Mandatory
NRHA Professionals Memberships
VIEW THE POLL
UPDATES IN RED (read
the completely amended rule change here)
|
ALERT
(October 08)! NRHA Rescinds Rule Change
24-01-09
An NRHA Board of Directors meeting
was held Sunday, October 12, 2008. The board
considered and discussed the legal ramifications of
the mandatory professionals’ membership. On the
advice of legal counsel the board voted to rescind
rule change 24-01-09 and all other references to
rule change 24-01-09.
|
| |
|
ALERT (August
08)! At the NRHA Board Meeting in OKC
on 8-8 and 8-9, a motion was presented by Guy Vernon
to rescind the recently passed
rule change
29-04-09
which will require mandatory NRHA Professionals
membership for every rider showing in Open NRHA
classes beginning Jan 1, 2009. Among the
reasons sited to rescind the rule change was the
example of AQHA's Professionals remaining voluntary
so as not to infringe upon right to work laws
throughout the country. Other points and
opinions were presented by Allen Mitchells, Kit
Cosper and Michele Flarida. However, this
motion to rescind the rule change was defeated 17-8.
|
THE
DEBATE
Three
rule change proposals PASSED BY THE 2008
NRHA BOARD, WILL mandate an annual NRHA Professionals
membership for any rider who shows in any
Open NRHA class,
Open aged event or
Open Freestyle competition.
The exception WILL only be NRHA Non
Pro and Youth Non Pro card holders.
Another
related rule change HAS DOUBLED the
current
NRHA Professionals dues
from $25 to $50 annually.
As
of spring 2008, the NRHA Website listed 209 NRHA Professionals.
At $25 per membership, that was $5,225 in revenue generated by
that program. We attempted to find in past NRHA Professionals
meeting notes where NRHA Professionals funds were budgeted,
expensed or accounted for, but found nothing.
If the
numbers submitted by the 2006 Finance Committee are correct,
approximately 2,500 individuals participated in Open,
Intermediate Open, Limited Open and Rookie Professional classes
in 2006. Multiply that number by the proposed $50 NRHA
Professionals Membership Dues, and that totals $125,000 in
revenue. (NOTE: it is logical to conclude that a portion
of those entries were carded non pros or youth, and thus would
not be required to join NRHA Professionals)
The RULE
CHANGES, as stated BY NRHA, do not address the need for the
revenue, where the revenue would be utilized, nor which value
center within the Association will gain benefit.
DUAL MEMBERSHIP
Some
feel that MANDATORY NRHA
Professionals membership - over and above the current NRHA Open
annual membership fee of $95 - reeks of the mandatory dual
membership which was rejected in the failed Strategic Plan of
early 2007, and again regarding Bylaw J at the 2007 general
election.*
The
apparent intent of the MANDATORY
NRHA Professionals membership requirement seems to be to
regulate NRHA professionals' Code of Conduct and behavior within
the industry. However, the Code of Conduct included in
NRHA's Non Pro Declaration accomplishes a similar purpose with a
ONE-TIME initial fee. Unless a Non Pro membership expires,
the fee is never assessed again. Note that both
professionals and non pro members are subject to standard
disciplinary procedures for violations of NRHA Rules.
Many Open riders with past NRHA Professionals memberships have
not renewed in subsequent years, stating no notable benefit of
membership. However, there is definite discrimination by
NRHA administration between members VS non members. For
instance, The Reiner Magazine's policy is to NOT
publish articles on trainers who are not NRHA Professionals
members.
WHAT
ABOUT RIGHTS?
Another
unique consideration is the rights of reining horse trainers who
are NOT NRHA Professional members. There
WAS an additional rule change
PASSED that is bedfellow to the
mandatory membership requirement. This
NEW RULE not only outlines
NRHA Professionals conditions,
i.e. what constitutes an NRHA Professional, but goes so far as
to state that;
-
"Advertising
as a trainer/instructor in NRHA media requires membership in
the NRHA Professionals",
-
"The
Professional Committee will screen all applicants. The
Professional Committee can require at any time a
Professional to submit his/her card for review of
applicability. The Professional Committee can refuse a
Professional card to anyone deemed not in compliance with
the eligibility criteria set forth in the NRHA Handbook."
-
and "Professional
status will be granted on a temporary basis and is subject
to revocation pending publication in the NRHA Reiner and
approval by the Professionals Committee. Professional
status will be null and void and any Professional earnings
and prizes will be forfeited if it is determined that the
applicant is not eligible under the NRHA Professional
conditions, as defined in the NRHA Handbook. Failure
to comply with the application requirement as specified in
this Handbook may result in disciplinary action."
Open
riders pay their standard NRHA dues and/or lifetime memberships.
Should they be required to also submit themselves to the
scrutiny of an NRHA committee? And if they chose not to
join, should they be denied the privilege of advertising in the
association's own publication? And above all, should they
be subject to disciplinary action?
THE
REAL QUESTION
The real
question is what is the motivation behind these
RULE CHANGES? Is it simply to
increase overall revenue for the NRHA? Is it to discourage
trainers from other disciplines from showing in Open NRHA
classes? Is it to try to reintroduce the previously
proposed and substantial increase in NRHA Open membership dues
in a camouflaged package? Or is it an attempt to make NRHA
a more exclusive, elitist performance horse association?
CURRENTLY, MEMBERS OF THE
PRO-MANDATORY PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP ARE LOBBYING FOR REGIONAL
DIRECTORS POSITIONS AND ARE TAKING ON OTHER POLITICALLY ACTIVE
ROLLS. WHILE THIS IS THE ENCOURAGED RIGHT OF EVERY NRHA
MEMBER, PROFESSIONAL OR NOT, THE RISK HERE IS THAT BY
MANDATING NRHA PROFESSIONALS MEMBERSHIP, A FEW HIGH PROFILE
TRAINERS MAY BE UNJUSTLY CLAIMING TO REPRESENT ALL PROFESSIONALS,
WHETHER THEY ARE SUPPORTED BY THE MAJORITY OF NRHA TRAINERS OR
NOT.
As was
the case with several past controversial rule change proposals,
many associations ARE recommending
that the Board of Directors REVISIT THESE RULE CHANGES.
all
related rule change proposals & polls:
*Bylaw
J called for an end to the dual membership requirement of
Reining Canada in addition to regular NRHA membership for
Canadian NRHA exhibitors. Despite the Bylaw J passing at
the 2007 NRHA General Election, the NRHA Board of Directors
voted shortly thereafter to impose a dual membership requirement
for Canadian NRHA exhibitors who wished to participate in the
NAAC Affilliate Circuit Series. As of spring 2008, it
appeared that of the 1,100 NRHA members in Canada, fewer than
400 had elected to join Reining Canada.
MANDATORY NRHA PROFESSIONALS
MEMBERSHIPS
POLL CLOSED |
| POLL QUESTION: |
|
| 1) Do you support
the proposed rule change? |
| Yes |
16
|
(17.98%) |
| No |
73
|
(82.02%) |
|
|
|
Total Replies : 89
|
COMMENTS:
- Wow... the professional
committee used to be a premium status. You
signed the code of ethics and got listed on the
web site. You were a cut above. But it looks
like someone did the math recently. I CANNOT
understand how NRHA can keep looking internally
to raise the additional funds it needs. Talking
about milking your own cow dry!!! You''ve milked
her dry now you''re cutting her throat!
- I do not see any reason
for another fee we already pay our dues and we
pay to show. What is to be gained by this I
belong to NRHA. I should not have to belong to a
professionals committee on top of it. I do not
belong because I have not seen the point of it
yet.
- Open means open to all.
Where will apprentice program participants fall
under this rule? It appears they would not be
eligible to show in either the open or non pro
divisions. Would we have to offer yet another
separate class for them?
- I do not consider
professional horse trainers in the same ballpark
as architects, engineers, doctors, lawyers, etc.
Perhaps if our trainers had to go to school for
4-8 years and have an advanced degree in horse
training, we could mandate that they belong to
the "union". Besides, this will no doubt put a
burden on those young trainers that don''t have
the benefit of some sugar daddy/mama mentor
trainer to get them started. This appears to be
another money and power grab - do what we say,
or else!
- This beats all I have EVER
seen! Coupled with the new NRHA Professionals
conditions, this is stifling the basic rights of
every professional NRHA member. Never seen
anything like it and I guarantee I will be doing
something else with my reining horses if this
passes.
- The open riders have the
rules protecting the amount of money that needs
to be added by affiliates. The open divisions
have larger purses to be won than their
respective nonpro divisions. The trainers pass
the expense on to their nonpro customers and
owners anyway, why shouldnt they pay more? If we
piss off enough new and low level trainers maybe
they will realize that they can make more money
showing in the nonpro if they are any good. If
you cant beat a nonpro why would you want to
take money to train someone else''s horse that
is trying to beat those same nonpro''s? This
rule like many others NRHA has made or talking
about making is about grabbing more money from
people that have little or no chance of getting
anything in return so they can give more to the
few people at the top. I agree with the last
poster that said they are insane, the difference
is I think the quicker we let them drive more
members away the quicker we can get back to
fixing this sport for the majority of reiners.
Keep up the good work Whoa zone, sooner or later
something is going to happen to allow reining to
grow like it should and not the little bit of
growth that NRHA brags about. This sport should
be over the 100,000 member mark. It will be soon
now that enough people realize that the NRHA
doesnt give a rats ass about anyone with incomes
under $200k per year and are looking for other
places to show their reiners.
- I see absolutely no reason
why anyone who wants to show in an open class
should be prevented from doing so. What is the
logic for this proposed rule change? Right now,
open classes provide a mechanism for non pros to
test-drive horses they don''t own but are
thinking about buying. Why would anyone be in
favor of this rule? It does nothing for the NRHA
as a whole.
- It seems NRHA is taking
away more and more choices from its members. We
MUST get the Reiner magazine. We MUST support
the USEF and WEG. We MUST pre-enroll weanlings
in the Futurity and Derby. We MUST enter all
divisions despite what we are qualified to
compete in. We MUST join the NRHA Professionals.
When will the membership wake up and take charge
of this association?! As seen on Whoazone polls
and reflected in NRHA''s own statistics, only a
very small percentage play this sport at the
high end. It is time the majority of the
membership becomes the VOCAL majority of NRHA
and steers this association a direction which
will serve the many - NOT THE FEW!!!
- I, personally, don''t
''WANT'' NRHA to determine if my trainer is
''qualified'' to show my horse. Just another
money grab. We need to vote against any rule
change that mentions NRHA Professional, by the
way. Currently there are only one or two
references and NO definition in the rule book.
- I think it should be a
choice to belong to this not mandatory. There
are several things about this proposal that just
do not seem democratic.
- I believe this mandatory
fee is also included in the Prime Time division.
- Another example of trying
to control things. Again the whole reason the
NRHA was started was to get away from a far away
entity trying to control them.
- Making all Non Pros join
NRHA Professionals is disrespectful to the true
Professional Reining Horse trainer. Just because
someone is an Open rider doesn''t mean they''re
reining horse trainers, where do they show?
- It kind of defeats the
purpose of having an "open" class (historically,
the open class was just that: open to ANYBODY).
Way to shoot up and coming trainers in the foot
during a recession.
- I think it is absurd,
complicated, and counterproductive for the NRHA
to attempt of legislate on such a large scale. I
resent paying additional money when I have
already paid a lifetime membership years ago so
as to avoid paying annual fees. I feel like I
have been duped. As far as attempting to
legislate ethics and common sense, that just
feels all wrong to me. I will assume that the
intent is good, but the solution that is before
us feels elitist and insulting. Maybe I am
missing the concept somewhere, but a longtime
NRHA member, and professional, I was not
contacted with any kind of an explantion (an
email would have been OK) as to why we need to
do this. It seems like another gap in
communication with the average member who it
will affect has occurred.
- I strongly oppose this
rule change. I cannot see how this is not in
direct violation of the recent rule change on p.
11 of the 2008 NRHA Handbook; Article VII.
Membership, Section 6 which states No exhibitor
or owner may be required to be a member of any
organization other than the National Reining
Horse Association in order to compete in an
approved reining event or class. Exception:
NRHA/US Equestrian Federation dual approved
events. They have passed this rule. Now, there
are many questions...1) What is the money to be
used for? 2) How does this possibly benefit the
trainers who show NRHA? 3) What kind of
questions will be asked in order to identify our
"eligibility" to be a "NRHA Professional"? 4)
How is the over-worked, under-staffed NRHA
office be able to handle the overwhelming
paperwork that this will produce? 5) Who will
the members of this Committee be that holds our
ability to make a living in their hands? Will
the NRHA Board be approving their
recommendations? And lastly and most
importantly, WHY is this a necessary
organization in the NRHA? Will a Non-Pro
Association and an Owners'' Association be next?
I have not found even one person who supports
mandatory membership in the Professionals
Association. Another prime example of the NRHA
Board ignoring the Membership of their
Association. We have to vote for the beneficial
By-Laws and Board Member changes in the upcoming
election or we are sure to continue to be
ignored by the NRHA!!
- How will NRHA monitor
assistant trainers and others who meet the
definition of "who has received or is receiving
directly or indirectly remuneration for showing,
training or assiting in the training of any
horse ridden astride regardless of discipline or
breed." if that assistant or independent trainer
does not show at this point in their career.
Same for a reining horse trainer who doesn''t
show locally, doesn''t join the association and
doesn''t advertise in the NRHA magazine. Further
dissection of the above conditions really state
that any person who trains a horse for
remuneration is considered a NRHA Professional
regardless of discipline or breed. Further it
states that "A NRHA Professional shall be
further defined as a person who has given or
currently gives lessons for renumeration." That
"further" means one could possibly not be a
"rider astride", but has or currently just gives
lessons, i.e., coaching another rider!! Thus
every trainer in the universe who trains astride
for remuneration is a NRHA Professional,
regardless of whether they are actually engaged
in NRHA activities or not. It doesn''t specify
what type of horse you train or which discipline
you''re training for. The real kicker to this
rule is the "entry into an approved NRHA class
or one who advertises in NRHA Media. Thus if one
stays clear of showing and advertising with
NRHA, they really don''t have to join NRHA nor
the Professionals and can carry on their
training business within the reining world.
Seems like this would apply to assistants who
don''t want to show, those who only break
reining horses for a living and those who may
actively give lessons from the ground. Thus
we''ve just created a situation for folks to
"legally" avoid the payment of the $50 if they
don''t show or advertise, or don''t care to join
NRHA, because otherwise would cause a monitoring
of all "reining horse" training facilities by
the NRHA Police!! Websters, among other
definitions for the word Professional, defines
it as "worthy of the high standards of the
profession" or as "one who does something with
great skill." Who is the judge of one attaining
these attributes?
- Personally, I think before
a reining horse trainer could be called a NRHA
Professional and a member of that group, they
must meet some defined criteria. First, would be
the number of years as a reining horse trainer
and a member of NRHA showing in the Open
division. Second, would be the attainment of a
certain level of achievement as an Open rider.
Perhaps a certain number of top level placings
at certain level of shows against X number of
competitors. Is the new Rookie Professional as
qualified to be promoting himself as a NRHA
Professional as a seasoned professional is? If
you hire an assistant tomorrow to start riding
colts and being an "open" rider, does that
qualify them to be considered an NRHA
Professional in the context of the description
of the application and meaning of the word. Does
it not degrade the real NRHA Professional
standing when you allow, carte blanche, anyone
to be a NRHA Professional for $50? Is a student
just out of law school as competent as a
professional, skilled and proven attorney? Is an
intern in a medical center qualified to be
called a Dr. when they haven''t achieved the
full level of experience and training? Is this
just a way to fund the secretary, separate
website for the NRHA Pros, newsletter and better
Top Twenty awards to the same people. Will the
bottom 200 be given the same "benefits" as the
Top 100?
- I WAS AT THE TOWN TALK
MEETING IN OKC DURING THE DERBY THIS PAST WEEK
AND WAS APPALLED BY THE FACT THE PRESIDENT OF
OUR ASSOCIATION STATED THAT ONE OF THE REASONS
FOR THIS RULE WAS BECAUSE HE HAD HEARD THAT
SOMEONE CALLED THE NRHA OFFICES TO FIND A
TRAINER IN THE GREATER ATLANTA GEORGIA AREA
ANDTHE OFFICE STAFF WAS SORRY TO SAY THAT THEY
COULD NOT FIND A NAME TO GIVE OUT!!!! I SAT
THERE IN DISBELIEF AS I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT IF
YOU GO TO THE NRHA WEBSITE AND CLICK ON SERVICES
YOU WILL FIND A LIST OF ALL PROFESSIONALS BY
STATE. THERE ARE SEVERAL TRAINERS IN GEORGIA
THAT HAVE PAID $25.00 FOR THIS BUT NO ONE IN THE
OFFICE COULD TELL THEM AND OUR PRESIDENT ALSO
SEEMS TO BE UNAWARE OF THIS !!!! YOU CAN ALSO
FIND TRAINERS LISTED IN THE REINER UNDER THE
DIXIE REINERS FOR GEORGIA. JUST ANOTHER CASE OF
A SMALL MAJORITY THAT IS AFRAID THEY WILL LOSE
CONTROL OF THEIR OWN PERSONAL AGENDA''S IF THE
MEMBERSHIP REQUIRES ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRUTH
BEHIIND THE RULE CHANGES!!!
- THIS IS A WAY TO COMPILE
IMFO ABT ITS PROF HORSE PEOPLE IN THE NRHA,
BRING THE TOO BUSY HORSE TRAINERS TOGETHER TO
TAKE THEIR POSITION AS A LEADER OF NRHA, NOT
ALLOW THE FRINGE FEEDERS TO CONTINUE TO FEED OF
NRHA WITHOUT HAVING SOME ENVOLVMENT.TRAINERS ARE
SO VERY IMPORTANT TO NRHA I WOULD TO SEE THEM
ALL JOIN THE NRHA PROF AS DO MOST ALL OTHER
PROFESSIONALS IN THIS WORLD EX NURSES DRS
LAWYERS ETC. BE CAREFUL THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT
HAVE POWER IN NRHA MAKE MONEYOF NRHA AND ARE NOT
HORSE TRAINERS. THEY WANT THIS EFFORT TO FAIL SO
THEY CAN CONTINUE TO INFLUENCE NRHA WITHOUT THE
NRHA PROF. KEEP UP THE IN FIGHTING AND THEY WILL
GET THEIR WISH. GOOD ORGANIZATION IN AN
ASSOCIATION BRINGS HARMONY AND SUCCESS NOT
DISCONTENTMENT
- this seems to me to be a
way for the current directors and exec board
members to form a political action group that,
after being forced to step down Jan 1 2009
giving way to the ELECTED board, will continue
to dictate policy from the back door.
- NRHA needs to reverse this
rule immediately and leave it like it was -
UNION and NON-UNION. This country and this
discipline is based on CHOICE - what type of
horse to ride, what type of gear to use, what
type or level of show to attend. In this day and
age too many of our choices are being taken
away. I became a trainer because I didn''t wan
to go down the narrow path of 9 to 5. PLEASE
don''t take away my CHOICE by making me join
your TRAINER UNION!!!
- THis is very prohibitive
to new trainers coming into NRHA.
- Your polls are apparently
rigged. I Looked at the poll results on the
professional rule and it had 20 replies and in 4
minutes it jumped to 65. Now way in 4minutes
could 45 people voted on this subject.
- WHOAZONE RESPONSE to above
comment: whoazone polls are not RIGGED. the
discrepency you refer to is likely due to either
your browser refreshing or your impatience with
the submission process - your comments were
originally submitted 3 times by mistake :-)
- Hello --- what about the
right to work laws. This type of plan was
"tried" by larger organizations than the NRHA
and their legal staff told them to back away
quickly. This can be deemed subjective - and an
unfair right to work tax. WHO makes the
decisions who gets a card ---- if they say NO
--- NRHA has lost another member (or in the case
of owners) several members -- several horse
licenses... Please rethink your efforts here.
See the copied text below from the article "The
Professional Committee will screen all
applicants. - IN WHAT TIME FRAME? The
Professional Committee can require at any time a
Professional to submit his/her card for review
of applicability. The Professional Committee can
refuse a Professional card to anyone deemed not
in compliance with the eligibility criteria set
forth in the NRHA Handbook." --- MAY BE DEEMED
SUBJECTIVE... and "Professional status will be
granted on a temporary basis and is subject to
revocation pending publication in the NRHA
Reiner and approval by the Professionals
Committee. Professional status will be null and
void and any Professional earnings and prizes
will be forfeited if it is determined that the
applicant is not eligible under the NRHA
Professional conditions, as defined in the NRHA
Handbook. Failure to comply with the application
requirement as specified in this Handbook may
result in disciplinary action IF YOU CAN''T SHOW
--- THEN HOW DO YOU GET DISCIPLINED.... YOU
WON''T BELONG...
- Here we go again - NRHA
Board proposes something outlandish without
forethought or general consensus, the membership
doth protest, the Board says SO WHAT WE DON''T
CARE, then 2 months later they say NEVERMIND.
Don''t these people care about their credability
or the animosity they cause?
- NRHA will just nickle and
dime everyone to finance there 30 people who
want to do international reining!Just like how
they stuck Canadian membership with mandatory
dual membership! Here it was voted out with
by-law j and then Canadians thought it was over
and they got caught sleeping and missed it on
the last vote and now they have mandatory dual
membership and the US is going to get it next!
|
|
Disclosure:
“In The Zone” is a cooperative effort between Whoazone.com founders and
contributing members of the National Reining Horse Association.
It's intent is to educate and involve NRHA's membership regarding the
political, functional and administrational issues facing the NRHA.
Comments and viewpoints presented herein are not necessarily those of
Whoazone.com.
|
