Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: SEAOC $10.00 dues increases objection

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
     

Tom Harris wrote:

     <<The SEAOSC newsletter just came out and i have received a call about
the $10.00 dues increase. I am on the SEAOSC board of directors and i 
specifically represent the members in Ventura, Santa Barbara , and San 
Luis Obispo counties.
     The SEAOSC member SE in Ventura county complained about the dues
increase. He said that he did not see what he was getting for the extra 
money. 
He said he would rather go back to the way it was 4 years ago with no state 
office and roll back the dues to just the SEAOSC amount.
     Since it is my responsibility to respond to the requests of members in
my area, i thought i would ask other members of SEAOC what they think. Would 
you
rather pay lower dues ( about $120. instead of 195. ) and not have a state 
office as i believe it was from 1929 to 1994. The contract is up this year 
and a
renewal should probably warrant an evaluation.
     When i tried to explain to the caller the benefits of state dues such
as the roster ( that he pointed out was skipped this year ) and reports on 
legislation in plan review ( that he pointed out have been few and far 
between lately) , i must say i was a little disappointed myself. Personally 
i 
don't think $195. is too much to support the profession that i earn a good 
living from. I pay more to be an AIA allied member for instance.
     At least i could point out that the local SEAOSC dues have not gone up
and there is a substantial reserve fund .
     If others can tell me all the benefits of paying the extra money for a
state office, i would appreciate hearing them so i can pass it on to others 
footing the bill.
     Thanks in advance>>
     
     Let's look at this from a cost-benefit standpoint.   I have an open 
mind on 
     the matter, but I would be hard pressed to discuss with any other SEAOC 

     member how he or she has benefited from the State Office, at any cost.  
I 
     would also have trouble explaining to our younger engineers the 
benefits to 
     joining SEAOC at $195 per year.
     
     I'm not sure I agree with the contention that $195 is not too much to 
     support the profession that I make a good living from.  How is the 
     profession better?  Were did the money go?  Where will the money go if 
we 
     keep the State Office?  Maybe with some facts and accounting, I could 
agree 
     with Tom.
     
     I think it would be fair to the entire SEAOC Membership to be informed 
in 
     plain English what benefits we gain from a State Office for the $70 per 

     year of our cost.  If the cost cannot be justified, the State Office 
should 
     ride off into the sunset.
     
     Rick Drake, SE
     Fluor Daniel, Irvine