- This topic has 12 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Well, come on then there’s not exactly a bunch of shrinking violets in here or are you leaving it all to me, Phil and Ian? đ
K.
Re: Subs/TA
Just reading it all reminds me totally what it will be all about, a talking shop.
All of you that have posted have put up lots of worthwhile argument, and to be honset I skip read it because there is far too much content to grasp my imagination. And there is the rub, swathed in even more rhetoric and possible baloney.
Don’t get me wrong boys, but we all know if anything happens it will be same old names and the same old faces at meetings. Not that I mind seeing everyone, but I could easily get confused as to what panel/comittee I’m part of today. The ones that would devote time and effort to this probably already do so in other forms, and as per bloody usual same old people, me being one of them.
Older & more cynical than ever.
Alex
Re: Subs/TA
I hate politics and as this involves it I need to keeps stum as I always put my feet and then my legs into my mouth.
Bryan
Re: Subs/TA
đ
You, cynical Alex, never. đ
TBH I’m not so sure about it myself. I can see the point but then I don’t see the point. đ
It’s one of those things that could fly but there’s the lethargy and misgivings as you’ve just so eloquently pointed out to a T. Basically that sense of deja vu that we’ve been here before only that time it was with another banner flying.
I suppose that the debate would run more to, “Do we need a trade association and, if so, why and what’s its function?” as opposed to getting lost in the question of how to do it and the associated mechanics of that. Which is where the thread kinda loses the plot a bit. Funnily enough, talking with Sean the other night, I pointed this out. Start at the very beginning and go from there, not half way through the story.
However for the benefit of those in this room I’ll share the letter that was sent to DASA in February of this year. Phil, I don’t expect you to try to defend this, we spoke about it at the time and I know you don’t agree with what went off just as much as I do but I just cannot support an organisation that is supposed to be representative of the trade that acts in this way.
kwatt – 04/02/2007 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 critisisms. 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.
Concept Services based in Birmingham 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 Concept at Conceptâs cost. Depite 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 Concept 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 Concept 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 Concept in any manner that differs from any other prospective member. And yet, that is exactly what has happened in this instance.
Concept 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 critisims 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 manoeuvring 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 endevour, 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, or 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.
My opinion of the situation remains unchanged and DASA has done nothing to correct the errors that I am aware of.
So far as I am concerned DASA is the victim of itself by allowing itself to be controlled in the way in which it has been.
As to whether or not we need a TA, well, that’s not for me to decide but one thing’s for damn sure, I won’t put my hat in the ring unless it’s one hell of a lot better than this.
K.
Re: Subs/TA
From the postings so far, I am reminded that there are potential pitfalls with any Trade Association. Politics and personalities come into play as well as self containment. I assume then that there has been no or little response from DASA regards the above.
I’ve just read Del’s response in the subscriber forum, and after reading the above, along with Del’s sentiments, I think a bit of an injustice may have taken place. If that is the way he has been treated it is incredulous. Del has been the advocate of DASA and almost singlehandedly persuaded me back into the fold. Granted he has had the opportunity being out there, but got off his arse & done something.
Not being there, and not aware of the credibility of the applicant, I’m not in a position to comment. However I am in a position to have concerns being a member of DASA. Therefore I cannot place judgement on their motives, but being a member I do question their modus operandi.
I might put some of the above into the Subscribers forum, but don’t want to side-track the thread into yet another slag off session regards DASA. Even if they look like they deserve it. Secondly, I would rather a dailogue with Del 1st as I don’t want to talk as if he is not among us, as he clearly is.
Alex
Re: Subs/TA
No, I had a conversation with Dave Coombes and Phil about it a while ago but beyond that, nadda, not a peep.
The topic has been raised and swiftly avoided by anyone else I’ve spoken with that is involved with DASA.
Irrespective of the company, their credibility or their history the behavior and way in which this was dealt with were wholly unacceptable IMO especially in view of the reason given for rejection publically which are, at very best, weak. It is also not exactly a good thing to have been rejected with such a pitiful excuse.
And at the exact same time as this we have our man Kevin jump ship from UKW and straight back into DASA with no probation, like all we plebs have to have even re-joining, and placed in charge of TRUSTmark!
TBH Alex, when the thread started I pretty much knew it would be a DASA bashing one as it almost always goes there. Maybe we should just get it all out and see where it leads.
I was angry then, as I’m sure you can tell and I’m still bl00dy angry that a body that is supposed to be dignified and representative acts in this way.
K.
Re: Subs/TA
Hi All
And kens previous post leads me to my avoidance on this topic…Too much reading and rattling my brain which I have a hard job controlling at the best of times..
Bryan
Re: Subs/TA
To be honest I’ve tried to stay out of it as I need the time to read it all. I am incensed at the “holier than thou” attitude of DASA, and glad I’m not on the council.
I was going to say an old boys club, realised I have to be careful as I have the qualification at least.
I will happily talk to people on this, but would rather not invest any more of my precious time at the keyboard in going over the same old ground.
Alex
Re: Subs/TA
Welcome to my world Bryan. đ
I have tried to remain as silent as possible on this because of the reasons stated earlier and, TBH, there’s little point in causing trouble for the sake of it. We’re (UKW) are, or have been, regarded as the so-called “rag-tag bunch of bad boys” that are in free fall and at least we, IMO, have remained very dignified over this by staying silent despite the anger.
And this is a part of why, when Sean was bursting my head to go do something with DASA that I wasn’t exactly bustin’ my wotchits to go do it. Frankly, it’s a poisoned chalice.
As you so rightly point out Alex, it is viewed in the industry as being an old boys club. Just think of how many times you’ve heard that expression used in conversation regarding DASA. The problem for anyone going in there is how the hell do you break down twenty years worth of negative opinion and that entrenched view of it?
Mission bl00dy impossible IMO.
On reflection, even if I had gotten into it and, TBH I’m extremely glad I didn’t, and managed to sweep away the problems which would have been a mammoth task with massive resistance from inside, I don’t actually know that it could be turned around. I currently don’t think it can be, the structure doesn’t allow it.
But even supposing by some miracle of Biblical proportions you did manage to turn the thing about, how the hell do you market it to the trade? And, before you market it to the public you have to have the support of the trade, but without the recognition or some sort of use/tangible benefit then the trade won’t be beating a path to your door.
It’s called Catch 22. No way out the trap without certain death or a lifeline as yet unseen, the latter being exceptionally unlikely.
But what the hell do I know? :rolls:
I was thinking on not posting this, but bugger it. đ
K.
Re: Subs/TA
Now this is unusual and I’m not posting it on another thread for the reasons you’ll soon suss…
Ever since mention was made of a TA on the site to the general populace there’s been a presence on UKW every single day from at least two of our more illustrious WP’s. Several of the manufacturers have been on more regularly than is usual as well, primarily those that use indies as agents.
I’ve been online a lot monitoring this amongst other things. đ
Obviously due to our privacy rules we can’t tell you who they are but they’re some of the big names and are obviously taking a very keen interest all of a sudden. I have wonder if it’s from a fear of what may happen next as, in this case, they’d have absolutely no control over the direction taken.
:snigger:
K.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.