ECF Finance Council Meeting 23 April 2022

[Mick Norris]

Thanks Roger, I see Dave Thomas gives in his Notes on Rolling Membership an explanation of a number of points, including

On the second of the issues, the point the policy was addressing was the barrier which requiring ECF membership to play one game in a rated event would place on a casual player being persuaded to turn out in the occasional club match. This could be addressed by requiring any member claiming exemption from Game Fee to be a member at the end of the season in question. To avoid the complication of a spread of eligibility dates, and to tie in with the recommendation in the previous point, the proposal is that exemption from Game Fee applies to players who are members on 1st June at the end of the season in question.

This does not in any way affect the exemption from Game Fee of players who play less than the stipulated minimum number of games, and means in practice that, as at present, players would have until 30th June to get their memberships in order.

[Joey Stewart]

I'm very pleased to see the rolling membership finally coming in, with more summer events then ever before chess is no longer a "seasonal" sport and I am certain that the arbitrary membership dates we currently use have put many potential members off signing up at all when it gets close to the end date.

[Paul Cooksey]

Just to annoy Joey, Council might vote against it.

Actually I might vote against it for Berkshire. I understand why it is better for the ECF and better for ECF members. But it seems like it is worse for Berkshire who get an extra admin burden.

As everyone knows, because I have been banging on about it for years, I would like to regard myself as being part of a OMOV representative democracy, guided by the ECF Members who play in Berkshire events. But I am not as things stand. I am representing the organisation, and turkeys who don't enjoy Christmas might outnumber Direct Members Representatives.

Maybe Berkshire will feel benevolent towards the ECF, but maybe not.

[John Upham]

Just to annoy Joey, Council might vote against it.

Actually I might vote against it for Berkshire.

I suspect that from the entirety of Berkshire only Roger dC, John T., myself (and yourself) will be aware of which way you intend to vote. Almost certainly nobody would care to express an opinion if asked.

[Roger de Coverly]

and turkeys who don't enjoy Christmas might outnumber Direct Members Representatives.

In my mind it's still muddy as to what happens, Assume the scheme is now in place, how would it apply to a club player who joined the ECF on 1st April 2022, Let's assume they are new to league chess. If they are members for a year, that takes them to March 2023. Clearly they would not count as a member at an April 2023 Congress if they didn't renew. But what about April and May 2023 league matches and April and May 4NCL. Once you reintroduce anniversary based membership, aren't you stuck with it until somobe decides to abolish it as was done by the ECF itself to the anniversaty based membership scheme it inherited from the BCF ?

[Joey Stewart]

Actually I might vote against it for Berkshire. I understand why it is better for the ECF and better for ECF members. But it seems like it is worse for Berkshire who get an extra admin burden..

We currently have a system which requires people to buy membership and the new system would also require people to buy membership - how could that require any more admin work whatsoever?

[Roger de Coverly]

how could that require any more admin work whatsoever?

Read the small print, over time you can end up having to check membership status every month. You also have the concept of member non-members. If someone takes out a Silver or Gold membership on 1st May, or during May, that covers Congresses until the next Aprul 30th, but league, county and internal club games or matches only until 31st August

[Stephen Westmoreland]

In principle I do not object to rolling membership but there has to be a bar against non ECF members playing competitive matches. That may deter new players.

[Roger de Coverly]

That may deter new players.

I think you mean "will".

[Joey Stewart]

how could that require any more admin work whatsoever?

Read the small print, over time you can end up having to check membership status every month. You also have the concept of member non-members. If someone takes out a Silver or Gold membership on 1st May, or during May, that covers Congresses until the next Aprul 30th, but league, county and internal club games or matches only until 31st August

I don't see why it needs to be so complicated, if it only covers League games for a fixed duration and congresses for the full year you have basically changed nothing, can't it just cover all chess games played during the period it is active ?

[IM Jack Rudd]

The fundamental problem here is that the needs of league chess and congress chess are different, with leagues wanting structures that work with discrete seasons, and congresses wanting structures that update continuously, and everything the ECF does as an organization has to balance the two against each other.

[Paul Cooksey]

The fundamental problem here is that the needs of league chess and congress chess are different

I agree that makes it hard to draft simple rules. But that the ECF wants to collect membership fees from individuals, but needs to use leagues and congresses to ensure those individuals pay, seems to me even more fundamental.

I don't have any solution to how the ECF could better handle non-payment of membership in principle. We talked about removing people from grading in the past, but it seemed to be seen as too harsh.

But I think it does have some relevance, because the rules as drafted seem to prioritise protecting ECF income - avoiding members gaming the system in when they renew - over making it simple for leagues to manage.

It does seem to me fair for a league to say to the ECF "if you want us to ensure people pay membership you have to make it as easy as possible for us to do."

[Kevin Thurlow]

"I agree that makes it hard to draft simple rules. But that the ECF wants to collect membership fees from individuals, but needs to use leagues and congresses to ensure those individuals pay, seems to me even more fundamental.

I don't have any solution to how the ECF could better handle non-payment of membership in principle. We talked about removing people from grading in the past, but it seemed to be seen as too harsh.

But I think it does have some relevance, because the rules as drafted seem to prioritise protecting ECF income - avoiding members gaming the system in when they renew - over making it simple for leagues to manage.

It does seem to me fair for a league to say to the ECF "if you want us to ensure people pay membership you have to make it as easy as possible for us to do.""

Yes - Some players might want to lose their grading, so they can try to enter lower sections. It has been the case for some time that BCF/ECF rely on leagues and congresses as unpaid interns to do the hard work.

[Hok Yin Stephen Chiu]

I'm inclined to agree with Andrew that it seems a bit pointless to have unnecessarily strict requirements for the Membership Reps. At the end of the day, these membership categories need people to represent them well. The ability to represent members is not particularly altered, if a Rep, who is currently a Bronze Member, plays in one congress in one particular year, became a Silver Member.

However, on Membership Reps becoming Directors, it does raise a question of, whether an individual gets disproportionate say, as both a direct member representative and a director. In theory, that is probably true. But, again if the membership wishes to keep voting in that individual, it is technically democracy in action. A sensible option could be to say any Direct Member Representative who becomes a Director, must resign as a Rep, but they may be allowed to stand at the next elections. If a membership category is happy with re-electing a Director to be their Rep, to hold the Board of Directors to account, it is after all democracy in action, and fair enough.

On rolling membership, rolling membership is, of course, convenient for individual members, but given the huge amount of undocumented work already goes into leagues and clubs to avoid being fined by the ECF, it seems a bit excessive to add another layer checks for club/league organisers.

[John Reyes]

I'm inclined to agree with Andrew that it seems a bit pointless to have unnecessarily strict requirements for the Membership Reps. At the end of the day, these membership categories need people to represent them well. The ability to represent members is not particularly altered, if a Rep, who is currently a Bronze Member, plays in one congress in one particular year, became a Silver Member.

However, on Membership Reps becoming Directors, it does raise a question of, whether an individual gets disproportionate say, as both a direct member representative and a director. In theory, that is probably true. But, again if the membership wishes to keep voting in that individual, it is technically democracy in action. A sensible option could be to say any Direct Member Representative who becomes a Director, must resign as a Rep, but they may be allowed to stand at the next elections. If a membership category is happy with re-electing a Director to be their Rep, to hold the Board of Directors to account, it is after all democracy in action, and fair enough.

On rolling membership, rolling membership is, of course, convenient for individual members, but given the huge amount of undocumented work already goes into leagues and clubs to avoid being fined by the ECF, it seems a bit excessive to add another layer checks for club/league organisers.

I asked Robert who is the director of membership question about this and this was his answer

Re your points, the member would become a member when he has paid and registered regardless of the 4 games. The league deadline will still be the 30th of June. So no real change apart from captains having to be slightly more vigilant regarding when a membership lapses.