- This topic has 32 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Right so I’m outside a pub the other night having a chat with Sean and he comes up with this mad idea about a trade association. Only, when you think about it it’s perhaps worth at least talking about.
The conversation was about DASA and how they have really let us down lately in one regard, so we’re stood about bitching about it as usual and then Sean says…
“Why don’t we just start from scratch, build our own association that actually does something”, or words to that effect.
So, the floor’s open, discuss. Once we see where this goes we can maybe look at broadening the debate a bit.
K.
Re: Crazy Idea
kwatt wrote:
The conversation was about DASA and how they have really let us down lately in one regard,
.
Would you care to elucidate, by PM if necessary, đJim.
Let’s just say they haven’t exactly impressed of late and leave it parked there for now.
Both my and Sean’s sentiments have been more than made clear.
K.
kwatt wrote:Let’s just say they haven’t exactly impressed of late,
As recent as that eh, :rolls: đ
As for the topic in hand, I think it is sound in principle, not sure how strong the support would be, if and when it actually changes from push to shove, to achieve what is needed would take a serious amount of financial clout, although we have a large trade membership there is still a strong emphasis on take rather than give at present, IMHO. 8)
Jim.Re: Crazy Idea
Totally agreed Jim. The trouble is getting past the support issue.
Then there’s the issue of how you structure it as it’s blatantly obvious that the structure in place at DASA with a council just doesn’t work.
There’s loads of stuff to yap about in this, it’s just a hypothetical conversation for now to see where it goes.
And DASA have hacked me off a few times, this recent one is just a topper though.
K.
Re: Crazy Idea
I said we had the basis of a trade organisation years ago, right here, when I used to “go off on one” as it was once described. Well in the forums anyway, ‘cos i wasn’t a Mod back then. We’re half way there with the Repairers Charter now. You could reasonably argue that the Subscribers are already a little trade organisation. Bit of formalisation and we’re off……
Been quite a while since DASA has run in the trade forums – give them a chance was the last standpoint from this site. If they’ve got nowhere after all this time (year?), tough.
The trade area comprises all sorts of members – repairers, managers, owners, work providers, spares people, manufacturers spies, mad Scots and presumably other interested parties. We would need to actually identify these groupings and decide who we are actually representing and separate them out.
I’m not interested in discount insurance schemes, or any of that rubbish. I am interested in a real voice for us, the repairers that will be taken seriously. I suspect that the current trade membership of UKW would knock DASAs numbers into a cocked hat right now.
So…… sub-site? Promote (re-named) Subscribers forum? How to take the members on board?
For a goodly number, it’s the occasional drop in for advice and info. There’s a regular group who help each other in the Trade forums and enjoy a bit of craic. And a few mad buggers who sort out the Public.
I suppose (in the UKW way), it’ll have to be very cheap or even free to start off with. Lure them in. If there’s going to be a problem, it’s going to be staffing. The UKW directors are pretty stretched now………
One other point is that we would have to separate the Trade activities of UKW from any representative body. In view of a hopefully forthcoming range of true quality products rather than the current “better than most” machine, I can see an upsurge in sales to the AB1 group who read on the site. We would have to disassociate the body in order to maintain credibility.
A few points towards the discussion, I hope.
Chris.
Re: Crazy Idea
I dunno that we would have to separate it out as much Chris. I will admit to playing Devil’s Advocate here a tad but I’m looking at it from an objective point of view, the current model for an association has proven to be ineffective, riddled with issues and really toothless for the most part.
So my question really I suppose should be one of, what do you do to redress the current issues? Now, when you think on that one chaps I’d like you to think, to coin a phrase, on a clean sheet. IMO what’s needed is a total re-think of the whole concept, not just the execution of the ideal.
To elaborate, look at DASA currently, it’s biggest single problem is that it has no clear leadership and therefore no one point of contact, it’s like a Hydra in many ways. In some situations this would be advantageous, especially if all spoke with one voice and one opinion, but we all know that that’s simply not the case. So you have a situation where, even when leadership is applied, that a small minority faction (for want of a better term) can overturn any clear moves on direction, even at the point where they are being publically ratified as we have seen on many occasions.
That’s only one example of an area where, I think, that the model is seriously flawed.
The point is that what I would never get involved in is a simple re-hash of the old idea as the old idea doesn’t work. Normally when something doesn’t work you toss it and try something else or you change, adapt and hone until you make it work. In the case of DASA it would appear at times as if they either haven’t bothered or have reacted too late.
All of which points to tossing the model totally and starting again, from scratch.
K.
Re: Crazy Idea
kwatt wrote:Right so I’m outside a pub the other night having a chat with Sean
Outside? feeling alright Ken? đ
Re: Crazy Idea
Smoking ban. đ
I meant to say…
This is a totally hypothetical thing, I have no idea if it would ever happen, but I thought it worthy of discussion.
The UKW directors are not really stretched as such, busy yes, but not to the point where there’s no room to do some things. Dave is though.
The subs forum, yes I agree. That is the nucleus of a trade association I guess.
Insurances and other cr4p are out, what’s needed is one voice to represent the trade with government and manufacturers etc. to eliminate confusion and to be heard. The Chinese Whispers used presently are inadequate and ineffective, as is ducking an issue because its a bit hard.
There’s no way that the effort and time could be devoted to it for nothing though, it just wouldn’t be possible to do it for free in the short term, if ever.
K.
Re: Crazy Idea
Subscribers forum (October 2004)
Martin wrote:Trade Association??? A dirty word perhaps? BUT in these ‘troubled times’ it is important for the respectabilty of UKW trademembers, to be part and parcel of such in order to gain public confidence. Historically there has been little headway in this area from others that have tried, but learning from their misgivings I believe we can go forward and create a true figurehead. An association that lays out clear and concise rules for its members to withhold, but one that does not get bogged down by dogmatic, dictatorial constraints.
Penguin45 wrote: Should we choose to become a Trade Association, we will have to regulate, formulate codes of practice, form commitees and mind our P’s and Q’s, and not least; set some aims and goals. We have a Trade Association – it’s called DASA. The fact that so many of us choose not to become members speaks volumes for the regard with which it is currently held. However, we all know perfectly well that the restructuring and reorganisation of DASA is now under way and that maybe soon their stock will rise.
kwatt wrote: The roots of UKW are stemmed from my dissatisfaction with the way in which DASA was being guided several years ago, primarily by Chris Hayter but being the way I am rather than moan about it I decided to get off my ass and do something about it. I did not see DASA as being a vessel by which I could eventually accomplish what I thought had to be done and, in many ways, I understand why it cannot do a lot of things that perhaps we feel that it ought to be doing. However, this is not a slag DASA reply it is merely an extension of what Chris has already pointed out, this is not a trade association nor is it ever liable to be one, this is something totally different.
Those comments were made over 2½ years ago and set the scene at the time, so what has changed since I wonder? I thought Sean was a strong supporter of DASA at that time? Isn’t it a bit late to jump ship and take on DASA head on Sean? After all said and done that’s exactly what would required, would it not? Is there room for 2 trade bodies these days when the flame of the present one has almost extinguised and all its teeth have long since fallen out?
The majority of UKW trade members will no more wish to be part of such an association though and to turn that fact around would be miraculous to say the least. There would need to be a significant cost to each member also in order to signify their own commitment to being a part of it. Free or discounted membership fees not an option as running it with full active council members can be a costly exercise. Those council members would have to break new ground in order to establish any form of recognition within the trade. Sitting on ones backside not an option, Mohammed has to go to the mountain and all that good stuff….. đ
Re: Crazy Idea
A recent event that took place within DASA killed Sean and I’s support for it, if you’re really interested I’ll post up the document I wrote on the subject. Essentially though they acted in a manner that is despicable IMO.
Anyway I was kinda playing Devil’s Advocate here and I will explain why.
My personal view is that the traditional trade associations are a remnant from a bygone age when unions were all the rage and working man’s clubs were on every street corner. Oppression was rife in the workplace and legislation to protect employees was thin.
Because of this and the new found entrepreneur culture many left and set up their own businesses wanting to escape the rat race, only to find themselves in another one and finding that many others, many not as capable, were also out there.
In response to this and in a bid to add some level of protection the idea of a trade association was formed.
But life has moved on.
In the modern world I think that most, if not almost all, trade associations barring the big ones, like the FSB, have lost their way. They just can’t act in the high media exposure, instant information modern consumerist society.
It is my opinion that DASA falls squarely into fitting this description like a glove. Even ignoring all the other issues that surround it.
In other words, it is my opinion as it has been for some years, that the traditional notion of a trade association cannot and will not work now.
With that in mind you can see the likes of DASA and some others going through the final throes of their own demise. It is a long and painful process as members dwindle away for whatever reason they see fit and the organisation slowly declines losing power and respect.
Had they recognised the need for change some years ago as the Yuppie Culture emerged they maybe had a fighting chance, but most didn’t and are now paying the price in that they are dealing with consumerism not only from end customers, but also from their members who are demanding value for money and results. Not many of them offer that.
K.
Re: Crazy Idea
kwatt wrote:A recent event that took place within DASA killed Sean and I’s support for it, if you’re really interested I’ll post up the document I wrote on the subject. Essentially though they acted in a manner that is despicable IMO.
Please do.
Jim.
Re: Crazy Idea
You asked for it, bear in mind that the headings will not appear correctly formatted in plain text and the company involved has their name blocked out as it’s not required or even relevant…
kwatt wrote:DASA â An Independent Organisation?
With recent events filtering back to me I feel compelled to write to DASA in an official capacity on behalf of UK Whitegoods.
DASA is supposed to have fair rules practised at all times, a code of practice that is maintained and a constitution that lays out how procedure works. It is also supposed to be an organisation that is governed democratically. Thatâs what DASA was founded with and, what it purports to still live by but does that stand up to scrutiny?
We all know the history of DASA and the posts on UK Whitegoods critising the organisation that have almost always, without exception, created a vitriolic response from the DASA members and, to be fair, DASA under Dave Coombesâ control has attempted to make ammends and address many of those criticisms. The point was to steer DASA away from being viewed within the trade as nothing more than an âold boys clubâ and to bring it up to date with more modern processes.
Recent events seem to have portrayed very clearly that this is not the case.
******* Services based in ********* applied for membership of DASA on the recommendation of Sean Delaney and, at a recent meeting of the DASA Council the outrageous decision was taken to vet ******* at ********âs cost. Despite the fact that this is a totally unprecedented move by DASA and no notice was given of this policy to any member, associate or prospective member, it is grossly unfair, perhaps even discriminatory, to target one company with this invented policy. DASA may even run the risk of being taken to task on the grounds of discrimination and, in all honesty, I fear that ******** would have very solid ground to launch a legal petition based on the events.
Whilst I may not have been present during this meeting as, had I been I should have had a lot to say on this matter, the news has filtered back to me and I am utterly disgusted that this move was made. It was grossly unfair to treat one company in this manner.
Amazingly this decision was based upon some old grudge from an associate member, a parts supplier by all accounts, who have some sort of historical issue with ******* or the people that own or run the company. I ask you, what has this to do with DASA? Why should an accounting issue have any bearing on the application for DASA membership? What bearing does this have on any companyâs ability to do the job or indeed adhere to the DASA Code Of Practice and Constitution?
The answer to all these questions is simply, absolutely none.
There are no reasonable grounds to treat ******* in any manner that differs from any other prospective member. And yet, that is exactly what has happened in this instance.
******* agreed to the vetting procedure, which is more than I would have done in the situation, a vetting procedure I may add that no-one knows anything of or so far as I am aware has ever been detailed. There is no vetting procedure in place, there never has been in this context. How then I have to ask, can one be invented in the space of a morning during a council meeting?
Simple, it cannot be and I suspect strongly that one still will not exist. It also begs the question, just what was going to be vetted? If the criticisms were against the companies accountancy then was DASA intending to audit the companyâs accounts? I think not and I donât think that DASA has any right to ask this of any business requesting membership, or was this merely a smokescreen to reject membership anyway on some technicality? I am left to wonder.
But the story takes a further twist when, behind closed doors, the councilâs decision is totally steamrollered and the application is summarily rejected without debate or discussion!
Open and fair? I think not. In fact I think this is perhaps the single most heinous act I have ever seen DASA perform, even in its darkest hour it has never stooped to this level of, basically, trying to instigate a cover-up of the reasons why this prospective member has been unfairly treated. Simply stating that the application has not been accepted in this instance without explanation is just not acceptable, DASA has to justify its position as it is a trade association, not an exclusive club or a commercial organisation that could take such an action.
I struggle to convey my utter disgust and disdain for this action, irrespective of who the applicant is or was. It is a sad day indeed when one or two council members, one of whom at least isnât even a repairer, can dictate DASA policy.
An organisation for independent repairers? I donât think so, more like a little club that, if your face fits, you are allowed to join. Disgusting, just utterly disgusting.
But it is compounded by the fact that this is based on historical information which has little, if anything at all, to do with the ability or integrity of the repairer in question. Can not we all be pointed to account disputes in our past or people that we have not agreed with? Can not we all find fault with accounting, even with some associate members, or behaviour in the past that is questionable at best? It seems a case of the pot calling the kettle black and simply manuvering events to suit certain agendas. Is this what DASA has become now?
Is this the type organisation we wish to represent our industry?
From where I sit, with the information I have, I have little option but to view the association in that light now and, I want no part of an organisation that acts in this manner. It should be open and even-handed, these events prove beyond doubt that it is not. It is no better than any other secret society or organisation where only the chosen few may take part.
I for one will not be a part of such an organisation and I will not allow UK Whitegoods to be associated with an organisation that behaves in such a manner.
With that said, I wish to resign UK Whitegoods as an associate member of the organisation with immediate effect, I shall not become tarred with being a part of this charade nor will my company. I will also petition that ISE also take similar action as, again, ISE is, like UK Whitegoods, there to support the repairers, not to judge or discriminate against them.
It has often been said that you either have a democratic process or you do not, it seems in light of these events that DASA does not. I would actually liken it to the Freemasons, who can similarly âblack-ballâ someone on a whim.
If DASA wants to be taken seriously as a trade association then it has to act in a fair and even handed manner, not on half truths based upon old grudges, heresay and rumour. Nor can it pre-judge a company, be that as a member or an associate irrespective of the history of the company as that is grossly unfair. And, were this the case, I can think of at least one or two members or associate members currently involved in DASA that should not have been allowed to join were this the policy, which simply furthers the perception that DASA is no more than an old boys club.
Once it can sort itself out and have clear systems in place I may consider re-joining the organisation or helping it, but until then and these matters are resolved I wish to have nothing whatsoever to do with it and I shall not offer any support or opinion on the organisation until such times as that is the case. I am sorry but I cannot support this in any way, shape or form as it goes against the very principles on which DASA was founded and flies in the face of how I run UK Whitegoods as well.
Trustmark
With this all in mind I am looking to DASA to actually get Trustmark off the ground but, with the level of contempt from some quarters, disdain from others, indifference from most, I canât say that I can ever envisage a point at present where DASA would succeed in this endeavour, regardless of the pushing from certain work providers or manufacturers unless there is a commercial advantage in it for those that participate.
Worse, if Trustmark is launched under the DASA banner then it carries with it all this baggage and, under scrutiny when repairers are asked to pay for the privilege, I would doubt that there will be much of a queue to sign up. Of course the old stigma of DASA council members snapping all the work before anyone else gets a look-in at it will also pervade and that is hardly liable to endear repairers to the idea.
I think and, I hope, that Trustmark gets off the ground but I have massive reservations as to whether it is even possible in the current climate and, with events such as the ones that have prompted this letter, I sincerely doubt that DASA will succeed in doing so. In fact, I do not actually think that DASA is the vehicle by which to do it as it cannot act fairly it would seem. If it cannot act fairly with something as simple as a trade application for membership then how can it be trusted with something as large and important as Trustmark? I do not think that it can be.
There are ways of solving this dilemma, virtually overnight, but I shall leave you to work out how to do that yourselves as I wouldnât want to be seen to be encroaching on how DASA is run and I am not paid to solve DASAâs problems. Whenever I do offer comment and solutions they are either ignored, usually to DASAâs detriment, os simply seen as some sort of attack on the organisation, which they most certainly are not. So Iâll leave the hot potato in your own hands to deal with.
In Conclusion
Should this news break on the UK Whitegoods forums I will post this letter in its complete form as I wish to explain to the trade members just where UK Whitegoods stands on this matter officially and, unlike DASA it would appear, I have nothing to hide.
I do not expect an answer to this letter as I do not think that there will be an adequate explanation for these actions nor do I believe that the questions herein can be answered. But with any luck it will make the people in DASA think long and hard about their actions and their future as well as that of DASA itself.
Please do not republish this or discuss it outside of here as I really don’t want to be accused of trying to kill DASA off, which would likely happen. The Chairman and others do have a copy and, thus far, have not responded although I don’t think that there’s much of a response to this that can be given.
K.
Re: Crazy Idea
kwatt wrote:The Chairman and others do have a copy and, thus far, have not responded although I don’t think that there’s much of a response to this that can be given.
In the light of that case and the still as yet unanswered questions as to why they felt duty bound to vet the applicants accounts (or whatever?). Wouldn’t it have perhaps been more beneficial to have demanded that the subject be put on the next council meeting? By resigning forthwith from DASA you will never know, nor in fact will the matter be officially discussed I don’t suppose?
That still doesn’t detract from the fact that DASA is a dodo anyway. But it does make me think that Sean’s idea of forming a UKW trade association (ish?) might well be considered (perhaps?) as acting on ‘the rebound’?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.