Fallout FRC meeting 1st March 2006 [5]. Press Office Blog.

For farriers to raise concerns with elected Farriers Registration Council representative Peter Baker. Anonymous postings will be deleted.
PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Fallout FRC meeting 1st March 2006 [5]. Press Office Blog.

Postby PNB » Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:33 am

FRC makes £6k PA Saving.

It has been decided that in future the annual reports of council will not be circulated to every farrier who pays his registration fee.

This represents a saying of £6k each year, savings are something to be applauded. Hip Hip. FRC lost £25k+ in the year 2005.

There are however a couple of small downsides. If you should wish you will not now be able to see at a glance where your registration fees come from and then go to, that is without either the use of a PC to see the reports on the FRC web site, or applying to Sefton House for your free personal copy. FRC have 500 copies printed up to post out which are available on request.

Of course you can also communicate with your representative on council to get explanations of matters.

What about the plastic warrant card and car sticker, do you want / need them. Is this another potential large saving.

PNB.

Any Comments.
Last edited by PNB on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:17 am, edited 3 times in total.

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Fallout, FRC meeting 1st March 2006. [6]

Postby PNB » Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:00 am

Further massive savings by FTA.

The Farrier Training Agency made a loss of £285K+ last year, don't worry, over the years it predecessor FTS have amassed a profit of £600k+ from which FTA can draw to meet any shortfalls. The forecasts for FTA are a poor year again in 2006, there should however be a big enough accrued pot to keep it solvent. Things financial we were told should improve in 2007.

It seems the fault lies wholly with the funding agency LSC well that is where the blame was targeted. It was reported that the LSC have altered its policy and changed the flow of the funding drip feed. Added to which the the £540K+ cove hand out was a one off which it appears now has been dispersed across all the areas it was handed down for.

Of yes, the massive saving, well ATF's are the ones to suffer here, all of the incentive payments well as far as I can see all have been withdrawn, so now ATF's get no NVQs subsidy, either for CPD, First year wages offset , attending training courses [ IE L11] and the other susidised ATF incentive areas. Administration it seems uses up all the available funds.

The one good thing to survive is that the £15k PA paid to NAFBAE to subsidize apprentice membership in exchange for a specified apprentice help line, this payment is to continue.

PNB.

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Postby PNB » Tue Mar 07, 2006 1:56 pm

All,

Part of the content of the above was a mistake on my behalf. It was the FTS that made the £285K loss!! in 2005, but a loss never the less.

The FTA agency didn't formally exist before 1st January 2006, when the FTS secretary took over the role of The Training Director of FTA, a joint role held as the same person is Company Secretary of the Farriers Registration Council, both very recent newly created posts.

I am sorry for my error!!


PNB.

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 8:32 pm

profits may go but sleaze goes on for ever

Postby admin » Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:23 pm

It's nice to know that even in times of hardship that the registration fees can still be used to buy off nafbae.

cliff barnes
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:24 pm

Postby cliff barnes » Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:13 am

Like the UKHSU would have turned down the money if they had been in the Position NAFBAE are... for GODS sake when are you people going to start to realise that we need to pull together instead of this constant BITCHING that goes on across this site.........

Giles
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 4:41 am
Location: Wales
Contact:

Postby Giles » Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:37 am

Cliff,
Are you a member of NAFBE or UKHSU ? If not why not ?

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 8:32 pm

Postby admin » Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:58 am

I think we would have turned down the money, to be financially beholden to the FRC would completely compromise our independence and our ability to represent farriers.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

csc

Postby csc » Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:12 pm

with ever way you look at it cliff n.a.f.b.a.e. are reciving funds from f.r.c. the f.r.c. are here to represent the horse owner n.a.f.b.a.e. are here to represent the farrier IT IS THE U.K.H.S.U. WHO IS TRYING TO KEEP THE TRADE IN THE HANDS OF FARRIERS, AND THE W.C.F. when you say we are bitching you are correct we are bitching about not being heard as farriers there are to many people that are easily led by the powers that be
let me give you an example DO YOU THINK THAT FARRIERS SHOULD BE ALLOWED A REFERENDUM on the royal vetinary debate or should we have the decision made for us and if we go in the r.v.c. direction what will hapen to the f.r.c. and w.c.f. IT MIGHT ALL GET DUMPED BY D.E.F.R.A.
as a farrier this is our trade the W.C.F. is our heritage and i and the U.K.H.S.U.want to protect it and if you dont feel that way thats your decision

cliff barnes
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:24 pm

Postby cliff barnes » Sat Mar 11, 2006 12:47 pm

Giles

Iam a NAFBAE member. and my feeling is that the ukhsu should never have been created. The farriers of this country do not exceed 3000 at present. Why would anyone want to seperate this small community by starting yet another UNION. The NAFBAE was set up for the farrier and blacksmith, originally farriers were considered the poor cousins to the blacksmith, now the tide has turned and the blacksmiths i have spoken to feel very much out in the cold..this is a huge shame and I would like to see them come back on board. I would also like to see the UKHSU dispanded and its members to rejoin (PNB still is a memeber) and bring thier views and passion for the industry back on board. I trully feel in this way we can present a much more UNIFIED force to tackle all the issues that need to be raised.. Peter was once an active member, and I belive if the information that I have been given is correct that he was the elected member of NAFBAE at the original meeting with the vets that considered thier new act.... when the meeting was voting on the important points of this new act unfortunatley for the farriery world Peter was off having a shower....! (sorry Peter I know that this is old ground for you and I from the NAFBAE sites, and I know your reasons behind leaving the meeting, but I feel its relevent. It was exceptionally hot and they were not allowed to remove Jackets at the meeting and I believe one of the members was seriously ill afterwards).

It is a serious problem that lies ahead of the industry.

Honestly if you offer a referendum to the farriery community how many would vote.....and how many would be well enough informed to vote, no matter how much information you send out to them....how many JUST want to shoe horses in peace..? It always seems to be a select few at any meeting or organised event..? It is up to those who are prepared to put the time in to work through these difficult times, and to make most of the decisions...

I aggree we need to fight for our rights. We have got be prepared for the upcoming events, DEFRA concern me massivley in all this, they have the ability regardless of what we can come up with of riding shotgun over the top of us and the vets..we need to find a way to keep the company and its acts upto date enough to keep it going.. all things need to advance so lets keep pushing and advancing but to do this we need to be united not working agianst each other...

It is very difficult on these pages to form any sort of coherent ideas on the individules ideas and prospectives due to the vast number of differnet headings.... so much info in so many diferent pages that is all interlinked. I dont feel this is constructive just confusing. every one seems to jump at what is said on one page when the explanation is on another, any chance admin can find a way of putting all the FRC meeting fallouts under one heading....? If peter is only covering one topic per day perhaps one every third day on one site would allow people a chance to get an overall view of the other individuals views....? Just a suggestion...

Regards Cliff

Giles
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 4:41 am
Location: Wales
Contact:

RCVS act and the unions

Postby Giles » Sat Mar 11, 2006 2:28 pm

Cliff,
many years ago I was also a member of NAFBAE and did not feel that my and other members concerns were being addressed by then powers that be. I also felt that as a Farrier I wanted to represented by Farriers, not Blacksmiths although this is what I trained as in my youth. Blacksmiths problems are not Farriers and visa versa and see no reason to be in the same union. When I found the UKHSU it was already formed, but felt that at last I had a place to go to that would represent a farrier which is what I have been most of my life. By diversifying NAFBAE have not done themselves any favours, blacksmiths have several groups which represent them separate from NAFBAE and why is that, and as far as allied trades are concerned they also have gone their own way. NO thank you, I think NAFBAE and its members would be better served by backing what farriers want, and at least in this case working alongside and with UKHSU. If they don’t then I feel I will know where their feelings are, and it wont include farriers.

I think as an active member of a union whether a farrier votes or not is not the question or the point. The main thing is that members should have the opportunity to do so, and how many do or do not is irrelevant. The opportunity is the main thing and any decision taken after the count would be binding on all. If a decision is made by a group without reference to farriers as a whole, I think it would not be binding on the majority, then where would we be, all for the lack of a little common sense. But then again common sense is not very common is it, but I would expect those that put themselves up as decision makers even without recourse to the majority to have some and be working for the farriers and horses welfare as a whole. If they don’t then I feel the proverbial will hit the fan and will not be in the best interests of the NAFBAE, UKHSU, WCF, FRC, Farriers and Horses, or even DEFRA

AS far as DEFRA is concerned I agree, they are a dictatorial group, but even they must understand that if farriers a s whole don’t go along with what they want, it wont happen. and I will do my best to see it doesn’t if it is not in the interest of farriers and horses. You are right i do feel that all this should be on one part of the forum, though there is too much for one thread.

Regards

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Postby PNB » Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:42 pm

Cliff,

I am sorry but at that meeting I informed the chair, a fellow farrier I was unwell and was over heated, he refused me leave to remove my jacket and refused to suspend the meeting to allow one other member [who later suffered a heart attack, and myself time to cool down and recover]. He allowed the meeting to continue in my absence, [that's minuted in an unspecific format] the remaining business was concluded very rapidly, which I suggest may have been due to the torrid conditions in the room on that day. Just out of interest the chair at the last AGM 01 03 06 , you were there, did not allow history to repeat itself, or the un ventilated atmosphere in that room to endure, the Registrar was instructed to switch off the heating, then she removed her over clothing.

On your further point, I have no reason to believe the conclusions of the small committee the last time the possibility of the registration act's amendment was discussed at council by me, [three years past] were misrepresented to council by the working group, committee's, chair, as the minute showed the proposals to apply for amendment were killed off there and then in accord with the small working committee's wish, due to the risk to the act, even though I was out of the room at this time.

The next point, How many would vote is not an issue just that the opportunity was afforded-- [I accord with Giles's above comments].

Further, Any comments I make are in the interests of openness and to my satisfaction accord with my obligation under the rule of law under NOLAN!!

The opportunity is open to anybody / everybody in our craft to reply, [And I listen, yes, to the whole broad spectrum of threads].

Finally, I agree if UKHSU and NAFBAE would / could accord with a common aim of affording farriers a voice I would support the idea. But NAFBAE is not truely democratic it is a delegate organisation, thus still demonstrating some of the historical constraints of being an employer's group, [as opposed to one unified with the crafts employees]. From my experience there simply is not the energy within NAFBAE to make things happen, just look at the responses on their notice board, that is until you came along. I look to you for a lead to unify our objectives, I will work for any common end. It is probably better to draw to your attention now, there are however ingrained prejudice within certain senior members of my association, to quote a recent comment, " While I am alive we [NAFBAE] will never speak to you [UKHSU]," I have tried to accord with you suggestion to unify, as you correctly state should happen, I have rejoined NAFBAE, our chair and one of the vice chairmen are also members.

The reality is NAFBAE offer the only affordable indemnity against disiplinary cost [being my main reason for membership]. Trying to find unanimity between a new group with balls and one that has become inert over the hundreds of years it has existed is a task that cannot be achieved as a unilateral act. In order for it to happen, NAFBAE have got to establish an infrastructure within itself, that can respond on reflex to situation, speak up / speak out in a moment to meet the crafts concerns. The restrictions of long standing protocols will not even allow person to person communication similar to this to happen and which would have to happen. It is today an easy task to achieve as the executive of any organisation can communicate at the touch of a button, communication is no longer the barrier.

Further to my final point. The fact remains the FRC, FTS - FTA are net subscribers to NAFBAE £15K PA, and as such I can not accept they are free to speak in an unbiased way for the membership, well at least for this member anyway.

PNB.


Return to “farriers - contact your FRC rep”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest