Page 3 of 15

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 8 Oct 2009, 3:16pm
by Regulator
Jimmy The Hand wrote:Karen you are assuming that all areas had a large number of lapsed members, however some areas may have no lapsed members but an increase in memberships in others the lapsed/new may be equal which across the board would balance out. As with all numbers it’s how you present them!

Are you also saying that neither Manchester group have has an increase in membership since 2007? That would be a bigger cause for concern, if we can’t get new members then we do have problems

Going by Simons figure it looks like Manchester lost 200+ a year has anyone tried to find out why they didn’t renew?


Some of us Council members have been trying to find this information out. Overall, this year the CTC non-renewal rate is up by 50% - from about 9% of total membership to 13.5% of total membership - but when the suggestion was made that we canvas all non-renewers to find out why, we were shouted down and instead a limited sample of non-renewers will be asked. It will be interesting to see how the survey is structured. The last one asked pretty leading questions and gave little real information about reasons for non-renewal - until you looked at the free text responses under the 'Other Classification'. There were some very illuminating responses there - a high proportion of them related to a lack of service to members.

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 8 Oct 2009, 4:17pm
by Jimmy The Hand
Regulator wrote: …..we were shouted down and…..

Pedantic I know but can we cut down on the rhetoric please? You make it sound as if it was a battle with people screaming at each other!!

Regulator wrote: It will be interesting to see how the survey is structured. The last one asked pretty leading questions and gave little real information about reasons for non-renewal

You make a valid point, you can word the question to get the answer you want which is why it’s sometimes better to bring in an outside agency to set the questions and collate the answers

Regulator wrote: ……There were some very illuminating responses there - a high proportion of them related to a lack of service to members.

What do you mean by a high proportion 30%, 60%? If it was 30% that means 70% had no problem with the service! As I said before you can make figures say what you want them to say.

I would be interested to know what service to members they felt was lacking

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 8 Oct 2009, 4:53pm
by meic
Jimmy said

What do you mean by a high proportion 30%, 60%? If it was 30% that means 70% had no problem with the service! As I said before you can make figures say what you want them to say.



Personally I would be worried if it was over 5%. You cant actually make figures say what you want them to say but if you have intent you could make them APPEAR to say something which isnt so.

For example saying 70% had no problem with the service, which sort of implies that 70% is pretty OK. Even if it means that 30% (thousands) of potential members are giving up on CTC because the membership system is a mess.

When I joined CTC I was warned by my friend who led me to it that they had probably messed up when the magazines didnt arrive. I have heard the same old thing from so many members about magazines and cards arriving at random.
To be sure it works more often than it doesnt. However it would be wise to have a look at what is going wrong to help the poor people at membership to be able to fix it to a high level of sucsess.

70% may sound positive but really it doesnt make me happy

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 8 Oct 2009, 6:59pm
by Regulator
And what it seems tends to be forgotten is that one unhappy person will tell a lot more people about the problems. Bad reviews travel more widely than good ones.

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 8 Oct 2009, 10:21pm
by Karen Sutton
Jimmy The Hand wrote:Karen, I didn’t aim my comments at you as an individual and I apologise if that is how they came over


My response was to your comments on quotes from myself. So I think I can be forgiven for thinking your comments were directed at me.

However, I am growing increasingly uncomfortable with discussing matters with somebody who I belive may know me in "real life", but who chooses to hide their identity. I am scrupulously careful in not offending my acquaintances. This is much harder when I don't know who I am addressing. Because of this, and because I have nothing further to add, I am leaving this thread.

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 9 Oct 2009, 9:41am
by Simon L6
Jimmy The Hand wrote:
Simon L6 wrote:.......You may also recall that I asked how many 'members' across the country were out of time on their subs. I was told 300-400. The month before (Karen will correct me if I'm wrong) 470 dropped off the Manchester roll.

Simon you and I both know that figures quoted at an AGM refer to the previous financial year therefore the 470 from Manchester will, should, appear in this years Annual Report
you are completely incorrect.

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 9 Oct 2009, 10:39am
by Jimmy The Hand
Simon L6 wrote:you are completely incorrect.

So correct me!

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 9 Oct 2009, 12:38pm
by Simon L6
1. there has never been any mention of the membership list carrying expired members in the Annual Report. It's a dirty secret.
2. I asked how many expired memberships were carried in the figures at any one time (having had experience that suggested the correct answer would be quite a few). I was given an answer considerably lower than the number that dropped off one DA list the month after

Jimmy, you've got an axe to grind. Spare us. If you won't look at the report and face up to the facts I can't help you. Those that have are entirely in agreement that the report is grim reading. And I notice you're running shy on the question of the Annual Report to the AGM being misleading.

My sources tell me that the membership report will be on the webiste before too long..............I'll chalk that up as a win!

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 9 Oct 2009, 1:53pm
by Jimmy The Hand
Simon L6 wrote: . there has never been any mention of the membership list carrying expired members in the Annual Report. It's a dirty secret.
2. I asked how many expired memberships were carried in the figures at any one time (having had experience that suggested the correct answer would be quite a few). I was given an answer considerably lower than the number that dropped off one DA list the month after


My point is that any figure given at the AGM, in a report or verbally, will be taken from the previous financial years figures so the Manchester figures would not be taken into account

Simon L6 wrote:Jimmy, you've got an axe to grind. Spare us.


Pot, Kettle, Black springs to mind!

Simon L6 wrote:If you won't look at the report and face up to the facts I can't help you. Those that have are entirely in agreement that the report is grim reading.

Why do you assume I haven’t read the report? Because I haven’t asked you for a copy? Did you never think that I also could know someone on Council?

I notice that only one poster, outwith councillors, indicates they have read the report

Simon L6 wrote: And I notice you're running shy on the question of the Annual Report to the AGM being misleading.


Not at all, I will wait to see what response comes from the Chair at the AGM before I start decrying anyone.

Simon L6 wrote: My sources tell me that the membership report will be on the webiste before too long..............I'll chalk that up as a win!


I just knew you would

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 10 Oct 2009, 5:22pm
by Simon L6
I'm also claiming the credit (along with my friend Regulator) for the inclusion of disabled people within the CTC's insurance policies (see this week's Newsnet)

Let's take an example. In 2007 Karen and I became aware that Arvato were not returning messages when members called up and left voicemails. Cue successively lack of interest, hostility, embarrassment, recognition of the problem, assurances that this was due to specific circumstances and a resolve to not let it happen again. The scandall,as I'm sure we'll all agree, is that the National Office didn't know, and they didn't know because Arvato didn't tell them.

Spool forward to June this year. The independent reporter arrives at Arvato and sees that 40% of calls are not being answered - they're ringing out. And yet the Arvato report for the month shows 100%. So, two years on (and three and a half years after Karen and I started to make a fuss) we still lack what might be called a simple courtesy - Arvato calling up the National Office and saying 'we think you should know, we're short staffed today....'

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 12 Oct 2009, 1:01pm
by Jimmy The Hand
Simon L6 wrote:I'm also claiming the credit (along with my friend Regulator) for the inclusion of disabled people within the CTC's insurance policies (see this week's Newsnet)

Well done! pity you have to boast about it though

I am now going to take a leaf out of Karens book and leave as I have nothing further to add to this thread

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 12 Oct 2009, 1:18pm
by toontra
Jimmy The Hand wrote:I am now going to take a leaf out of Karens book and leave as I have nothing further to add to this thread


That implies that you have actually contributed to the thread - is obfuscation a contribution?

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 12 Oct 2009, 1:38pm
by Si
Chaps/chapesses, can we return to the subject of the CTC's membership process rather than who has contributed what and when and what worth that contribution has?

I'm sure that all concerned only want the best for the CTC and all have worked in their own ways to the benefit of the CTC, but it would be a same if a thread about such an importable subject were to descend into a bit of a petty squabble (and such a squabble might also give more ammunition to those that would want to see the thread pulled from the board). Plus, the debate going in such a direction can also put of those who would like to air their views but would be worried that they might get flamed to some extent if they did.

thanks or you cooperation all.

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 14 Oct 2009, 4:14pm
by CW
Having only been a member of the CTC for just a few years I have experienced more problems with DD and sorting out my membership than with any and all other memberships I have had with other organisations over my years.

What I found was that emails to the membership services were infrequently replied to. Those that were claimed my issues were sorted when they were not. Phone calls were a hurdle in themselves..

My experience is one of systematic failures in this department. Though having been assurred problems were sorted last year, they surfaced again in this years renewal.

I have made my feelings/experience known by bringing it directly to the attention of the CTC.

I can only conclude that nothing has changed for the better. I`m still wating for my corrected membership card but I`m not holding out much hope even after being told on the phone it `ll be sent out...that was on 6th September.

Re: CTC Membership Services

Posted: 15 Oct 2009, 8:14am
by Simon L6
CW - not happy reading. I'd encourage you to get in touch with your National Councillor. It's his or her job to sort this kind of thing out