WBCCI MOHO issue - 2010 to 2012

[cooperhawk]

Originally Posted by Forrest

I think the context of HowieE's post is in regard to Airstream travel trailers, not Airstream Motorhomes. Your post and another make it sound as though FMCA welcomes trailers when they don't. To quote from their website: "Family Motor Coach Association is the world's largest motorhome owner's club. Our RV club is dedicated to helping motor coach owners to enjoy the motorhoming lifestyle to its fullest. If you’re passionate about motor homes and motorhoming, you should join FMCA."

I'm sure that FMCA is a great organization, full of wonderful people, but it is a motorhome group. The WBCCI started entirely as an Airstream trailer club, dedicated to trailers, run by trailer owners concerned with trailer issues. It reached its zenith as a trailer club. It's richly ironic that has changed and that motorhome owners are changing the club to suit their needs and not the needs of trailerists.

There is a difference between a motorhome lifestyle and a trailering lifestyle. If that difference were not significant then FMCA membership would be open to trailerists (and not just commercial vendors who own a trailer).

Well duuuuh! Is that why I never noticed any trailers? Oh, is that why thier name is Family Motorcoach Assn? That's kinda insulting friend. And you wonder why your membership is going in the tank.

Well, you quoted my posting which seems to have magically disappeared. Wonder how that happened.

[Gene]

Howie, I am aware that there have been efforts to change things by moving people through the officer route. I realize the deck is stacked against reform. I am also aware of the efforts to change the constitution and that those proposals were very controversial.

That does not mean efforts to elect reformers is not a good idea if it is possible. It takes time, a lot of time is appears, but every reformer elected to something is a voice for change and maybe it will help in the long run.

Constitutional and bylaws changes are even more difficult, but also worth the effort for people who want to reform the organization. The changes should be simple, easy to understand and less controversial.

Commitment to change means long hours, politicking, and a desire to push the stubborn people opposed to change to accept that reformers will not give up no matter how long it takes.

The alternative is fighting only over MH's and no change, a declining organization and continued actions associated with powerlessness.

Gene

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by HowieE

Forrest an interesting picture, but somewhat misleading.

As all RVs that frequent Wal Mart as an overnight spot are acutely aware there is a growing problem of the larger MH pulling the dump valve and or setting their trash on the parking lot just before they leave.

While your picture is a joke I don't consider the increasing actions of the MH crowd a joke or an image that RVs should support.

Misleading? Huh? It doesn't have anything to do with WalMart. Where do you get that?

In 2006 the Int'l rally was in Salem, Oregon, and everyone was given dire warnings to not put wash water or any kind of water for that matter on the ground there. I witnessed a distraught woman talking to IP Jim Franklin. Her husband was in poor health but she hitched up and drove the two of them to the rally because they'd never missed one. They were long time members. Until then, her husband had taken care of driving, hitching and setting up. But with his poor health, those duties fell to her. In a very real sense she was a first timer, and she made a mistake. She pulled the dump valve on their trailer and of course put some nasty water on the ground. She was terribly upset, embarassed and was asking Franklin what she should do. Well, he told her to leave the rally. That was his answer. Naturally, she was devasted.

Fortunately, one of the VP's - I don't remember which one - took her aside and comforted her and assured her he'd have it taken care of and that she could stay. This was just one of the things I witnessed and experienced at that International that were very disturbing to me.

The EC7 were camped almost entirely in motorhomes that had two to four times the holding capacity of vintage trailers. With that mindset, they didn't see any reason why the honey wagon should pump us out any more often than every four days.

There was a dump station available, but as usual it was sometimes inaccessible. Anyway, that is the purpose of the commentary in the cartoon - the motorhome mindset versus the needs of trailers. So, the trailer (with a red #1 on it - now guess whose number that is) is taking a leak on you know who.

But seriously, it's sad that I have to explain this to you, and all the humor is probably lost in the explaining.

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by cooperhawk

Well duuuuh! Is that why I never noticed any trailers? Oh, is that why thier name is Family Motorcoach Assn? That's kinda insulting friend. And you wonder why your membership is going in the tank.

Well, you quoted my posting which seems to have magically disappeared. Wonder how that happened.

No insult intended at all. Maybe you're being a bit defensive, and if I caused that I appologize. But pointing out the obvious is sometimes necessary.

I had nothing to do with your post disappearing.

I'm not worried about my membership going in the tank, cause I'm no longer a member.

[Forrest]

In the spirit of trying to stay within the theme of this thread, I wrote to FMCA the following:

Hello,

I am hoping that the FMCA can clarify what a “motorhome lifestyle” is and/or how that lifestyle is different from a “trailering lifestyle.” I am a trailer owner and respect the FMCA restricting membership to only motorhome owners, but would like to know the FMCA viewpoint. For instance, why doesn’t the FMCA let travel trailer owners have a regular membership?

Best regards,

Forrest McClure


This was the response from FMCA:


Dear Mr. McClure,

Thank you for your email asking about "motorhome lifestyle." FMCA was formed in 1963 as an association of motorhome owners only. When the original members formed the association, the Bylaws they penned stated that membership would be limited to any Type/Class A, B, or C motorhome, or a bus conversion, that contains all of the conveniences of home (including cooking, sleeping, and permanent sanitary facilities). I believe they wanted to create a niche among this particular type of RVer.


At one time, people who owned trailers and fifth wheels were permitted to join as associate members. Somewhere along the line, apparently due to some of the benefits the Association had offered to members, this practice was discontinued. The current associate membership category is for former family members who no longer own a motorhome but want to stay involved in FMCA. So, it technically is possible for someone with a towable to be a member of FMCA, but only if they once owned a motorhome and qualified for full membership.


We all share the same passion and joy for the RV lifestyle. We also all learn from the many publications and Websites available to RV owners. Perhaps travel trailers and fifth wheels will be considered for membership in the future. In the meantime, we would invite you to subscribe to Family Motor Coaching magazine, widely recognized as a premier publication for the RV industry. We would be happy to provide a complimentary copy to you if you would like to provide a mailing address.


Take care.

[HowieE]

Forrest

My comment on your picture had nothing to do with Airstreamers or Salem.

It was an observation of how apropos the actions of an increasing number of RVers in the larger MH are spoiling the image of RVing in general by actually doing what the picture displayed. If you have not yet been exposed to this level of arrogance you are lucky.

[HowieE]

Originally Posted by 65gt

i'm afraid many will miss the subtlety of the tx license plate -- i didn't!
__

Touche'

[Grand Master]

Many Vintage Airstreamers own multiple Airstreams.

If you want a motorhome fine. But if you want to attend WBCCI functions buy an Airstream solely for the purpose of attending Airstream events. Afterall, if you can afford a $300,000 +++ motorhome, you can certainly afford an additional Airstream.

Simple.

[wheel interested]

Originally Posted by Grand Master

Many Vintage Airstreamers own multiple Airstreams.

If you want a motorhome fine. But if you want to attend WBCCI functions buy an Airstream solely for the purpose of attending Airstream events. Afterall, if you can afford a $300,000 +++ motorhome, you can certainly afford an additional Airstream.

Simple.

Great point. That is an easy solution! In fact how many PIPs or others can an Airstream trailer sleep after all? Perhaps we could even initiate a volunteer program to sponsor an SOB member and share Airstream lodging for rallies. It could be listed at very little printing cost to the club on a page or two following the campground and courtesy parking listings.

[rideair]

Carol,

Sounds like a great idea. Now if you can only get them to agree to it, I'll buy that 36' Airstream "bunk house" trailer that was used by the Rail Road. My guess, you can fit at least four/five PIP's and their wife's in that thing and we'll be all set. We can have the Revision Committee re-write the Constitution to where it's the job of the current IP to pull it behind their MOHO.

If ones not enough, we will look for another and hook them together! It will look almost like a silver bullet train coming into the International Rally.

We can call it the "I PEE Express" because it will really p*ss them off!

[wheel interested]

On a serious note, I was thinking about whether we as members should construct and propose a non-compete clause for leadership. It seems very much a conflict of interest for leadership to use their position, experience, knowlege and contacts in the club and the membership to compete with the club's own single brand identity for their own benefit. As our elected representatives they should be upholding the constitution, the club's tenets and working to accomplish members initatives and not working as a separate entity to create, of their own volition, for their own advantage. They have taken a sworn oath to uphold their duties to the club and its constitution as it is written and it is beyond the scope of their office to introduce change to better suit their own needs as leaders in abject opposition to the principals and general membership of this club. They are in violation of over reaching their jurisdiction and distorting assigned duties by utilizing club and business time and resources to consistently cause membership to defend itself against leadership's independent actions.

[RickDavis]

I think it is interesting that the Thor diesel club does not seem to be the least bit interested in having Airstream motor homes in their club.

How to Join

In the meantime we have members clamoring to buy a Thor MH and be allowed to stay in our club

[HowieE]

Lost children with lots of money and no where to go.

[drag'nwagon]

Maybe the ruling class are embarrassed or just plain tired of seeing thier previous Airstreams showing up in the vintage section...? If they buy a brand-x product they wont have to worry about being the "P.O." at the VAC happy hour.

[Coloradobus]

I emailed the membership lady of the THOR Diesel Club about Airstream Class A's joining, and have yet to hear a response. It has been two weeks, but she might be on the road.

[dwightdi]

It is clear that Thor Diesel club is a Interclub of FMCA. The membership application specifically states that it does not welcome any Airstream Diesels. I guess, even Jims' luxury coaches are not good enough for them.

[66Overlander]

Originally Posted by jwgreen

What's to be gained by continuous squabbling about trailer vs. motorhome? Nothing positive. Get over it. It's about the people and not about their RV brand.

Hi JW,
No, it's really about the brand. I suspect that the majority of WBCCI members joined THE AIRSTREAM club and then met the people. I doubt very many actually went out and bought an Airstream just so that they could join the club with their friends and attend club events.

It is owning the single brand known as AIRSTREAM that binds us together. Lose that single brand identity and far more AIRSTREAM owners will quit the club than MOTORHOME owners will be retained. Why was the membership not surveyed to see how many would QUIT the club if this motion passes before it had to be sent to the membership for yet another divisive vote?

Originally Posted by jwgreen

With respect to Kerfoot et al, this concerns CHANGE. If you don't want change (as in membership eligibility), then you regard tradition and maintenance of the status quo as you highest priority and act accordingly. While doing so, you denigrate anyone who's opinion or desire for change is different from yours and support your position with endless tirades about future gloom and doom should a change be implemented that's contrary to your views (or opinions).

Be careful against LABELING all people that are against this motion to allow non-Airstream into an AIRSTREAM club as "denigrators". There are many of us who do not actively participate in discussions on the subject that want this club to remain a single band club. We are not against change, we are just against THIS proposed change.

But I will admit that when a change as radical is this is proposed, there are some folks that will get very defensive and the other side may not like the backlash. This type of response is to be expected when radical change is proposed.

Originally Posted by jwgreen

On the other hand, it is possible to embrace change that can produce a positive outcome. That would require some creativity or even innovative thinking, a behavior that would not be consistent with being a naysayer. It requires more work than just sitting on the side and making frequent and repetitive unkind remarks about officers wardrobes and other traditions. Where's the benefit to improve the club when the remarks are meant to ridicule while containing nothing of a suggestion on how to improved. It's easy to be a critic but it takes work to be innovative and creative.

Again, not everyone against this motion is a "naysayer". I see no way that this motion can cause a positive outcome. I personally know people (including Airstream Motorhome owners) that quit the club last time this was put to a vote. They just got tired of the bickering and being made to feel like they were second class members (both ways). The best way to avoid this would be to withdraw this motion.

If this motion passes this time, as I have already stated, far more AIRSTREAM owners will quit the club than MOTORHOME owners will be retained. This is not being a naysayer. It is my honest opinion. I positively believe the best choice for this club is to retain it's single brand identity. This club has one unique marketable trait and that is it AIRSTREAM only identity. Lose that and the club decline will accelerate.

By the way, many club members who are NOT supportive of this motion do more than sit on the sidelines and comment. They are active at the Unit and Intraclub levels, even if they cannot volunteer to be Region and International officers. That does not mean their opinions are any less important that those that are in the top leadership positions. But I agree that both sides should comment in positive tones. Nothing positive can be gained by ridiculing the other side.

[Gene]

It's not just about members quitting if non-Airstreams are allowed in to the club, it is also about nonmembers watching this endless argument about it and the other squabbles about leadership. Any organization needs to attract new members and the present situation is very public because of the internet—thus potential members learn about the club this way. Many ask themselves why they would want to join such an organization.

Gene

[cmgirdwood]

if they want to have another brand motorhome well that's what the Family Motor Coach Assn. is for...they just think they are special and everyone else should go along with what they want...

[wheel interested]

Originally Posted by 66Overlander

Hi JW,

Be careful against LABELING all people that are against this motion to allow non-Airstream into an AIRSTREAM club as "denigrators". There are many of us who do not actively participate in discussions on the subject that want this club to remain a single band club. We are not against change, we are just against THIS proposed change.

Again, not everyone against this motion is a "naysayer".

By the way, many club members who are NOT supportive of this motion do more than sit on the sidelines and comment. They are active at the Unit and Intraclub levels, even if they cannot volunteer to be Region and International officers. That does not mean their opinions are any less important that those that are in the top leadership positions. But I agree that both sides should comment in positive tones. Nothing positive can be gained by ridiculing the other side.

Excellent advice but let's take that one step further and not label any people as denigrators or naysayers on the basis of expressing their opinion, and realize that all members' opinions are valid whether they sit on the sidelines and comment or work as a volunteer. In a similar effort to avoid polarization, let's also be careful in thinking that there are not only two sides to an issue but remember that there are often many.