"Who Are We" - Demographics of US Amateur Radio Licensees

I'll be speaking about demographics of US amateur radio licensees at RATPAC this coming Wednesday. It's part of a series of talks about the Present, Past, and Future of Amateur Radio.

9:00 PM EST / 8:00 PM CST / 7:00 PM MST / 6:00 PM PST

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/2128884758?pwd=VTE0ajAraG0rMyticmtwN2ZCdHZ3Zz09

Meeting ID: 212 888 4758
Passcode: WEDNESDAY

All are welcome, and it will be recorded and posted to RATPAC YouTube channel at: https://www.youtube.com/c/RATPAC

-Michelle W5NYV

 

Just go to a hamfest and you'll find out all you need to know.

 

@W5NYV please keep up the good work!

 

Sad but true.

 

Good thought-provoking presentation.
l have been thinking about these questions for some time.
The bi-modal age thing really got me; not sure how we ever deal with that one.
Look forward to future works.
David, K2WPM

 

I thought the presentation would spend more time on the problem of licensed Amateurs not upgrading beyond Technician. It was brought up so people do see this as a problem. The other demographic problems mentioned in the video don't require action from the FCC but the problem with Technician license privileges does.

One problem with the Technician license is it offers too much too soon. Anyone that lacks interest in HF will see no value in upgrading unless they want to be a VE. That I see as a "demographic time bomb" (to borrow a term from social sciences) because people need to upgrade beyond Technician to be a VE, and if too many people "age out" (another term I'm borrowing from social sciences) before these people decide to be a VE then we have a bottleneck on growth in Amateur radio.

There's a long list of issues with the licensing we have now, and it's long overdue on fixing them. We have licensing that's built on "incentive licensing" from the 1940s that's been patched and patched for decades. We have "disincentive licensing" now. The disincentive to upgrade is not just at Technician, people see little reason to upgrade from General or the old Advanced license.

How do we fix it? Well, not with another patch. We need to start over. We can't start completely over because of practical issues on maintaining continuity with the licensing we have now. Extra would stay as is because we aren't going to start completely over. Technician and General would be grandfathered just like Advanced and Novice. Then we should consider if we want to go with two tiers of licenses or keep three tiers.

Two tiered licensing would be something like what Canada has. The first tier has privileges for up to 200 watts RF output, and a few other limits here and there, but it's mostly about keeping power low. Canada calls this license "Basic" and we can use that name or come up with a different one, just don't reuse "Technician" or "General" because this is a new license and not another patch. This license should have no limits on bands, modes, or frequencies because slicing and dicing up the bands to create an "incentive" is repeating mistakes from the 1940s. To get the license would be something like a 100 question exam with a passing score of 80%, like Canada does or something around about that so, again, we aren't repeating old mistakes. The top tier license, again an unchanged Extra, is offered after passing another written exam, and we'll keep that at 50 questions just like we have now and like Canada does.

A three tiered license would be like the two tiered model but we'll cut that first written test in half and cut the allowed RF power on the first tier license to 10 watts to emulate a "Foundation" license as modeled by a number of other nations. 50 questions for Foundation, another 50 questions for Basic (as described above in the two tier licensing), then another 50 questions for Extra. If 50 question exams sounds like too much then just keep it 35-35-50 like now, that's not likely to get much resistance. We can put in other limits beyond power for Foundation, like other nations do, there's room for debate here. The goal is to have a license structure that doesn't create a disincentive, doesn't carve up the bands to complicate the licensing and repeat the mistakes of artificial "incentives", and has some continuity with current FCC licensing and licensing in other nations.

As I see it the majority of demographic problems mentioned in the video are from a tiny minority of old white men trying to keep bad social habits learned in a different age. That's a problem that's beyond Amateur radio and there's nothing unique we can do in Amateur radio but be courteous, respectful, and neighborly just as we should everyday with everybody.

 

@W5NYV

Thank you! This was easily the most interesting and informative presentation I've seen linked on qrz.com.

Your results, analysis and recorded discussion addressed many questions I've had rolling around in the back of my head since I first got my license in 2020.

I earned a general class license specifically because I wanted to work HF digital. I realize that an extra class license would allow me somewhat more band access for my preferred activities, but I've never once felt that it was a significant limit. This led me to wondering whether my situation was common or unusual. Your work answered this very well.

Do you think there might be any value in organizing new clubs around date (or perhaps decade) of birth, roughly similar to the way school alumni organizations are keyed to matriculation dates?

Again, thank you, kudos, and keep it up!

 

I disagree with you almost categorically. It's not a perfect system, but your assert things like "anyone", lots of "if"s and more. The reality is that ham radio is growing. Who we are will always change; it's our responsibility to license operators for both legal and ethical use of our spectrum. The incentive-based licensing, IMHO, isn't perfect but will withstand the test of time and mission-creep. New operators need experience. What amateurs do isn't what "pros" do, but it's not what the unlicensed can do-- or damage dangerously.

73 Tom W9YW

 

Actually, a hamfest is perhaps the worst place to get such information, because a LOT of hams don't go to them.

 

I think there's a lot more to it than "bad social habits learned in another age".

I think the attitudes and mindsets encountered by @W5NYV are a MUCH bigger problem than the license structure, license tests, or privileges.

I say there is NO place in Amateur Radio for racism, sexism, or similar exclusionary "isms". None at all.

And we can all so something about such attitudes, besides not having/displaying them ourselves: we can refuse to accept such attitudes from those who display them.

Such things are a much bigger danger to Amateur Radio than any demographic data.

 

If you disagree so much then I suspect you misunderstand my posted comment.

We are seeing growth in Amateur radio, but I'm seeing an unfortunate trend of people not going beyond Technician. That was one thing I thought would be getting more attention in a presentation on Amateur radio demographics.

I agree, we should expect good behavior from Amateur radio operators. I'm just suggesting that maybe we need to look at another demographic problem too. A problem that needs FCC involvement because it is about licensing.

Okay then, we agree that licensing is not perfect. I'd like to discuss improvements.

What are you implying? That new operators need experience in this before getting access to that? What are this and that? We already allow people to get to Extra from the start by passing three written tests, so are you suggesting we don't allow that?

I don't follow. Is this a suggestion that we need changes to licensing? A desire to leave things as they are? Something else? Why mention "pros"?

 

Okay, but it is still a problem. You agree it is a problem. I suggest we do something about it while we work on other demographic problems.

I agree, did you conclude I believe it isn't a problem because I chose to focus on a different problem?

Yes, we can do something about that. We should do something about that. We should do it everyday, not just when on the radio or when at a club meeting.

There's plenty of existing social pressure to drive "-isms" from society that I don't see why this needs special treatment in Amateur radio. The worst insult today is to be called a racist, and a close second is to be called a sexist. Just how much of a problem can this be if people lose their job over using a racist remark just once where someone else heard it?

I doubt Amateur radio is some haven for racism and sexism. If it is then it sounds like this is a tiny minority of grumpy old men that won't trouble us much longer. If these people hold offices in Amateur radio clubs then vote them out, or don't be a member. It sounds to me like this is a problem with Amateur radio clubs more than anything, it's the clubs that are tolerating this, not the Amateur radio community as a whole. This is certainly not tolerated in society as a whole, as I said people lose their jobs over their "-isms".

Who is tolerating these "-isms"? Is this being heard on the radio? That might reach a level where the FCC should be involved. If this is in a club then find a new club. I recall finding a new club was mentioned as a solution in the presentation. Don't tolerate this in your club. Let them know they are not welcome in the club or go to another club. This would be like any other club. Once you no longer associate with these "-ists" then what more can be done? If they take this so far as to be a violation of their license, or a criminal offense, then it should be reported. In a recent ARRL bulletin was a statement from the FCC that illegal behavior should be reported to local law enforcement or the FBI, which was pointed out in the discussion thread on that bulletin as odd since we should be doing that anyway and at all times. This likely has something to do about protesting truckers or that yahoo that triggered false weather alerts.

The presentation recognized this problem, and recommended solutions to the problem if seen in one's club. I agree with those solutions. I also agree with the comments made about people not upgrading is a problem, that Technician grants too many privileges for an entry level license, but I believe it was not given nearly enough discussion on what to do about it. It was hardly discussed at all. So, let's discuss.

 

Sure. But I think "we" need to put a lot more resources into dealing with the problem of licensed amateurs with behaviors, mindsets and attitudes that are driving away newcomers.

There's an old saying that is valid here: "you don't get a second chance to make a first impression."

I think you don't give the problem I mentioned enough emphasis.

Agreed. We need to do more, and do it consistently.

It needs emphasis because of the experiences of @W5NYV and others, recounted in the video.

Maybe to you and me. Not to some folks.

How many US amateurs have lost their jobs for racist/sexist things said on the radio or in person?

How many US amateurs have lost their licenses and been put off the air for racist/sexist things said on the radio or in person?

You'd be surprised at how long some people can hang around, causing trouble. "Only the good die young".

Maybe. I only belong to one amateur radio club, and with C19 our meetings are almost all virtual.

The impact of bad behavior at clubs is important because it's often the entry way for many newcomers. How many times have you seen people here say "find a local club"? If a newcomer goes to a club meeting and doesn't feel welcome, it's a BIG problem.

See above questions about amateurs losing jobs, licenses, equipment, and being put off the air. How often has any of that happened?

Most employees I know of have written non-discrimination/no-harassment policies, with clear consequences for violations. Bad behavior WILL get you FIRED.

If an employer tolerates bad behavior, they can and will be sued for millions and will probably lose. So they take it seriously.

How many clubs have such policies? How many have been sued and lost?

There's also the issue of people claiming First Amendment rights.

Note too that most people NEED a job. Most people do not need to be hams.

A lot can be done. The first step is to recognize that it's a real problem.

It was about the January 6 attack on the Capitol.

It's much older. 2021.

That "yahoo" has reportedly been behaving badly for a long time. It was only the false weather alerts that got him in hot water. Has his license been revoked? Has his equipment been confiscated? Has he been put off the air permanently? Has he paid a fine, gone to prison? Is there video of him being arrested, handcuffed, doing the perp walk, Federal agents impounding all his radio stuff?

Will any of that ever actually happen?

The solution to the Technician-isn't-a-good-entry-license problem is:

1) End "Tech in a day" and similar "teach the test" methods that result in people with licenses who don't know the next steps.

2) Encourage newcomers to get a General as their first license, bypassing the problem entirely. Note that Technician became the de facto entry license more than 30 years ago because so many newcomers bypassed the Novice and went straight to Technician as their first license.

3) Focus on continued Elmering after newcomers are licensed.

4) Give wide exposure to non-voice modes. Amateur Radio is much more than repeaters and HF SSB.

 

I believe we can do more than one thing at a time. We can discuss the "-isms" problem here as well as improvements to licensing to address the disincentives to upgrade. The disincentives were mentioned in the video but no real discussion on solutions came from it yet. At least not until I brought it up.

It seems to me that all that needed to be said on the "-isms" problem was in the presentation. What more needs to be said? Feel free to discuss, I'm not stopping anyone. Given how little discussion happened so far on a thread that is a month old I suspect many people feel as I do that the "-isms" issue was addressed well enough in the video.

I don't know what you want from me. There's been very little discussion on this video so far but I saw this as an opportunity to discuss the licensing as there wasn't much discussion on any other points so far.

If it needs emphasis then why so little discussion on a month old thread? Again, it appears the problem and solutions were well established in the video. If there's more to add then add it. While discussing that we can discuss another demographic issue. Perhaps we can find a lot of overlapping solutions.

That was over a year ago and the FCC statement was a week or so ago. They gave a near verbatim statement then, but something caused them to issue the same warning more recently. I'd think it's the trucking protests, not an Amateur radio issue, or the Amateur accused of making threats and false weather alerts, which is being discussed in another thread. I feel that's getting off topic. I mentioned it only because the FCC gave a reminder on what to do if such things happen on the air, and it was not likely to be some "-isms" problem that prompted this most recent reminder.

Are you agreeing then that Technician offers too many privileges too soon? I'd like to discuss some changes to licensing and testing to address that. It appears you are implying we should not have the question pool available publicly, is that where you are going? I doubt that's going to happen as the FCC shot that down repeatedly already. Are you suggesting a "time in grade" requirement? That has also been killed by the FCC. Given the "Extra in a day" option has been allowed for so long with no indication the FCC would allow anything else I don't know where you are going with this. So many resolutions to that have been proposed and shot down. We need to keep in mind that politics is the art of the possible. Don't waste time on proposals the FCC has stated repeatedly and emphatically they will not consider.

I believe we can do more than "encourage" that. I believe we can get the FCC to agree to make General, or something very similar, the entry level license.

I'd keep element 2 and 3 as separate testing elements for the entry level license. Have one test matters of operational skill, the other on technical skill. Operational skills would be rules and regulations, best practices, and so on. Technical skill would be basic circuits, antenna designs, and so on. The "teach to the test" isn't a problem if the test covers all the necessary materials. Also, I don't know how else one is supposed to learn FCC regulations other than by committing them to memory.

As I pointed out before we should not repeat past mistakes with more patches on patches. We should create a new license to replace General, or have a "do over" on the privileges a General class license grants. Keep in mind the art of the possible. We need to keep this to something the FCC would agree to do. We can look back to what they already opposed, what they liked, and work off that. I don't know which the FCC would find more agreeable, new privileges for General, or a new license to replace it with many similarities in testing and privileges. Both have merits.

Okay. Not sure how you are going to make that work.

Well the ARRL started a digital modes contest, is that something like you are thinking?

One way to help with that is allowing Technician to use digital modes where they are currently restricted to CW. I know that suggestion upset a lot of people but I don't know how they expect these outdated Technician privileges to remain unchanged.