|
Many reasons:
1. Because the proposal, if accepted by the
member clubs, would take away the members’
voting rights on one of the most important issues of
Toastmasters: membership dues and ultimately the budget of more
than $12 million per year. The
proposal is asking us, the member clubs, to give a "carte blanche"
to the board of directors to raise dues at
their own discretion! For more than 80 years the
members and member clubs (the people) were the ones that decided
on what the membership dues should be. This is just like the
shareholders of a company are able to agree or disagree with
what the board of directors suggests. This is good. This gives
the control to the members and shareholders. Therefore we should
vote against proposal A.
2. Because the members ought to have a say in
where the organization is going. And this is heavily influenced
by membership dues. Let me explain: The Toastmasters mission is
“…the leading movement devoted to making effective oral
communication a worldwide reality.” While $54 annually are
little to almost all those who live in developed countries,
including me, it is serious money for people of developing countries. But isn’t it in the
developing world where the big
potential for growth of the organization
lies? By increasing the fees TMI is excluding the countries with
little purchasing power. I trust that we all want this great
organization to grow so everyone can benefit. Therefore the members and member clubs, not TMI, should
have a say in future increases of dues and therefore the budget.
Therefore we should vote against proposal A.
3. Because as members and member clubs we are
not presented with a detailed
budget as to how our money is spent. The yearly financial report
(published usually in June of every year) does not allow enough
detail to see how our money is spent. With the 50%
increase in dues in 2005 (increase of $4 mio. per year to $12
mio.) it was promised that new
educational programs were going to be developed. At club level I
have noticed one (1) new program (the competent leader). Does it
take $8 mio. to develop this new program? I am currently working
on my AC-G with materials that are from 1988. The materials are
good, no need for big change, it's just that the question
remains: What is the money used for? How much money was spent
for and saved with the improvement of online services? I expect a detailed report.
Another example: All foreign language manuals have to be translated for
free at the district and club level by volunteers. Then, TMI
takes the copyright of the materials and sells them to those who
translated them as well as their fellow members. It doesn't feel
right and it does not create any need for additional funds. Therefore the members and member clubs, not TMI, should have a say as to future increases of dues and the
budget. Therefore, we should vote against proposal A.
4. Because I believe that there should remain a
system of checks and balances. The constitution and bylaws of
Toastmasters are set up that way. It means, that the board of
directors has to consult (via proposals) with the members and
member clubs about important questions. I believe that is good.
Just like it is good that a government of a country has to
consult with the people every few years (in some countries more
often, i.e. Switzerland) whether they are still on track.
Therefore I believe that moving the competence about setting
dues from the members to the board of directors an unwise
decision. It is one of the few means that the members can voice
their opinion about where the organization of Toastmasters is
headed. Therefore, we should vote against proposal A.
5. Because the name of the proposal “improving
the process of setting membership dues” sounds misleading to me.
I don't share the opinion that it is improving the process nor
that it is complicated to suggest a proposal and bring it in
front of the members for a vote. It has been done many times
before. It is being done now with proposal A. And, in the past,
what the dues are concerned, it only took place once every 10
years. The change only removes one of the members rights: the
opportunity to approve of the board of directors direction.
Therefore, we should vote against proposal A.
I like to keep a say in this organization. Help
to keep our voting rights for future dues increases! |
Remembering 2005
In 2005 Toastmasters International found itself in the third
year of large losses: the expenses had by
far exceeded the income and therefore had created a debt of
several million dollars. It was decided to increase the
membership fees by 50% (!) instead of reducing expenses. The
increase, not surprisingly, sparked heavy protests from members.
Fortunately, there had to be a vote by the member clubs.
Unfortunately, the proposal of the 50% increase was approved by
a majority.Why did it take 3 years to ask the members about a
dues increase? Why were there no other options (proposals)
offered? |
|
About the author:
Thomas Skipwith is a long time Toastmaster. He first joined the
organization in 1997, when he joined the Stuttgart Toastmasters
Club in Germany. In the meantime he has taken many roles, from
VP PR to president, founded two TM clubs and has been area
governor. Currently he is the president of the “Rhetorik Club
Zürich”. He has a master’s degree in business administration and
runs his own business out of Zurich, Switzerland. Thomas is a
professional trainer for public speaking.
|
