, they aren't skilled in sales or people techniques.

They know it's wrong, they can often see ways to make it right, but
they don't believe they have the ability to make it right. After all,
motorcyclists aren't your average conformists, they don't tend to have
the office/committee/negotation skills needed to deal with bureaucracy.

Note that when I put up topics the MCC is looking at here, there's a
lot more negative than positive remarks. IF I say nothing, offer no
alternatives, just ask for input, then almost no response. If I do put
forward things, then the number saying 'this is wrong' is higher than
the number saying 'do this' and way way higher than the number saying
'I'll help'.

That's human nature... and the negative comments are not as helpful as
the positive ones, but they are at least engagement and they can show
weaknesses. If the half awake bods reading aus.moto can pick holes then
the sharks in the government can rip trenches...

But as time goes on, more people are willing to put a bit of effort into
the MCC as they see it's worth putting effort in to. Lots won't ever
think such things are worth doing of course But of those who do, few
will have enough passion to fight the hard fight it takes to get it up
and working and respected. Once it *is* up and working and respected,
then more people will think it is worth joining. If they haven't been
told they are useless for not wanting to spend effort on what they think
is a losing cause.

Boils down to "how can you persuade people that you are worth their time
and energy, compared to all the other things they could be doing?"

Motherhood statements about rider's rights won't do it, unless you can
convince them that the MRA is going to be effective in protecting said
rights. Every spat is another mark in the "couldn't run a boozeup in a
brewery if you brought your own bottleopener" column.

Most people are lazy. They'd rather sit in the sun than work, which is
why paycheques were invented... Many people are uninterested in
motorcycle politics unless a) something bites them and b) they think
it's possible to stop the biting. No point in being interested in
motorcycle politics if you don't think it will do any good.

So for people to support the MRA-VIC, it has to get runs on the board. It
has to be worth supporting. Meaning, I suspect, that it also has to
overcome the current severely negative score.


Zebee

 

Martin Taylor wrote:

Only if you are lucky,
...and it won't be a public one, either. :-(

regards,
CrazyCam

 

Or a variety of other reasons... I sit on a couple of regional transport
advisory committees, and a state industry commitee. And you know...
they all meet during business hours which is fine.

What I've noticed about motorcycle committees and lobby groups in
Victoria is that they tend to meet in the evenings midweek. Now I can
understand why... because they are volunteer groups and people mostly
work during the day.

But that doesn't suit me... a meeting that starts at 7:00 in the CBD (I
wouldn't get there until after it starts and if goes until 10:00 means
I'm not back home until almost midnight.

This is why I much preferred the regional structure that MRA Vic used to
have and that Ulysses uses to this very day. If I want to attend a
Ulysses meeting it's a 30 minute ride or drive.


G-S

 

G-S said....

At the AGM this year he put up a fellow who helped him with the toy run
for life membership. The fellow, as far as I'm aware, has done zip
before or since. And as crazy as it sounds, it did get up...

 

sanbar said....

What internal bickering are you refering to?

 

G-S wrote:

Should you find yourself wanting to attend a U.C. meeting, feel free to
phone me and I'll try and talk you out of it. ;-)

regards,
CrazyCam

 

Then you wonder why we shitcan the MRA
*sigh*

 

Nev.. said....

That's him. It's not me. I've always said that people have the freedom
to criticise, to offer opinions. I'm just saying that it annoys me when
they constantly do so and offer no alternatives, or don't put their
hands up to help out in whatever way.

I dunno if you're in a union or not. For a few years I was on the
sub-branch of the union that represents us at work. When we did EBA
negotiations, more often than not we'd cop crap from a few workmates
(and I use the term "mates" loosely) about how we're going about it.
Fine, we say, what should we do? Viable alternatives were thin on the
ground. Mind you, this was a vocal minority. Trouble was, they'd shitcan
the sub-branch but never, since our time here, have any of these people
put their hands up to help out in any way.

I s'pose it's a similar thing, except that not many riders are MRA
members.

People have a right to criticise, to express their opinions. There's no
denying that. But it DOES get irksome when the same few people
continually bash the MRA and in particular the volunteers who are trying
to deal with the issues. Frankly, I wasn't surprised when the previous
board resigned en-masse. Whether they were doing things right or wrong,
they copped a lot of abuse. I can only assume that they just got sick
and tired of it all.

This current board is doing its best to try and mend fences, and pick up
the ball and run with it. It's not getting much help, unfortunately.

If it folds, it folds. If it happens and nothing rises to take its
place, then I s'pose we'd soon see if we really needed it or not.

 

Zebee said....

Good point.

A mate, when he got involved in the union said to me when there was a
union issue over rosters; normally, people won't bother turning up to
any of the sub-branch meetings. But when there is something that's
directly affecting their lives, in this case, 12 hour shifts versus 8
hour ones, you'll see 'em rock up in droves.

And he was right. The 12 hr shifts got up, anyway, despite the doom and
gloom the negativists were predicting. Now the same fellows have got a
whiff of a rumor that management is considering going back to 8 hour
rosters and they're up in arms over it...

 

G-S said....

I might steal your idea and see if I can reinvent that particular wheel.
See how the board reacts to the re-formation of regional registers,
whether they be suburban or rural.

Also, with respect to evening meetings, as you say, they're volunteers.
However, when they are invited or requested to attend meetings with
government depts, say VMAC or whatever, invariably they are held during
business hours, which means that they have to take time off work attend.
And this makes it hard for volunteers to try and achieve anything with
respect to that, particularly if they have employers who aren't keen on
them flitting off during work hours to do what they see as personal
business. Heck, a lot don't even like their employees doing stuff like
SES or firey work...

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:56:38 +1000

You know I think folding might just be the best thing.

Make a properly clean slate, and try the MCC idea, trying to get clubs
to send a couple of delegates to a meeting. At that meeting, get the
delegates to list the things their clubs are interested in.

Start completely from scratch.

MInd you... money is a bugger. The NSW MCC has an independent income
from the work done every year at Bathurst, which means it doesn't have
to charge membership fees to clubs, and it can afford to hire people to
write press releases and afford to print flyers and banners. I suspect
the first thing any federation group would have to do is ask where the
money is coming from...

Zebee

 

No they can't. Somebody always complains about lack of parking in the CBD
but, IMHO, there are many more empty bike bays in Perth than car bays, and
certainly more bays for bikes than cars on a vehicle population basis. Also,
most parking in Perth is now by ticket, you buy one from the nearest machine
and display it on your windscreen. Bikes are excempt from buying tickets so
bike parking is mostly free.

Theo

 

That's normally fairly easy... it's talking me into _going_ that tends
to be hard


G-S

 

I'd try and pitch it as 'similar to the Ulysses' system rather than
'like we had in the 80s' then

Yah we give people paid time off work for SES or firey work and we've
heard a number of times over the years how that is unusual.

Personally it seems like 'enlightened self interest' to me and not any
big deal.

The staff members appreciate that we offer it, and they try and work
around the busy periods at work if possible.

Works for us *shrug*


G-S

 

Umm, don't you mean, you?

This was what I was getting at. ....And others, that have been involved in
the MRAx (and other organizations) cf those that haven't.

Hammo

 

I agree with you, Martin.

It is one thing to shitcan, that is lame and easy. It is another to do
something.

I have a problem with the MCC/MRAx/etc of any state representing the state,
as they aren't representing the state, just those that live within a walk to
the pub.

I don't quite understand this living in the big city thing, and how that
makes "their" ideas all the best. Funny breed.

Hammo