ARU fee structure change for 2015

[Chris McCracken]

It always bothers me to think that when shit decisions are made and volunteers pick up the pieces, and work harder to pick up the pieces the people who have made the decision can look at it and say - "see, it didn't have the impact you said it would".

Yes - in whatever endeavour, that attitude shits me no end.

 

[Almost 2 old]

Thanks for the all the great info you fellas have been pumping out. It is confirming my resolve that the ARU really don't have a clue of how the game really exists and operates. I am more than aware of liabilities and changes to business structures and shifting market needs as I have recently sold a labour hire company that I owned and ran for 15 years. I see participation as absolutely fundamental to our games existence as this is the major % of the customer base If you keep reducing/losing your customer base you will quickly isolate your service/business to where you become no longer viable and capable of trading . Then the " cottage industry" tag can be quickly applied. Best go now before I get too worked up

 

[Brendan Hume]

Advice from QRU on some insurance matters that may be of use to some. This relates most directly to our clubs set up but it may be replicated in other clubs or competitions. I find some of the barriers to u19 and women's a bit disconcerting - there appears to be no recognition in the insurance scheme for modified games as was previously the case.

1. Under 19s – Are players in the U19s Competition included under the senior fee or are players turning 18 in 2015 considered juniors, with players turning 19 in 2015 seniors? ($97.50 difference)

Under 19 Competitions are classified as Seniors – players playing in an U19 competition will pay the Senior Fees.

2. Womens Rugby – Are Womens players all considered seniors under the new insurance scheme?

Yes Women are considered Seniors.

3. Under 8’s – Should players turning 7 in 2015, but playing in an Under 8s comp be liable to be charged as Under 8’s or Under 7’s? ($24.50 difference)

Players playing in an U8 competition are charged the Junior (U8-U18) fees.

4. Insurance – does the new individual Insurance Levy cover players for all rugby activities in Australia – ie Are players insured for sevens carnivals, trial matches, etc without having an additional insurance payment imposed?

Insurance covers individuals for all activities with their club. Greg Denny - ARU (greg.denny@rugby.com.au) is the best contact to discuss any further questions on the ARU Insurance Scheme.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chris McCracken]

Brendan,

If you want to mess them up a bit, ask what happens with under 17s players playing part-time in under 19s under ARU 2 year window sign off. I guarantee you'll hear crickets chirping for a while.

Individual vs per team insurance is an even bigger issue than the NPF. I didn't realise just how much until yesterday.

 

[Druid]

Another good question to ask is, if on any given weekend the Under 8's are short of some players and an Under 7s player puts up their hand and says I will have a run. Does the parents have to stump up the additional Insurance money before crossing the sideline and to whom, the coach, manager? If the parents does not have the money on them at that time, does that mean the kid can't support the Under 8s? If the parents stump up the additional money on the sideline then is the child immediately insured, or is he not insured until the treasurer receives the money and it get's sent to Gow Gates?

 

[Brendan Hume]

It smacks of desperation. Nothing has been thought out clearly and now it's one reactive response after another. You're right Chris, individualised insurance is potentially a minefield for both players and administrators


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TSR]

Also, looking ahead it is my understanding that at the start of the 2016 season a new player who rocks up to training who wasn't insured in 2015 will not be insured at pre season training until he has paid the NIL for the 2016 year. Essentially anyone new cannot do pre season unless they pay the insurance or your club is prepared to run the legal risk of them training uninsured.

This doesn't appy this season as everyone is currently covered under last years team policy.

This could also conceivably have implications for kids moving into the u8 age group.

 

[Brendan Hume]

I think the ARU need to be careful to clearly communicate the changes and implications. As you can see from above, questions are being asked that do raise significant issues around liability that they are accountable for ultimately, and it's they who'll be held to account in courts if the competitions they sanction aren't covered by the insurance policies they provide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brendan Hume]

Perhaps some not-so-great news for SJRU. Interesting to see how this unfolds.

Bill Pulver, Bruce Worboys and myself have all written to Tony Fisher, President SJRU and advised that they are not complying with the National Policy and that the letter contains inaccuracies and misleading information which we will request is corrected.

To be clear NSWRU have agreed to the National Funding Reform, including Rugby Link, individual the National Participant Registration Fee and an Individual Insurance Levy, this issue is isolated to SJRU.

The key misunderstanding detailed in the SJRU letter is that NSWRU will cover any incremental cost of insurance for clubs compared to 2014. The letter confuses this by suggesting SJRU will charge this on a per team basis and collect this insurance which is untrue, as Gow-Gates will invoice clubs for offline registrations on an individual participant basis.

You will note from the letter that SJRU have adopted the National Participant Registration fee.

The other area is Rugby Link which SJRU have advised they will not be using in 2015, ARU are currently working through this with SJRU.

The NSWRU Executive Director, Bruce Worboys has requested a meeting with the SJRU President Tony Fisher regarding the letter when he returns next Tuesday 27 January. At this time the contents of this letter will be addressed.

Rest assured, the ARU has not compromised the National Policy, NSWRU have supported the national policy and we are working to implement this with affiliates, clubs and participants.

Regards

Andrew Larratt

 

[Chris McCracken]

This is getting murkier. I spoke with a NSWRU board member who was very particular in noting that insurance was per team. This is really pissing me off.

 

[Quick Hands]

The ARU clearly have their minions scouring G&GR for dissidents.

Should Mr Fisher expect the Stasi to come knocking in the middle of the night for not complying with Politburo policy?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

no need to scour - there's more dissidents here than The Gulag Archipelago

 

[Brendan Hume]

The ARU clearly have their minions scouring G&GR for dissidents.

Should Mr Fisher expect the Stasi to come knocking in the middle of the night for not complying with Politburo policy?

There's a lot of communication across States and competitions. This could be the best thing to happen to community rugby if it plays out to its conclusion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[I like to watch]

I'm struggling to keep up,but are we saying that the last two letters from the ARU,deliberately misstate the current positions of all parties?

 

[TSR]

As an aside, does anyone else think it that it is a poor choice to charge players in u20 or lower senior rates? I guess that potentially if they pay less other people have to pay more, but on the other hand I figure if they drive down participation in these age groups they are eroding our future senior playing numbers.

 

[Quick Hands]

I'm struggling to keep up,but are we saying that the last two letters from the ARU,deliberately misstate the current positions of all parties?

I'm not sure if it's deliberate though.

 

[Quick Hands]

As an aside, does anyone else think it that it is a poor choice to charge players in u20 or lower senior rates? I guess that potentially if they pay less other people have to pay more, but on the other hand I figure if they drive down participation in these age groups they are eroding our future senior playing numbers.

The whole thing is an ill though out poor choice, but they're too proud, stupid or stubborn to admit it and start again.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I'm struggling to keep up,but are we saying that the last two letters from the ARU,deliberately misstate the current positions of all parties?

I'm not basing this on anything in particular but it does seem that some of the member unions might be talking one thing down to their members and another up to the more senior bodies.....

 

[Chris McCracken]

As an aside, does anyone else think it that it is a poor choice to charge players in u20 or lower senior rates? I guess that potentially if they pay less other people have to pay more, but on the other hand I figure if they drive down participation in these age groups they are eroding our future senior playing numbers.

One of the key issues with the NPF/NIL for our senior club is just that. We could previously work to reduce costs for our 20s, but can't under the ARU arrangement. I'm not sure how it works in other places, but our 18s play in the 20s comp and we have enough traouble keeping them as is.

Worse still, but less prevalent, is that a player who is 17 and signed off to play Colts could have to pay the NIL in both junior and senior competitions to be able to do so.

 

[Chris McCracken]

I'm not basing this on anything in particular but it does seem that some of the member unions might be talking one thing down to their members and another up to the more senior bodies...

I don't think so, to be honest. There isn't that much different to what I have been told from NSW. Just the bit about individual insurance arrangements they have made. And that's a mechanical issue which affects the periphery (TryRugby, juniors playing in seniors, and part time players) rather than the bulk of players.

I'm hoping that NSW will issue a position statement.