MANDATORY NRHA PROFESSIONALS MEMBERSHIP

STALLIONS	BREEDING	SERVICES	TRAINERS	INCENTIVES	HELP WANTED	AFFILIATES	SALE HORSES

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:

• Open

• Aged Events

• Freestyle

• Increased NRHA Professionals Membership Dues

• NRHA Professionals Conditions

*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 NRHA is insane   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!

 

top  .  home  .  visitor comments  .  traffic stats  .  e-mail us  .  contact us

  

 

 

 

 

 

Whoazone.com thanks Quarter Horse News for their cooperation and support.