ARRL - Interactive

It’s time to consider a more direct approach with us in establishing how the League represents the Amateur Service.

Right now the group in Newington sets policy, determines its regulatory stance, and promotes a political agenda as established by a combination of paid and volunteer managers and administrative officials. The ARRL also uses a paid attorney in Washington who specializes in communications law, and a team of paid lobbyists on the ARRL staff who “work” local, state, and federal agencies and Congress.

This system, with a presumption that the decisions would be driven by the membership just like a club, worked fine when most hams were members and actively supported the leadership. This was also when there was broader consensus within the hobby on how to move the service ahead in the minds of the public, the politicians, and among government officials.

Things have changed. The League has not kept up.

Their system today fails to respect the rise of communications like the internet, electronic mail, and variations like “blogs,” bulletin boards, and reflectors, that can hold great influence over matters that affect the Amateur Service. Dissent is more prevalent and more organized, only a fraction of active hams pay dues to the ARRL, and it is increasingly unacceptable to find a few guys in a back room in Newington making closed-door deals among themselves with membership resources.

Most struggling non-profit service groups in a situation like this would overhaul their method of outreach to constituents, but the League refuses to officially contribute to these important ways of communicating, and seems stuck in an old system that insulates rather than supports the exchanging of ideas.

For a hobby that prides itself on communicating, this puts the League’s problem in a very harsh light. The few regional directors who take input from hams in their locales are unable to outweigh the pre-determined notions of others with whom they share the decision-making.

Failing to look for insight from these newer forms of communicating has led to situations where the League was kicked around by the utility industry; found itself held in low regard by certain officials at the Federal Communications Commission, and felt the need to fight credibility problems with other federal agencies involved with telecommunications policy.

Oh, did I mention the group’s financial trouble and the fact only a quarter of the licensed hams are members anymore? Anyone wondering why yet ?

Some people on this page have a knee-jerk reaction to criticism against the ARRL, and it falls into three categories – 1.) There’s no other group so shut up and support it 2.) Vote your conscience against elected ARRL officials 3.) The League doesn’t matter, so what.

Other people have indicated they really want to help reform the group in Newington, but feel blocked by this obsolete, insulated system that protects those in positions of power, both paid and volunteer. I have been paying dues to the group while keeping them on probation as a way to underscore the need for change.

What has happened, and will continue to happen, is that the ARRL, as a group, will increasingly find itself on the fringe, not the mainstream, and that a consensus on a given matter will naturally form among those who have decided to step around a system that obstructs and undercuts the forward growth of the radio hobby.

Putting it bluntly, they don’t feel the ARRL is serving them, so they don’t wish to be part of that club. In the time ahead, we probably won’t see another “club” or institution to take its place, and that’s part of the point – the SYSTEM they offer is outmoded at effectively representing our interests.

Instead, the League seems mystified at having to compete for credibility with people who have coalesced around a specific issue, and are doing a ‘better’ or more influential job of presenting it to the amateur and regulatory audience. It won’t take many examples in a series of these to show how disconnected the League has become.

We already have seen the signs of a trend where the League has lost relevance, thanks to these open, identifiable forums such as QRZ.com. More importantly, you should check the range of filings in regulatory forums like the FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System. It cannot be stressed enough that regulators look for input and act on a variety of sources on matters that affect the Amateur Service.

The League is not their only voice.

Such an open-minded view should have been in place long ago at the ARRL, but I can’t find it, and neither can many others who are puzzled by moves that were not reached by real consensus within the club. ( Feel free to name your issue, but this posting is meant to explore the system, not the issue, which is why I’ve left out BPL, the threatened bandwidth petition, code/no-code, licensing and testing standards, etc.)

The ARRL’s place in the hobby can be bolstered and perhaps restored, but not with the current leadership. I challenge anyone to show me where their interests have been directly served by the actions of ARRL’s president, who often responds with a combative, disrespectful exchange confronting those who disagree with him, and the ARRL CEO, who is missing from an open discussion of matters he is supposed to be shepherding through his organization for the paycheck he receives.

Start at the top, and the rest will follow.

It would help to see League officials commit themselves to open, published dialogue as a way to establish participation with active hams that we don't now see. Leadership responses would then lock them into a course of action arrived at with participants in an open process of negotiation and concensus-building.

For the ARRL, this would be a very radical approach.

What do you think ?


Paul/VJB
Annapolis

 

well said.
If arrl posted open comment requests, ( mmm, just like here on QRZ)
They might actually seem to have a clue, or maybe we (hams)
might get a better understanding of why they make the decisions they make.
My feeling is, I don't have a say in arrl, and a my vote doesn;t count.
Anything I could or would say simply falls on deaf ears.
Perhaps an open fourm, visible to all, would get more hams involved.
It would at least move more hams to partisipate.
At least we could say "major conseses says this, why did you not vote that?"...

Ya I know, blah blah blah blah blah.........

Dan kb7uxe

 

Here we go again!!

 

Paul....

You have managed to take my own concerns about the ARRL, and state them in a way I never could have done.  Thank you for that!

I left the ARRL, after many years, because it had become something I no longer recognized as a membership organization.  I personally trace the current problems back to the passing of Dick Baldwin.  

The ARRL has become an entity of self-serving officials, who dictate, rather then listen, to it's members.  You have only to scan past threads on this web site to realize how things have changed.  Threads that begin with a line like "What's your opinion of the League's proposal concerning....." tell me that the League has already decided what's "best" for you.

What happened to open door meetings?  More and more it's a hand selected group that meets behind closed doors, and membership doesn't know of it until it's over.

Yes, I tried the "hang in there and vote 'em out" thing....but nothing changed.  Maybe because too many of us were doing exactly the same thing?

So my final vote was done by removing my membership money from their retirement fund, and it was not done without regret.  I know there are many, many good people holding local, state, regional, etc, positions within the League.  Unfortunately, they don't get to attend the "closed door" meetings either.

Funny thing is, the only thing I miss about the ARRL is the magazine.  And that is  mainly because the advertisements and product reviews were good reading in my own "throne room."

Jim/k7unz

 

Paul -- I'm a newbie amongst the ranks at the League, having just been elected this past January.  I'm learning the ropes, and decided to run for the position so I can offer some influence in League decisions, based upon input from those in my Division, and based upon where I think the League can benefit from it. While others may disagree, I think its fair to say everyone on the board is trying to do good for our membership and Ham Radio. None of us are in there to create the malice some people have charged.  On the same token, we don't pretend that 100% of our decisions please 100% of the membership 100% of the time.

I agree that an open line of communication is essential for any organization and any kind of leadership position.  I'm very much open and willing to have a conversation with those in my division.  The same is true for any Ham, provided they want to have decent, productive dialogue.  I'm in this for the same reason everyone here is -- to have a bunch of fun, learn something new, meet people on the air and sell this fun to others.

As for QRZ and eHam, I read them periodically. Even as a 25 year old -- which in some circles means I have to be tied to every kind of electronic leash that's out there -- interacting on blogs doesn't interest me.  I prefer direct correspondence with those in my division who have concerns or questions to raise.  I don't have anything against blogs...nor do I believe my use of them (or lack thereof) determines how well I represent those in my Division when I have other lines of communication that welcome them anytime.

I won't attempt to speak for others in the League, but as for myself and those in my Division, there's ample opportunity for dialogue and my members' voices do guide the influence I hope to provide within the League.

73,
Brian, N5ZGT
ARRL Vice Director, Rocky Mountain Division

 

While I am new to the hobby, I have noticed that a lot of Operators have taken the untrusting stance with the ARRL that a lot of Americans have taken with our federal government. It ends up where (best case scenerio) they only listen to their members yet those who have opposing views won't hold a membership due to their lack of trust and disagreement with the establishment.

The fact is we can sit on the sidelines and watch it happen or we can become part of the voting membership and move in numbers forcing them to listen. As the old saying goes "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem".

Whether you feel they listen to member input or not I can guarantee you that if you can get enough members to organize and put forth a valid agenda you have a better chance of getting them to listen. Certainly they will listen to a flood of voting members' opinions before they will show any concern for posts on outside forums bellyaching about not getting their way.

While the original poster is certainly correct that the changes needed should start from the top the fact is that changes always start from the inside not from the outside. Sitting on the sidelines complaining about what is and giving our opinion of what should be will most certainly fall on deaf ears.

The best chance of having our concerns heard and eventually acted upon is to be inside and attack the beast from within.

 

I imagine reform may follow from eroding membership. Otherwise, I doubt we will see the perceived need for change from the BOD.

73,
Chip N1IR

 

I always have and still do support the ARRL - but!

The recent behavior associated with the WL2K scam has convinced me that they desperately need an administrative enema at ARRL HQ.

A month or two back, Jim Haynie was here on QRZ dissing amateurs for communicating with Radio with "pure RF" instead of using the Internet. - The way he made it sound, "pure RF" was something we should feel ashamed of.

Prior to that, I had supported Jim Haynie, but now I'd like to see him bounce a few times on the way out. - I feel embarassed about my former support for this individual, now. That kind of anti-ham sentiment has no place in the hobby, particularly at ARRL HQ.

The WL2K scam is not an isolated incident, being a continuation of the same neglect, denigration and wrong-headed thinking on digital matters that has characterized the ARRL for close to two decades. - We were all much better off during those long periods of time where the ARRL simply pretended that digital ham radio did not exist.

That was definately a big improvement over the present situation, where a splinter group that decided they would no longer work cooperatively with the rest of the digital amateur radio community ( WinLink ) is being fawned upon by the clueless folks at ARRL HQ.

I support the ARRL - but not the dysfunctional group of individuals who are currently in charge.

Charles Brabham,  N5PVL

Director: USPacket
Admin: HamBlog.Com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com
Weblog: N5PVL's  Blog

 

The League considers opinions here on QRZ not representative of the Amateur community. They are convinced we're all the lunatic fringe and they are the ones really in touch. My Director, Frank Butler does not answer email even though he promised me he would. Jim Haynie and I have spoken or swapped email a few times. I have to say he has been approachable. Emails to Newington fall in a black hole.

I want the League to succeed but I want to know what the will of the membership is on an item before a petition is filed with the FCC. Even an anual poll on relevent subjects would be welcomed. I hope the message eventually gets through. But they will have to think it is their own idea before they do it.

 

I have been a HAM for over 10 years and just recently joined ARRL. My take on this issue is that the League may not represent 100% of the membership 100% of the time, but they DO represnt the service. On issues such as BPL they are our only and best representation. Without the League we HAMs would have absolutely no voice with regard to protecting the spectrum and the service.

I for one am thankful that we have the League and its high profile lawyers in DC and elsewhere. Without them, we'd be looking at reduced spectrum and second class status.

Just my thoughts...

 

N1IR says:

Sometimes I wonder if my continued financial support of the ARRL makes me "part of the problem".

Amateurs should not have to wonder about that when they support the ARRL.


Charles Brabham,  N5PVL

Director: USPacket
Admin: HamBlog.Com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com
Weblog: N5PVL's  Blog

 

Way to go, Brian!  Hats off to you for stepping up to the plate and doing what so many are either too lazy, or too scared to do.  I have said many, many times that sitting here complaining about the League, contriving "Black Helicopter" theories, or making personal attacks on League members and/or officials does nothing.  If you want to create change, follow Brian's lead and do it from the inside.  

The simple fact is that you can write the equivalent of Homer's Odyssey about code tests, the ARRL & WinLink, or question pools on this site every other day.  What is it going to accomplish?  What is your motivation?  I suspect that if you are truly motivated to further the interests of Amateur Radio, you wouldn't be trying to do it here.

Don't get me wrong -- this site provides a valuable outlet, but it's almost like some folks here expect their words on this site to be taken as gospel and heavenly light will shine down on the ARRL BoD if and when they come here and read them.  You want to make changes?  Get off your butts and *DO* something -- work in your section and build a consensus.  Show strength in numbers, and they will listen...

Joe, N3JI

 

N3JI says:

This theory applies to you too, right?  

Charles Brabham,  N5PVL

Director: USPacket
Admin: HamBlog.Com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com
Weblog: N5PVL's  Blog

 

hhmmm...  97 posts in 4 years compared to 391 posts in one year.  You be the judge.  

 

Folks, many of the comments in this discussion sound so similar to the views expressed by Wayne Green in the '60s. As W5NK wrote in his posting, "Here we go again."

I was a U.S. delegate to the World Radio Conference in 2003 in Geneva, representing a government agency in International Telecommunication Union activities. Among many things, I saw the ARRL in action, taking the lead among IARU member nations to protect amateur frequencies from being eroded and receiving interference. Paul Rinaldo, ARRL CTO, was a delegate and chaired a committee for the United States governement. ARRL staff members Walt Ireland and John Siverling also were involved and are very active in fighting BPL and other important issues. One of the biggest victories at the international level was the restoration of the full pre-WW II 40 meter band which also will have the effect of minimizing the presence of European short wave stations in that band for North American ham operators.

To say the ARRL is off base and not tuned in with reality is showing one's ignorance. With their limited resources, they do a real good overall job looking out for amateur interests, better than any other amateur organization. As far as the comment that they employ a paid Washington lawyer, let me tell you that in this town of Washington, you'd better have a lawyer who specializes in communications law because the that's the type of lawyers the ARRL is up against with the telecoms, power companies, and satcom firms. I've talked to that ARRL attorney - he's a ham, he's good at his job, and he doesn't make a enough off the ARRL to go into early retirement.

The bottom line is that we need to support the ARRL. Their staff does this stuff because they are dedicated to our hobby, as are the volunteer ARRL staff. I don't doubt they could get jobs elsewhere, but they stick with the ARRL. And they're not just sitting on their duff. My association with them in the ITU reaffirms that my dues are going in the right direction.

Instead of hearing what people don't like about the ARRL, let's have some comments about what those people are going to do about it. Like, get involved themselves.

Tom WB2STR