I was very glad to read these couple of comments regarding our proposed By-Laws Amendment. Especially, reading comments here from Pete, our former Chairman, Jim, our MN Editor, and Laurent, a long time IAAF Measurer, and a few comments written in MN from Mike, our current Chairman.
It seems clear that we can all agree on the fact that there are problems within the RRTC. How best to address these problems is really the core issue at hand. Our proposed amendment doesn’t seek to create a new and unnecessary bureaucracy, peppered with incompetent elected officials. We see our amendment effectively tackling the ongoing development and needs of the sport thru a truly democratic organization working with many of the talented people already in place and within associations.
The oligarchy political structure of the RRTC does not allow for outside voices to be heard. The system in place is too subjective. A democratically structured RRTC requires experienced leaders who are accountable for results and growth. There simply isn’t accountability in the current RRTC form. Just ask yourself if current status quo in course certification meeting the needs of all interested parties?
As much as I trust the wisdom of individual judgments of others, I strongly believe that desions made by a collective group almost always yield much better results. Maybe my grandfather’s advise and direction was the only acception to this rule. The biased appointment process for a Regional Certifier’s position or to Chairman doesn’t allow others who might be more talented and capable to enter. Why hasn’t an objective criteria been developed for the appointment process? Why hasn’t there been a search committee established to seek out new qualified people? Why aren’t current officers and certifiers grooming our future officers and certifiers? Why are Regional Certifiers able to keep their positions for life, just as long as they are willing to process applications?
What I have found a little odd in the comments is all the constant bell ringing for the idea that only “qualified, experienced, and competent” Regional Certifiers who can review an application for certification, all the while our Measurement Manual is set up for “anyone” to measure. We have a process for “anyone” to complete, yet the review must be by a “qualified, experienced, and competent” person. When does the “anyone” become able to competent to review our application? Just what criteria signifies “qualified, experienced, and competent”?
Some associations already have working relationships with Regional Certifiers. Naturally these relationships should be encouraged to continue. In associations dominated by a greater focus on Youth Athletics programs, they would naturally defer to the wisdom of the RRTC to work under the certifier of the closest neighboring association. The goal is to assist each association to be independent and disseminate the workload. We can certainly agree that most associations could, thru proper trainings, eventually run their own program locally.
Jim, you have to admit that MN has failed as effective communication tool for the RRTC. The goal of a quarterly publication hasn’t been met, even after lowering it from bi-monthly publication. Does an editor wait for submissions or seek them? Is it really worth publishing MN in October with only four pieces of old information in it, our August By-Laws Amendment, Chicago’s Tribune Lakeshore Marathon June article, Neville’s June Cyclocomputer Measuring, and a course list current thru August when the September 12th list was available. Do you really think that all is well with the RRTC?
Pete, despite admitting to problems within the RRTC, you also say all is well with the structure. Why has the current structure been unable to find solutions? Was your subjective appointment of Mike the best decision for the RRTC? Could a collective team have elected a stronger leader, maybe? A collective team would certainly be accountable for the failures of the chairman elected. Who is accountable today?
Note: George Regan, is the long time President of the Adirondack Association (Albany Area) and Race Director of the Freihofer’s Run for Women, and I have co-sponsored this amendment. I am the Secretary of the Niagara Association (Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse areas), one of four NY associations (Niagara, Adirondack, Metropolitan, and Long Island), and a National Certifier.