BCA News Sheets

[graham]

Quite apart from the data protection issues mentioned above. it would seem that 17% of UK households still have no internet access (as of 2013 the latest year for which I could quickly find the figures.

If it is true that this 17% applies to cavers as much as to the general population, and that they are just, to use Pegasus's words, just being blummin contrary how does BCA inform them that tough they've disenfranchised themselves? Do we make it a condition of membership that one must access an email account everyday? every week? I can see that going down well.

 

[Bottlebank]

page 9 of the draft minutes "Action: Council to consider paper communication with the membership."  so as to inform membership that the electronic version of the newsletter exists. 

I would add that clubs with CIMs are under a duty to BCA to inform their membership of such developments.  So for example clubs were asked to supply email addresses for CIMs.  Some have, some presumably have not.  But it would appear that Bottlebank's club has not even bothered to communicate the fact that the request has been made to its membership (like several of the clubs I belong to).  That is the disenfranchisement which really worries me. 

I would also emphasise that the original motion stated "to poll its membership" ... "to obtain the view of its membership".  It was not proposed to do away with AGM motions etc.  Surely getting 300 responses by email is better than getting 30 who are bothered enough to turn up at an AGM?

Bob,

Now you mention it I think my club secretary did raise this at a meeting, perhaps unlike some of the clubs you are a member of, along with some other BCA issues. But we only meet once a year - which is one reason why I like the Earby. You appear to have forgotten that clubs can't oblige members to hold or attend meetings, or read newsletters or minutes.

The BCA should NOT try and pass the buck for it's own communication failures to member clubs whatever their "duty" - it's up to clubs to operate as they see fit.

And as for "page 9 of the draft minutes "Action: Council to consider paper communication with the membership."  so as to inform membership that the electronic version of the newsletter exists." - what a joke! When were they thinking of "considering" it - the next meeting?  What's the plan, post a letter to six thousand members to tell those that are not online that there's an online newsletter they obviously can't look at because they are not online?

And why can't the BCA be ahead of the news - and use a simple Wordpress blog for example, reposted to Facebook and Tweeted, to get news out as it happens rather than months later, often not until it's been done to death on here and elsewhere?

I'm with Pegasus on this, sometimes cavers as a group do make ourselves look ridiculous - let's move on.

 

[Bob Mehew]

Re It is, of course, perfectly possible that some clubs have data protection policies by which their members can direct them not to supply such detail to a third party.

When BCA was set up and the CIM concept introduced, it was made clear that clubs would shoulder the burden of communicating on behalf of BCA to BCA's members in return for a reduction in the subscription of BCA CIM membership.  DIMs pay a higher sub to cover direct communication, amongst other things.  I note that many clubs with CIMs do pass on one bit of information namely the BCA sub.  Cynically one might say because they have to do so in order to get the money in.  But as for passing on information such as the date, etc of the AGM  - well read your club newsletter / web site or what ever. 

Re You appear to have forgotten that clubs can't oblige members to hold or attend meetings, or read newsletters or minutes.

I am not talking about obliging "members to hold or attend meetings, or read newsletters or minutes", I am talking about informing them in the first place.  That is the duty which I am accusing some clubs with CIM members of failing to do.

As I see it, the problem is whether the Data Protection Act applies to a communication routed via a third party (the club) of a nature not directly related to BCA's business, such as for example advertising some piece of kit.  I don't understand how the Data Protection Act covers communications such as AGM details, subs, votes or even seeking the views of BCA members.

RE And as for "page 9 of the draft minutes "Action: Council to consider paper communication with the membership."  so as to inform membership that the electronic version of the newsletter exists." - what a joke!

I have to agree.

 

[Bottlebank]

"When BCA was set up and the CIM concept introduced, it was made clear that clubs would shoulder the burden of communicating on behalf of BCA to BCA's members in return for a reduction in the subscription of BCA CIM membership.  DIMs pay a higher sub to cover direct communication, amongst other things.  I note that many clubs with CIMs do pass on one bit of information namely the BCA sub.  Cynically one might say because they have to do so in order to get the money in.  But as for passing on information such as the date, etc of the AGM  - well read your club newsletter / web site or what ever.  "

True but times have changed 

 

[graham]

I would add that clubs with CIMs are under a duty to BCA to inform their membership of such developments.  So for example clubs were asked to supply email addresses for CIMs.  Some have, some presumably have not.

It is, of course, perfectly possible that some clubs have data protection policies by which their members can direct them not to supply such detail to a third party.

In the light of further comments, I perhaps need to clarify here that there is a difference between a club making onward communication to its members and that club passing information about its members to a third party such as BCA. please do not confuse the issue by conflating quite different things.

 

[Bottlebank]

I would add that clubs with CIMs are under a duty to BCA to inform their membership of such developments.  So for example clubs were asked to supply email addresses for CIMs.  Some have, some presumably have not.

It is, of course, perfectly possible that some clubs have data protection policies by which their members can direct them not to supply such detail to a third party.

In the light of further comments, I perhaps need to clarify here that there is a difference between a club making onward communication to its members and that club passing information about its members to a third party such as BCA. please do not confuse the issue by conflating quite different things.

Now you've confused me.

Clubs and their individual members are both BCA members, when a club passes a members email address to BCA it does so as a fellow member of that club. It isn't possible for a BCA club to have a data protection policy which prevents passing members data to BCA and remain a BCA member. In theory a club could have a data protection policy that specifically prevented passing an email address to BCA but why would they?

I cannot see why data protection should prohibit BCA emailing it's members with updates on caving/BCA related matters. That is not what the Data Protection Act seeks to do.

 

[Bob Mehew]

In the light of further comments, I perhaps need to clarify here that there is a difference between a club making onward communication to its members and that club passing information about its members to a third party such as BCA. please do not confuse the issue by conflating quite different things.

I think you are wrong Graham.  The circumstances are that an individual is both a member of their caving club as well as a Club Individual Member of BCA.  Thus BCA has the right, subject to its declared policy (see http://caves.org.uk/payments/bca/forms.html?f=M1) to send what it wants to its members.  I trust you accept that?

The fact that BCA does so via a third party, namely a caving club, is little different from BCA using a bulk mailing organisation or the Electoral Commission or the Royal Mail or some other body to send something out.

 

[graham]

In the light of further comments, I perhaps need to clarify here that there is a difference between a club making onward communication to its members and that club passing information about its members to a third party such as BCA. please do not confuse the issue by conflating quite different things.

I think you are wrong Graham.  The circumstances are that an individual is both a member of their caving club as well as a Club Individual Member of BCA.  Thus BCA has the right, subject to its declared policy (see http://caves.org.uk/payments/bca/forms.html?f=M1) to send what it wants to its members.  I trust you accept that?

The fact that BCA does so via a third party, namely a caving club, is little different from BCA using a bulk mailing organisation or the Electoral Commission or the Royal Mail or some other body to send something out.

You are, yet again, missing the point Bob. Are you saying that in joining a member club, an individual willy-nilly agrees that the BCA can and must be given any personal information, i.e. email address that it asks for? if you are so suggesting then I reckon that it's one to put to the Information Commissioner's Office. I would be surprised if the answer is a straightforward one. I think that some clubs, including such as university clubs, the Scout Association etc. might have problems with this. We both know that most cavers don't ask to become members of BCA. It's BCA that insists that they do.

 

[Bob Mehew]

You are, yet again, missing the point Bob. Are you saying that in joining a member club, an individual willy-nilly agrees that the BCA can and must be given any personal information, i.e. email address that it asks for? if you are so suggesting then I reckon that it's one to put to the Information Commissioner's Office. I would be surprised if the answer is a straightforward one. I think that some clubs, including such as university clubs, the Scout Association etc. might have problems with this. We both know that most cavers don't ask to become members of BCA. It's BCA that insists that they do.

A club can join BCA without enrolling its members.  Many do.  Those clubs who are just Group members without also having all their individual members as CIMs of BCA are not requested to provide details of their members.  Such clubs are not being required to covey BCA's information to their members.  To suggest otherwise is being misleading.

But if the club because of a decision by its members wants insurance cover, then things are different.  The legal and insurance advice given to us in setting up BCA was that if a club wants insurance cover, then it has to ensure all its members join BCA as individual members as:

    a) with few exceptions, clubs has no legal basis and hence it is the individuals who have to be covered, and

    b) BCA cannot 'sell' insurance but only provide it as a provision of membership.

I understand the positon on that advice has not changed.

When BCA says it wishes to communicate with its members such as by email, it means just that, no more, no less.  All that is being asked by BCA is that clubs who have all their members enrolled as CIMs of BCA fulfill the function they accepted to do, namely to onward deliver such communications from BCA. 

 

[Bottlebank]

In the light of further comments, I perhaps need to clarify here that there is a difference between a club making onward communication to its members and that club passing information about its members to a third party such as BCA. please do not confuse the issue by conflating quite different things.

I think you are wrong Graham.  The circumstances are that an individual is both a member of their caving club as well as a Club Individual Member of BCA.  Thus BCA has the right, subject to its declared policy (see http://caves.org.uk/payments/bca/forms.html?f=M1) to send what it wants to its members.  I trust you accept that?

The fact that BCA does so via a third party, namely a caving club, is little different from BCA using a bulk mailing organisation or the Electoral Commission or the Royal Mail or some other body to send something out.

You are, yet again, missing the point Bob. Are you saying that in joining a member club, an individual willy-nilly agrees that the BCA can and must be given any personal information, i.e. email address that it asks for? if you are so suggesting then I reckon that it's one to put to the Information Commissioner's Office. I would be surprised if the answer is a straightforward one. I think that some clubs, including such as university clubs, the Scout Association etc. might have problems with this. We both know that most cavers don't ask to become members of BCA. It's BCA that insists that they do.

I think it's very straightforward. When you join a BCA member club you also join the BCA, so it's perfectly reasonable that your information is shared with both, including your email address - as that's the obvious and cheapest way for both the club and the BCA to stay in contact? It's not a unique arrangement, BSAC clubs operate in a similar way.

 

[Jenny P]

Being involved in 2 organisations which use email to contact their members, I did a quick count of the proportion of members for whom I have no email address.

My caving club (Orpheus C. C.) has 12 members out of 105 with no email contact, i.e. about 11.5%.  Not a problem to sent the monthly 1-page information Bulletin or Minutes by post to these few.  The Newsletter is printed and posted to all.

Out of 47 individual members of DCA, I have no contacts for 7, i.e. nearly 15%.  Again, not a problem to send Minutes, Agendas and 4 - 5 Information Circulars per year to these 7.  However they do miss out on the quick access updates which are sent out as necessary - sometimes as many as 3 or 4 a month.  (All our member clubs have an email contact which we use - but that's not to say how many pass on information to their members.)  We post the printed Newsletters to all members but make them available later on our website.

Also, the DCA Individual Membership application form says:
Note that if you give us an email address we would normally expect to use it to send DCA Information Circulars, Minutes and Agendas.  Please let us know if you would prefer that we POST these items to you instead.  We will always post your copies of ?The Derbyshire Caver?. The DCA Annual Report and the DCA Handbook.

Neither of these organisations has ever run an email poll but, if we ever did such a thing, we would have to post a form to members without an email contact address.

These are vastly different numbers to those BCA is dealing with and, as has been said, there are data protection issues which come into play here which means that BCA has to use the "opt in" system if it wishes to contact all its individual members (whether DIMs or CIMs), directly by email, even when it actually has the email address on record.

Worth noting also that quite a number of people who have an email address still prefer not to use Facebook or Twitter for personal reasons - so perhaps not such a good idea to rely on these as a means of communication.

There is one other issue which has been brought home to me recently - a rapidly deteriorating and intermittent BB connection which leaves me unable to get online for days at time.  How many others could be affected in this way and miss out despite having opted in? 

Jenny Potts,
DCA Hon. Sec.

 

[cap n chris]

Will UKCaving be offering an opt-in facility for people wanting daily updates via penny post?

Put another way, I am finding it difficult to take this thread seriously. Does anyone genuinely still believe that the internet is a flash-in-the-pan and something that is likely to fizzle out any time soon? If not, why are such people still persisting with cleft sticks and semaphore?

 

[kay]

Will UKCaving be offering an opt-in facility for people wanting daily updates via penny post?

Put another way, I am finding it difficult to take this thread seriously. Does anyone genuinely still believe that the internet is a flash-in-the-pan and something that is likely to fizzle out any time soon? If not, why are such people still persisting with cleft sticks and semaphore?

They may be using methods that they understand and are comfortable with, rather than something which they don't understand and feel rather scared of. Or they may not see any benefits to the internet for themselves (especially in an area where slow broadband makes the internet's virtues far less obvious) and don't see why they should go to the expense just for the sake of communicating with BCA.

 

[cap n chris]

....don't see why they should go to the expense just for the sake of communicating with BCA.

Can that work both ways, though?