Wrong! – It’s been a commonly held belief, and seems intuitive, that benefits/conditions of being a member of an organisation should apply while you are a member!
It was true, until ECF introduced ‘rolling membership‘ – Now it isn’t.
This change seemed counter-intuitive and caused much confusion.
How so? – Traditionally, when you joined ECF (or renewed) membership applied to the whole of the current playing season regardless of when you paid. Membership included free grading of all games played throughout that season.
Prior to 2011 new grades were calculated annually, at the end of each season, then twice yearly (Jan and July) until 2020 when grades started to be revised monthly. Game/grading fees however has always been invoiced from the end of each season.
|<=================== playing season =======================>|
|<================= membership period ======================>|
|<================ free grading period =======================>|
If you were not an ECF member, your club could encourage you to join (or renew a previous membership) by not selecting you to play after reaching the quota of 3 graded league games. This helped avoid the league being invoiced for potential grading fees.
If you confirmed a membership application was in process this would be taken on trust. Clubs knew they would be expected to cover any invoiced game fees for their own players and so might influence those players to join/renew. Any occasional delay on this only tended to be a SHORT period of uncertainty before everyone knew where they stood.
This was the situation for many years so it was only natural to continue to expect no grading fee for games played while you’re a member.
Under ‘Rolling Membership‘, Introduced in 2023, you are called a ‘member’ for 12 months from when you join/renew (actually 12 months from from the beginning of the month in which you join/renew) which can now generally span more than one playing season. ECF regarded this as an improvement, claiming it allowed members to now get a full year membership regardless of when they apply – though that was already the case for grading purposes, just not for other ‘benefits’ such as discounts on goods from partnering sites – which seems to have been the driving force of this decision. On the matter of free grading however, ECF considered it inconvenient to shift that in line with the same new period of membership – so they stayed with the traditional system of free grading of all games played in the season of joining/renew – thus creating the problem!
|<======= playing season 1 ======>||<======= playing season 2 =======>|
………………|<===== membership period 1 =====>|
|<====== free grading 1 =========>||<== ?? grading 2 ?? …..
Membership period 1 above covers fees for season1(= free grading period 1) – but does NOT cover ANY of the graded games played in playing season 2 (marked ??) and this is where the issue begins! Longish periods of uncertainty now arise with players who may join/renew mid-season.
Liability for potential game fees starts from the beginning of playing season 2, until the start of membership period 2 (cushioned only by the 3 game quota) – but not easy to accept for some liable members? I use the term ‘liable members’ for players in playing season 2 still in membership period 1. Their memberships expire on or before 30th June of season 2. For game fee purposes, we have to regard them the same as non-members during playing season 2, so their game counts are also shown on the website to help clubs track this, until they renew.
Impact? – There is now a LONGER period of uncertainty on future renewals. Most players do renew but who should pay the invoice for grading period 2 if they don’t?
ECF clearly hold the league responsible for this, as they state here
“Important – Liability to pay any game fee lies strictly with the league which has made the rating submission, and cannot be derogated to the club(s) or individual players.“
This ‘liability’ is questionable as it needs be to be accepted, not created by others. Neither league, club nor player can absolutely guarantee a future renewal and expiry of a current membership may be several months away and the former leverage is no more, so other measures were needed to limit league liability, requiring extra work. Most players renew, but a scenario of say 50 non-renewals @£21 would otherwise cost the league $1050.
So, the league treasurer now has to manage a grading fee reserve fund, made up of transfers-in from club treasurers. The webmaster had to provide this facility, plus the means to easily identify liable members for monitoring by club and league treasurers.
A list of players at or over quota in league or club games is shown here, which also shows the status of any league reserve fund payments. If/when players renew, their reserve is transferred back to their club account.
Clubs no longer have the previous leverage, as players would not expect to be asked to pay for membership period 2 in advance (to cover fees for the period 2 games they are now playing). NECL rule 22b rule had to be amended at AGM to now state:-
…. “Any players incurring a pending fee to ECF via NECL will be ineligible whilst
their club has insufficient credit to cover all of such players’ fees.“
What could ECF do?
1. Revert to previous system – unlikely now the step has been made?
2. Redefine free grading period to be in line with each players membership period to restore a) the status quo to what players intuitively expect! and b) previous club leverage – implies invoice process change from annual to monthly?
3.. Failing the above, ECF do not help by not allowing renewals until near to expiry and say they will not provide a means to pay a part/extended renewals to help players to synchronise to an early-season cycle – this would help reduce periods of uncertainty and help ease the required size of club floats at no extra long-term expense to the player. If this does not change, it is destined to perpetuate.
I feel that all this has not been a positive influence on league chess.
What else could NECL do? – failing any of the above ECF actions, NECL could consider;
1. Ring-fence a set amount, or a proportion of the league balance, to be a general grading fee reserve fund and just recover any end of season liabilities from clubs? – avoids many in-season dialogs and toeing-and-froing of pending reserves.
2. Delay submission for grading of results for all games that involve a new or liable-member player who has already reached quota – until such date that membership status as of 30th June of the current season is verified. This is because the stated assertion of league liability by ECF seems based on the action of the league making the grading submission – so no submission – no liability!
This would of course delay the normal grading process for opponent-players, who may have got used to expecting to see grade result changes on a monthly basis (and due to previously clarifying with ECF that ‘events’ be submitted in entirety or not at all, the full match result should possibly be delayed?) – the knock-on effect causing small differences in published grades during the season, compared to there being no delay. This would dispense with the need for a grading reserve fund, though tracking still needed.
3. What value do club members place on having an ECF authenticated grade?
About 185 players are registered to play NECL league (with typically a dozen or so having a potential game fee liability at any one time) – about £4k annual revenue to ECF. A more drastic measure would be to not submit for ECF grading at all and adopt a local equivalent calculated rating – player ECF memberships and grading fees then no longer an issue!
4… other suggestions?