I am pleased we have the debate that has been occuring about the proposed name change, however, I am staggered by the lies, deceit and inuendo that has resulted from this.
The claim that the Directors of the ATMS are underhanded and actually setting about to change the construct of the organisation is absolutely untruthful and there is no proof for this claim.
Most of the membership are hard working wonderful people who help so many, yet this mindset that has emerged by only a handful is sobering.
Most members acnowledge that the knowledge + experience that forms the Board of Directors offers faith. Faith that we are there to do the very best for them. This will continue.
The suggestion that ATMS should focus on regulation of the profession adds further credibility to my claim that the knockers (although few) do not know what they are talking about as Directors within the ATMS are actively participating in this process and in fact we were the organisation who commenced the process.
I will be reporting further on the many issues we face over the following months.
In closing of today please let me assure you that:
There is no move to change the structure of the ATMS
Best wishes
Sandi
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
There is no doubt that the Directors, Administration and Membership are a collective of hard working and well intended people.
ReplyDeleteThe Board of Directors are definitely knowledgeable and experienced and to a degree a call of faith is warranted by the membership - but not "blind faith" without substantial information or debated evidence.
One would have thought that with such an experienced and knowledgeable Board, headed up by the current President, that a more professional, respectful, transparent and thorough approach would have been taken to deal with the name change before it was put to vote.
For example a member's survey, a private member's blog, member's forum/workshop, etc.
The style taken by the board is very bureacratic and completely nullifies the opportunity and contribution of democractic discussion.
Keep in mind that you currently have a large, dedicated membership of professional therapists that are intelligent, dedicated practitioners that deserve the utmost respect and representation.
In the responses I have seen by the President the above has been far from the truth - starting with the blog being public and not made private by a members forum.
It is unfortunate that not many members have voiced thier contribution to the name change. But that does not mean that the few who have participated should be marginaised for doing so by comments such as "The vocal minority should not make the rules" "I am staggered by the lies, deceit and inuendo that has resulted from this”. It took only 6 to initiate and draft up the U.S. Declaration of Independence in 1776! The minority is not be underestimated.
The feedback that you say you are looking for is happening now, may not be what you want to hear, but it is happening now.In my opinion the comments/feedback has been quite rational, passionate in expression yes, but they are not lies and they are not deceitful it is quite open and frank.
If one was to take a more objective approach as opposed to reactionary some of the more oommon themes of feedback are: (and I won't name everyone because you all know you are who have contributed to the blog but you are acknowledged)
1. Reference to the WHO definition of the word “traditional”
2. The majority of responses of those who have participared is a whopping big "NO".
3. Real issues relating to costs associated with name change - this is not imaginary
4. Need for greater transparency from the Board
5. An already established branding and positioning of ATMS
6. Views from massage therapists
7. Issue of Blog Privacy
8, Struggle for Identity at Government meetings of our industry (note that only happens if the person doing the representation has a grip on the identity)
9. Lack of “real” evidence and research indicating the need for the name change
10. Up to date information on what's going on and what our Board members are up to.
Th vote should be suspended pending more feedback and consultation with the membership.
No the vote should not be suspended, you are entitled to your view, so are the rest of us.
ReplyDeleteI have made the time, to be present for the meeting, and would not be happy for it to be cancelled o the basis of 37 or so blogg posts.
Regardless of the outcome, it should be an opportunity for clarification and further discussion.
Fair enough. It's good to know that some can make it to the meeting, unfortunately most of us can't due to other pending commitments or reasons, so the only forum we have is by proxy, blog or by any other electronic means. Those of us who cannot attend won't even know anyone elses point of view presented at the meeting.
ReplyDeleteA webcast could have also been an opportunity to participate utilising modern technology.
The ample opportunity should have been given to members way prior to the vote on this issue to ensure that there was further discussion and clarification - no use bolting the door once the horse has run.
I look forward to hearing of the outcomes.
All the best.