Application for BCA Secretary
- Thread starter Cavematt
- Start date
andrewmcleod
Well-known member
Cookie said:
The early agenda items all appear to take more time so I think you can both be right here? I think it was discussed under item 13.2, but this did occur later in the meeting then the numbers alone would suggest.
Am I right in thinking that this is (privacy policy aside) the only major disagreement here?
If the newsletter is direct marketing, then it requires opt-in consent. You believe the newsletter is, or contains, direct marketing. Council has decided it is not direct marketing and thus PECR does not apply.
An opt-out is always a requirement. If we are using legitimate interest then it has to be something that a reasonable person would expect to get (as a membership benefit, in our case). Some people may not be reasonable but we can't permanently hamstring the BCA for those.
From the ICO guidance:
"Direct marketing is not limited to advertising goods or services for sale. It also includes promoting an organisation?s aims and Ideals. This means that the direct marketing rules in the DPA and PECR will apply to the promotional, campaigning and fundraising activities of not-for-profit organisations. For example, a charity or political party contacting particular individuals to appeal for funds or votes, or contacting supporters to encourage them to write to their MP or attend a public meeting or rally, would be covered by the direct marketing rules."
I think this is something we should be aware of but in the newsletter we are not encouraging people to donate, or asking them to do anything, we are just providing information as a membership benefit.
I for one can say that I have signed up to receive the newsletter by e-mail, but have never actually received it.
IMHO, this all comes under legitimate interest anyway.
I still think that the worst thing, is that in order to vote for change, I must travel from central London, 5 hours assuming no breaks, for a meeting on a Sunday, presumably taking a day off on Monday to do so.
Unfortunately, I can't justify the diesel costs, or the time.
My club will also likely not send a representative for similar reasons. We aren't a big club, and we aren't a rich club, and I suppose that means we don't get a say.
IMHO, this all comes under legitimate interest anyway.
I still think that the worst thing, is that in order to vote for change, I must travel from central London, 5 hours assuming no breaks, for a meeting on a Sunday, presumably taking a day off on Monday to do so.
Unfortunately, I can't justify the diesel costs, or the time.
My club will also likely not send a representative for similar reasons. We aren't a big club, and we aren't a rich club, and I suppose that means we don't get a say.
badger
Active member
newsletter aside, driving to the agm, I will be travelling up Friday night from Chichester so even further than London, in fact where ever the agm is be it mendip 3 hours, south wales 3 1/2, Derbyshire also 3 1/2 to 4 or north 5 hours plus, I have a lengthy journey, I like a few in the south make the effort, all depends if you feel the need to get involved or your happy with the way things are.
badger said:
badger said:
Don't want to spend the best part of ?100 to vote?
Don't want to spend 10 hours driving?
Obviously I don't give a shit.
Quite clearly I would like to get involved, and quite clearly I am not happy with the way that things are.
It's just that I don't have a spare ?85 (optimistic for my 25+year old car) and the idea of spending over 5 hours driving each way doesn't exactly fill me with excitement.
If only there was a way I could participate remotely.... perhaps some kind of device to allow secure communication with those geographically far away...
I really don't understand why an organisation people pay to belong to, would be reluctant to make engagement easier.
NewStuff
New member
gardouth said:At least it's in a caving area so you can also have a day underground. Maybe this will make the drive a bit more worth it
Or maybe, as a lot of people want, the BCA can move into the current era and remove the archaic need for people to spend ???'s and a couple of day's to be physically present.
To some people out there, ?100 is a lot of money. Using a couple of days holiday (not everyone works 9-5 weekdays) may be out of the question. It doesn't mean they don't care, or want to get involved, it means they're priced out of being involved.
alastairgott
Well-known member
From the ICO website, it suggests you can send out information to members (even without express consent), "such as changes to terms and conditons" so an email with the information that people need for the AGM can be sent out to all members you have an email address for.
Within that email (probably at the top) you could have an opt in box for the newsletter. you might get a good uptake.
This will not constitute direct marketing. but as we do want to advertise things like hidden earth in the newsletter, then the newsletters themselves probably do constitute "direct marketing".
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-pecr/?template=pdf&patch=10#directmarketing
I work round the corner (3mins walk) from the head office of the ICO. So if you want me to pop by for advise and post it here i'm more than able to. https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/who-we-are/
Within that email (probably at the top) you could have an opt in box for the newsletter. you might get a good uptake.
This will not constitute direct marketing. but as we do want to advertise things like hidden earth in the newsletter, then the newsletters themselves probably do constitute "direct marketing".
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-pecr/?template=pdf&patch=10#directmarketing
I work round the corner (3mins walk) from the head office of the ICO. So if you want me to pop by for advise and post it here i'm more than able to. https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/who-we-are/
Cookie
New member
Hi Alastair,
Yes that approach is similar to the one I mentioned above and is my preferred way forward.
Thank you for your offer. The ICO thoughts on whether our Newsletter constitutes direct marketing would be useful. The term direct marketing is poorly defined. Show them some example back issues.
Yes that approach is similar to the one I mentioned above and is my preferred way forward.
Thank you for your offer. The ICO thoughts on whether our Newsletter constitutes direct marketing would be useful. The term direct marketing is poorly defined. Show them some example back issues.
Madness
New member
Using Alistair's example. Surely telling members of an event such as Hidden Earth is not direct marketing, it's merely informing the membership of an upcoming event. Even suggesting places to buy caving gear would just be passing on useful advice 
Do we really need yet another sub-committee to hum and haw over this? Can the committee not take responsibility for making the decision rather the palming it off to somebody else?
If the BCA were a business it would have ceased trading long ago because no-one seems capable of making any decisions.
Ali-Mac - If no-one from your club can attend then I'd be happy to vote on your behalf, with an official letter of authority obviously.
Do we really need yet another sub-committee to hum and haw over this? Can the committee not take responsibility for making the decision rather the palming it off to somebody else?
If the BCA were a business it would have ceased trading long ago because no-one seems capable of making any decisions.
Ali-Mac - If no-one from your club can attend then I'd be happy to vote on your behalf, with an official letter of authority obviously.
alastairgott
Well-known member
I'll pop in and ask them how much notice they need me to give to "be seen". :blink:
I had some dealings with the Information Commissioner last year. I found them to be very reasonable in the way they applied the regs. The regs are there to protect individuals and prevent misuse of their data. I am sure they would not consider a caving organisation sending out a newsletter about caving to its members an illegal act.
BCA can just go ahead and send out its newsletter as council has directed (twice). We heard from many council members on Saturday how everyone from parish councils to the BMC send out newsletter type information as standard to its members always with the ability to unsubscribe.
If someone feels so strongly about receiving it then they can put in a complaint to the IC. The IC would contact BCA to hear their views, consider the matter carefully and then they would issue a decision and advice on the correct way forward.
BCA council has made itself clear (twice). If the officer charged with implementing council decisions is unwilling or unable to carry them out then they should reconsider their position at BCA.
BCA can just go ahead and send out its newsletter as council has directed (twice). We heard from many council members on Saturday how everyone from parish councils to the BMC send out newsletter type information as standard to its members always with the ability to unsubscribe.
If someone feels so strongly about receiving it then they can put in a complaint to the IC. The IC would contact BCA to hear their views, consider the matter carefully and then they would issue a decision and advice on the correct way forward.
BCA council has made itself clear (twice). If the officer charged with implementing council decisions is unwilling or unable to carry them out then they should reconsider their position at BCA.
That last remark seems rather unnecessary sniping!
The problem seems to be that, whilst Council has indeed voted to send the Newsletter to all individual members for whom we have email addresses, there appear to be a number of people (both council members and others), who seem to be uncertain whether this is legally OK under the most recent data protection acts. I happen to think it probably is OK; however, I am not a legal expert and Council cannot "instruct" one of its officers to do something illegal.
In this context Alastair's offer to check with ICO directly by taking examples of the Newsletter to show them and seeking their advice is extremely helpful. Once we have clear advice, one way or the other, then it may be possible to go ahead with what Council wants to be able to do.
If it turns out that this is acceptable legally then, provided we ensure that there is the option to "unsubscribe" for those who really do not want to receive the Newsletter, then we may be able to go ahead. As Cookie said yesterday:
The other option is to exercise BCA's rights under the soft opt-in. That allows, as part of the joining/renewal process, BCA to send an email to ask the question. That's is my preferred option but requires an upgrade to BCA Online to make the process manageable.
He also said:
At my initiation, Council did agree at this meeting to form a sub-committee to be responsible for the ongoing data protection issues. I suggest that that sub-committee look at this again.
It may also be worth noting that my own club sent out its latest subscription reminders with the following note included:
NB, Email addresses:
BCA would like to use your Email address to contact you for specific purposes such as Constitutional changes or Ballots. It guarantees not to supply addresses to other persons/companies or to use them for advertising.
If you object to BCA using your Email at all please inform ----- by email before the end of 2018.
So you see, some clubs are trying to be helpful.
The problem seems to be that, whilst Council has indeed voted to send the Newsletter to all individual members for whom we have email addresses, there appear to be a number of people (both council members and others), who seem to be uncertain whether this is legally OK under the most recent data protection acts. I happen to think it probably is OK; however, I am not a legal expert and Council cannot "instruct" one of its officers to do something illegal.
In this context Alastair's offer to check with ICO directly by taking examples of the Newsletter to show them and seeking their advice is extremely helpful. Once we have clear advice, one way or the other, then it may be possible to go ahead with what Council wants to be able to do.
If it turns out that this is acceptable legally then, provided we ensure that there is the option to "unsubscribe" for those who really do not want to receive the Newsletter, then we may be able to go ahead. As Cookie said yesterday:
The other option is to exercise BCA's rights under the soft opt-in. That allows, as part of the joining/renewal process, BCA to send an email to ask the question. That's is my preferred option but requires an upgrade to BCA Online to make the process manageable.
He also said:
At my initiation, Council did agree at this meeting to form a sub-committee to be responsible for the ongoing data protection issues. I suggest that that sub-committee look at this again.
It may also be worth noting that my own club sent out its latest subscription reminders with the following note included:
NB, Email addresses:
BCA would like to use your Email address to contact you for specific purposes such as Constitutional changes or Ballots. It guarantees not to supply addresses to other persons/companies or to use them for advertising.
If you object to BCA using your Email at all please inform ----- by email before the end of 2018.
So you see, some clubs are trying to be helpful.
For clarification. Is there any difference between, for example, caving clubs, Cambrian Caving Council, BMC, CNCC newsletters being sent to members and a BCA newsletter being sent to members?
If the BCA emailed every member it has email addresses for asking if they DID NOT WANT a BCA newsletter sent direct then the ball could get rolling, I would guess a very, very small % would decline.
Jopo
If the BCA emailed every member it has email addresses for asking if they DID NOT WANT a BCA newsletter sent direct then the ball could get rolling, I would guess a very, very small % would decline.
Jopo
I do feel that most here are missing the point of GDPR.
I struggle to think of a reason why there isn't a Legitimate Interest for sending a newsletter to paid up club members...
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/lawful-basis-for-processing/legitimate-interests/
I'm certain that it has already been done, but may I suggest that someone more involved with the BCA takes the time to look at this:
https://www.sportandrecreation.org.uk/pages/gdpr-clubs
It is the resource pushed by the BMC, to aid smaller clubs - https://www.thebmc.co.uk/gdpr-mountaineering-clubs
Madness,
Thank you for your offer.
I will try and put this to the club I'm in, and PM you once I have a result.
I struggle to think of a reason why there isn't a Legitimate Interest for sending a newsletter to paid up club members...
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/lawful-basis-for-processing/legitimate-interests/
I'm certain that it has already been done, but may I suggest that someone more involved with the BCA takes the time to look at this:
https://www.sportandrecreation.org.uk/pages/gdpr-clubs
It is the resource pushed by the BMC, to aid smaller clubs - https://www.thebmc.co.uk/gdpr-mountaineering-clubs
Madness,
Thank you for your offer.
I will try and put this to the club I'm in, and PM you once I have a result.
Madness said:
Madness
New member
If sending out the newsletter did turn out to be 'a bit naughty' (and I'm of the firm belief that it isn't) and someone did take exception (someone will, just to be an arse). Then I suspect the BCA would be sent to the naughty step and told not to do it again.
Come on BCA Council, get real and grow a pair!
Come on BCA Council, get real and grow a pair!
andrewmcleod
Well-known member
Madness said:
I think that it exactly what happened (sensibly or otherwise)?
Been away from this for a week or so so bit a catch up.
I do find it concerning to see a suggestion that having, and providing, an e-mail address to the BCA should be a requirement of membership. Membership should be open to all irrespective of whether or not they wish to use or provide an e-mail address. Plus for as long as someone has to be a BCA member if they wish to be a member of a BCA Club this again seems a very undemocratic requirement. What does the Club do if someone doesn't have an email address - throw them out?
My Club still has a small number of such members. We continue to aim to respect them and engage them with the Club as best we can - and yes they get Club newsletters by post.
There has to be a better way for the BCA to deal with the issue and enable communication with those members. Even if its simply advising them (via the Club route if appropriate) that without an email address they won't receive direct communications.
That debate however is different to the voting aspect. Here you can offer online voting or attendance in person - or if deemed necessary voting in proxy as well (which may be seen as less of an issue if on-line voting is introduced at the same time). This should cover those without email.
Several posts ago Jenny asked about whether non-Club Group Members should retain a vote. (I have no idea how to post a quote).
I would suggest yes. Otherwise where in the BCA is the voice of cave rescue, cave research etc. Certainly any thought of removal of such a vote should be considered in the wider context of the objects and roles of the BCA and not removed merely because the 2 House system is thought of as a little bit complicated or difficult to manage with on-line voting.
I do find it concerning to see a suggestion that having, and providing, an e-mail address to the BCA should be a requirement of membership. Membership should be open to all irrespective of whether or not they wish to use or provide an e-mail address. Plus for as long as someone has to be a BCA member if they wish to be a member of a BCA Club this again seems a very undemocratic requirement. What does the Club do if someone doesn't have an email address - throw them out?
My Club still has a small number of such members. We continue to aim to respect them and engage them with the Club as best we can - and yes they get Club newsletters by post.
There has to be a better way for the BCA to deal with the issue and enable communication with those members. Even if its simply advising them (via the Club route if appropriate) that without an email address they won't receive direct communications.
That debate however is different to the voting aspect. Here you can offer online voting or attendance in person - or if deemed necessary voting in proxy as well (which may be seen as less of an issue if on-line voting is introduced at the same time). This should cover those without email.
Several posts ago Jenny asked about whether non-Club Group Members should retain a vote. (I have no idea how to post a quote).
I would suggest yes. Otherwise where in the BCA is the voice of cave rescue, cave research etc. Certainly any thought of removal of such a vote should be considered in the wider context of the objects and roles of the BCA and not removed merely because the 2 House system is thought of as a little bit complicated or difficult to manage with on-line voting.
Similar threads
