Membership Count
Mar 4 2007 05:06
The number of members carrying Red Cards at some point during the course of 2006 was 1,897...93 fewer than 2005.
Number of members in good standing as of january 1, 2007 stood at 928, which is 20 more members in good standing than the same time last year.
Mar 4 2007 18:14
#2
Is that a global figure, a North American figure, a USA figure or a Bay area figure?
Mar 4 2007 23:52
#3
EdmontonWobbly wrote:
I also really like standing order/automatic clearing house
What is that?
Mar 5 2007 02:18
#4
Automatic Dues withdraw
janky wrote:
EdmontonWobbly wrote:
I also really like standing order/automatic clearing houseWhat is that?
Mar 5 2007 02:26
#5
tsiatko wrote:
Automatic Dues withdrawjanky wrote:
EdmontonWobbly wrote:
I also really like standing order/automatic clearing houseWhat is that?
its the way forword
Mar 5 2007 07:31
#6
nah, I like the stamps and physical payment. Wouldn't have it any other way for me.
Mar 5 2007 07:39
#7
Catch 22 wrote:
nah, I like the stamps and physical payment. Wouldn't have it any other way for me.
im sure you can still get the stamps in a red card if you like... 
Mar 5 2007 07:42
#8
account for turnover in shops
Mar 5 2007 10:53
#9
Quote:
Number of members in good standing as of january 1, 2007 stood at 928, which is 20 more members in good standing than the same time last year.
hmm. that's actually pretty shit. so net growth is twenty. whoopie.
Mar 5 2007 14:10
#10
I hope this email isnt out of line.
I haven't been in the IWW in decades, but dues collection was pretty traditional as i recall. Dues were always hand tendered to delegates (where there are branches). Footloose members sent their dues to GHQ....GHQ would send the monthly stamp or you'd have to send the book with the dues..been so long i can't recall exactly. Is the problem that there are more footloose members than members in branches? Are the deliquncies only a short period of time which makes the numbers look, look, well, look terrible? I guess it's tough to look at such high numbers without asking what is structurally wrong. And i would hope these high numbers don't translate into high turnover.
This seems like an accounting nightmare.
Anyway, good luck in getting this one together for the sake of your efficincies and organizational work.
Mar 5 2007 14:18
#11
You can pay by standing order. Just download the form from the main site and send it to your bank.
Mar 5 2007 14:24
#12
yeah so is this globally? or just in the US?
Also the red card stamp systems looks very nice but it's ridiculously inefficient. no capitalist organisation would waste resources like that. sorry. maybe some kinda online graphic equivalent could be come up with for people who like seeing the stamps
Mar 5 2007 14:34
#13
i think it's just the US. last i heard the global count was about 1,300 in good standing.
i really do think that yeah it's great to pay in cash if you go to all the meetings and actually have meetings to go to, but there really is nothing wrong with just setting up a standing order. people say you won't come to meetings if you do standing order, but i go to them all the time and i do it that way. it's efficient, it's safe, it's instantaneous and it's a hell of a lot easier to keep track of.
Mar 5 2007 18:14
#14
There's no reason why people can't keep their 'sticker book' and still pay dues through an automatic bank withdrawal. It just means that finances don't stop coming in just because someone is working out of town, a big problem with our members in the oil patch, and that the organisation can actually budget for things over the long run on the branch level. We should still keep the voluntary dues for those that want it, lots of people don't have a steady pay check, some don't have a bank account and others want to see a delegate once a month these are all valid reasons for paying dues traditionally, but we should allow for more efficient options.
Also I'm not so worried about our members in good standing count partially because I can see the composition of the IWW changing drastically since I joined five years ago. There is a lot less 'activist' work happening and a lot more organising, the membership is also a lot less counter culture than it used to be.
Mar 5 2007 19:38
#15
That count is global.
Re: the Bay Area, we have exactly 100 members who have paid dues in 2007.
Mar 5 2007 19:55
#16
yeah so is this globally? or just in the US?
I don't know John. I''m in Britain and it's the case here.
Mar 5 2007 20:30
#17
Quote:
I can see the composition of the IWW changing drastically since I joined five years ago. There is a lot less 'activist' work happening and a lot more organising, the membership is also a lot less counter culture than it used to be.
good, because those surrealist types scared me
Mar 5 2007 21:28
#18
so that count's global?? it gets so confusing when it comes to the good standing vs bad standing thing. i mean, some people just drift away like in a lot of groups/orgs, but others remain active and still manage to fall a long long long way into bad standing. so how do you coount membership? should it be the number of people who are active? how can you measure activity? is activity a decent measure of 'being' a member? is paying dues also important because it gives the IWW funds? it's an epistemological minefield i tell you!
Mar 5 2007 22:09
#19
syndicalist wrote:
This seems like an accounting nightmare.
It's actually both an organizational and accounting nightmare. But, I think a lot of folks are more forward-looking these days.
Mar 5 2007 22:38
#20
I wouldnt count on any of the numbers posted here.
Mar 5 2007 22:49
#21
x357997 wrote:
I wouldnt count on any of the numbers posted here.
As in they're inflated, deflated or its just impossible to really know?
Mar 5 2007 22:52
#22
I'd say the last one.
Mar 7 2007 04:31
#23
x357997 wrote:
Catch 22 wrote:
nah, I like the stamps and physical payment. Wouldn't have it any other way for me.im sure you can still get the stamps in a red card if you like...
you must still get the stamps actually. it keeps delegate's accountable, and fights corruption...
Mar 7 2007 10:18
#24
Quote:
it keeps delegate's accountable
but does it keep delegates accountable to The Grammar Police?? 
Mar 7 2007 11:34
#25
Actually, I think you'll find that this one comes under the jurisdiction of the punctuation police. So the grammar squad can just back off!
Mar 7 2007 12:25
#26
steady now, we don't want the royal vocabulary constabulary getting involved in this too!
Mar 7 2007 12:47
#27
Or SPSI, the Society for the Prevention of the Split-Infinitive.
Mar 7 2007 13:20
#28
i definitely think it's for the PROMOTION of the split infinitive, actually
now if you don't mind i'm going to hastily go to my hockey match 
Mar 7 2007 15:26
#29
ftony wrote:
i definitely think it's for the PROMOTION of the split infinitive, actuallynow if you don't mind i'm going to hastily go to my hockey match
Aaargh! The swine! The Punctuation Police aren't at all happy about your use of 'i' rather than 'I' and your complete lack of full stops is an assault upon the written word, suh.
More to the point, for how long do you think we can continue talking such utter bollocks?
Mar 7 2007 15:35
#30
SPSI is too reformist. Down with the SPSI! Split-First!
Thing is the membership count is almost always two months late and often very innacurate, for some reason our membership is always lower than what we know it is just based on card check at meetings. We really need to update our dues collection process, some day we may actually have real number and if we continue to use this paper heavy system, as opposed to a remote access database not only will it be a nightmare for GHQ but our records will be even more of a mess. I also really like standing order/automatic clearing house and we really should encourage more branches to use it with members who have a steady job.