Jump to content

MOTS deadline September 6/2018


Greggie

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, sledjunk said:

Matt, under MOTS, that will change as the clubs now have NO MONEY.  All permit funds have to be turned over to the district,  so even the small bills are paid by the district.  As for volunteer repairs, I fear that they will dwindle as the volunteer efforts would be only saving the district money, with no benefit to the club.  Yes, the equipment gets repaired, but there is no difference to the club if it gets repaired for free, or if there was a labour cost attached.

Gotta disagree Dave. If a club has the expertise available to make the repair, in a timely manner at a portion of the cost, than a dealer would charge, then the district has a fiduciary responsibility to have the club do the repairs, and save the district some repair dollars as well.

The district is the clubs, it's not an us and them situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply
7 hours ago, soupkids said:

I'm not sure why every is so against MOTS, Sudbury has been running that way since its inception and it works pretty good.

Some will argue otherwise (step in here ceaig).

Most issues are specific to an individual not the system in place.

When you look at the big picture the STP worked fine. When you looked at certain areas specifically, you see the bias. Make no mistake there is bias in what trails get groomed often and what trails are ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bigfish said:

Gotta disagree Dave. If a club has the expertise available to make the repair, in a timely manner at a portion of the cost, than a dealer would charge, then the district has a fiduciary responsibility to have the club do the repairs, and save the district some repair dollars as well.

The district is the clubs, it's not an us and them situation.

And what do you think of the common situation where some Clubs pay their Operators while other Clubs don’t?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bbakernbay said:

And what do you think of the common situation where some Clubs pay their Operators while other Clubs don’t?

Brian, under MOTS every groomer operator get paid...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, zoso said:

When you look at the big picture the STP worked fine. When you looked at certain areas specifically, you see the bias. Make no mistake there is bias in what trails get groomed often and what trails are ignored.

Last year was much better, operator where told where and when to groom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, bbakernbay said:

And what do you think of the common situation where some Clubs pay their Operators while other Clubs don’t?

My understanding is that all operators are paid, under MOTS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing in MOTS that would prevent volunteer operators. Its just that most have chosen (been forced) to go to paid operators. That has been a district decision.

 

With volunteer operators you grooming budget goes much father when the labour component is nil.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is very difficult (if not impossible) to get a volunteer to commit to the hours and erratic schedule, that have become the norm in southern Ontario.

We have been paying operators ($15 p/h) for several years now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, soupkids said:

Last year was much better, operator where told where and when to groom.

No matter what, moving forward permit buyers cannot expect a high degree of grooming for the money we pay. Every single year the cost of grooming rises and the permit stays the same price. In 2005 the early permit was 180 bucks, here we are 14 years later and the price has risen 5% while costs to operate have risen 30%. The math simply does not add up. I truly believe the model the STP used for years was efficient, and therefor must believe that MOTS will be as well. That is a good thing because being we refuse to raise prices cost cutting

 is all we have to combat inflation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, bbakernbay said:

Has anyone done a rough calculation of the cost to go to 100% paid Operators province wide?

For our district it amounts to an extra $19K or about a 6% increase in total Grooming Expenses. To fund the extra costs the district will have to reduce spending in some other area because revenue does not go up or support the extra with fund raising dollars. Now also consider if as other posters have suggested the volunteer commitment continues to dwindle and the volunteers that currently wrench on the groomers no longer want to do it for free. How much extra is that going cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, bbakernbay said:

Has anyone done a rough calculation of the cost to go to 100% paid Operators province wide?

Simply multiply every grooming hour across the province by $20.00, then if the figuures are compiled ast the provincial level deduct current wages paid to operators now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a set wage for groomer operator or is it left to the district? Last season we had different rates in the same district.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Elliotgroomer said:

Is there a set wage for groomer operator or is it left to the district? Last season we had different rates in the same district.

Wage rates would be a district decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/1/2018 at 12:41 PM, Big Pete said:

For our district it amounts to an extra $19K or about a 6% increase in total Grooming Expenses. To fund the extra costs the district will have to reduce spending in some other area because revenue does not go up or support the extra with fund raising dollars. Now also consider if as other posters have suggested the volunteer commitment continues to dwindle and the volunteers that currently wrench on the groomers no longer want to do it for free. How much extra is that going cost.

Based upon this one District’s estimate, it would appear that having all Operators paid across the Province could cost in the range of $300,000 per year.  Mechanical work done by Volunteers would add another very significant sum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bbakernbay said:

Based upon this one District’s estimate, it would appear that having all Operators paid across the Province could cost in the range of $300,000 per year.  Mechanical work done by Volunteers would add another very significant sum

How can free manpower add significantly ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, soupkids said:

How can free manpower add significantly ??

If the province wide mandate is to employ a fully paid Operator workforce which would likely include the necessary daily preventative maintenance then a similar argument should be made for major mechanical repairs.

 

Some Clubs do almost their entire major mechanical repairs using Volunteers while other Clubs pick up the phone and have their dealer or repair

erson come or float the groomer for repairs.

 

With less Groomers on the trails, prompt mechanical repairs are a necessity now.

 

Why should mechanical repairs be any different than operating?  If full time paid Operators are deemed essential, so should Payment be made for Volunteers to Repair the equipment in a timely manner, similar to calling a paid Wrench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bbakernbay said:

If the province wide mandate is to employ a fully paid Operator workforce which would likely include the necessary daily preventative maintenance then a similar argument should be made for major mechanical repairs.

 

Some Clubs do almost their entire major mechanical repairs using Volunteers while other Clubs pick up the phone and have their dealer or repair

person come or float the groomer for repairs.

 

With less Groomers on the trails, prompt mechanical repairs are a necessity now.

 

Why should mechanical repairs be any different than operating?  If full time paid Operators are deemed essential, so should Payment be made for Volunteers to Repair the equipment in a timely manner, similar to calling a paid Wrench.

2 things

Volunteers are just that, Volunteers, no pay, maybe a lunch once in a while.

Once a volunteer is paid, they are no longer a volunteer, they are an employee

 

Volunteers don't cost money.

Employees do.

 

Pretty simple to me.

 

you statements are contradictory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, soupkids said:

2 things

Volunteers are just that, Volunteers, no pay, maybe a lunch once in a while.

Once a volunteer is paid, they are no longer a volunteer, they are an employee

 

Volunteers don't cost money.

Employees do.

 

Pretty simple to me.

 

you statements are contradictory. 

I am a huge believer in continuing with Volunteers in both capacities, Operating and Maintaining.  I do not think OFSC has the revenues to support fully paid Operators and Mechanical Repairpersons.

 

It was stated that MOTS is mandating paid Operators for all Groomers across the Province with the associated extra costs that are likely substantial.  I don’t agree with that philosophy but I am told that is what is going to happen.

 

If that is the case I am pointing out the ongoing repair of groomers and drags is equally important, given the smaller overall fleet size and fewer spares, if any, available within each District.

 

If the mandate is to pay Operators then I am saying that the same should apply to Mechanical Repairs, not having one Club do repairs using Volunteers while the next Club pays to have the work done.  This is changing somewhat as the District assumes greater responsibility but most Districts don’t yet have centralized repair facilities and rely on the Clubs to maintain the fleet.  Those with Grooming Associations are likely doing that now but I am unsure what percentage of their operating and repair is paid versus Volunteer.

 

I do not think it fair that one Club receives District funding to repair their groomers and drags by paid professionals while another Club uses Volunteers that do not result in some form of credit to their Club to be used on Items that the Club needs to look after such as their shed, trails, etc.

 

Clubs and their Volunteers need to be treated fairly or they will start disappearing as we have already seen and there appears to be no replacements forthcoming.

 

How this is contradictory I don’t know but I will await other comments from those with more experience than me.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/30/2018 at 1:53 PM, Bigfish said:

Gotta disagree Dave. If a club has the expertise available to make the repair, in a timely manner at a portion of the cost, than a dealer would charge, then the district has a fiduciary responsibility to have the club do the repairs, and save the district some repair dollars as well.

The district is the clubs, it's not an us and them situation.

 

 

John I'm pretty sure that liabilities and expectations will change drastically when club volunteers work on district equipment and the club invoices the district for the work completed. Our club banks no less than 20k a season doing all our own maintenance and repairs,  that money went to trail, equipment and infrastructure upgrades , we have always bought our own groomers and equip, and have never applied for OFSC or district funding because we didn't need it. We are not the only club in that position.  This all will change, and I doubt under the current MOTS plan of 2 tiers of accountability we'll see any savings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Nutter said:

 

 

John I'm pretty sure that liabilities and expectations will change drastically when club volunteers work on district equipment and the club invoices the district for the work completed. Our banks no less than 20k a season doing all our own maintenance and repairs,  that money went to trail, equipment and infrastructure upgrades , we have always bought our own groomers and equip, and have never applied for OFSC or district funding because we didn't need it. We are not the only club in that position.  This all will change, and I doubt under the current MOTS plan of 2 tiers of accountability we'll see any savings. 

Good points, Rick

Correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't all grooming equipment (drags and tractors)belong to OFSC now? Will this equipment not still belong to OFSC, albeit indirectly thru the districts?

I'm not suggesting the the clubs make these repairs for free, but if there is a qualified member of a club, who can make the repairs for less than the dealer, why not throw them a bone, and let them make the repairs which are then invoiced to the district. Seems like a win-win to me.

Could you please elaborate on the "2 tiers of accountability", not quite sure I follow your train of thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bigfish said:

Good points, Rick

Correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't all grooming equipment (drags and tractors)belong to OFSC now? Will this equipment not still belong to OFSC, albeit indirectly thru the districts?

I'm not suggesting the the clubs make these repairs for free, but if there is a qualified member of a club, who can make the repairs for less than the dealer, why not throw them a bone, and let them make the repairs which are then invoiced to the district. Seems like a win-win to me.

Could you please elaborate on the "2 tiers of accountability", not quite sure I follow your train of thought.

 

 

Yes everything still belongs to the OFSC John, but clubs will have to invoice the district if they want to recoup something for their efforts in maintenance and repairs . Once you invoice and receive payment for a service it changes the rules of everything, regarding liabilities and whole host of other things.  Can you imagine once the Ontario College of Trades finds out that sled club volunteers are doing mechanical work and invoicing and getting paid for that work.   I can do the brakes on my own car and my insurance will cover me and my car, but you pay me to do your brakes and ........ 

 

 

Apparently the province has requested for 2 tiers of financial accountability, being that the only ones doing transactions with permit dollars are the OFSC and Districts.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nutter said:

 

 

Yes everything still belongs to the OFSC John, but clubs will have to invoice the district if they want to recoup something for their efforts in maintenance and repairs . Once you invoice and receive payment for a service it changes the rules of everything, regarding liabilities and whole host of other things.  Can you imagine once the Ontario College of Trades finds out that sled club volunteers are doing mechanical work and invoicing and getting paid for that work.   I can do the brakes on my own car and my insurance will cover me and my car, but you pay me to do your brakes and ........

Well I did say qualified

 

Apparently the province has requested for 2 tiers of financial accountability, being that the only ones doing transactions with permit dollars are the OFSC and Districts.  

I'm not an accountant, so I have no idea what 2 tiers of financial accountability means

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For 02 and Nutter here is how it works here in a nut shell up here.

STP proper (Sudbury) we do have a repair garage which if required machines will be floated in to be repaired, general maintenance is done where the machine is parked. 

Espanola and the Island both have existing agreements to get the machines inside for repairs, the 2 new northern clubs, no idea as of yet.

Now to the paid vs volunteers.

Each groomer has a coordinator(paid), which can also be an operator, and operators(paid).

Coordinators are expected to attend bimonthly operations meetings which a member of each club also attends to work out "issues" with grooming and trails etc.

General maintenance is performed by the coordinator and or operator depending on what is required, ex general greasing would be the operator, full service, grease, oils, filters would be coordinator and an operator possibly.

Now if an extra pair of hands is required for a short time for a specific task and a volunteer is available and wants to go, well thats what happens 

Many factors are considered in all of the above.

Many times a volunteer has been asked to go rescue an operator when the groomer has had a catastrophic failure and is stuck in the bush, ask me I can tell you all about it over a beer or 10.

I'm not saying the system we have is perfect but it has worked pretty dam good for us for the last 15 yrs or so.

now in the case of areas where this system is just starting, why can't your volunteers no be paid employees as operators or coordinators.

They don't have to work everyday or even at all, only when they want to or are needed.

the cost of wages is small vs repairs.

If a volunteer really f's up a machine there isn't much you can do about it, paid employee, here's the door.

hard to get a volunteer to go grooming all night every night, paid employee, its the job, no liky, here's the door.

Not saying all paid employees are great operators, we have let more than a few go, and in some cases a volunteer is a guy you want on the machine (make him an employee then)

With the funding model in place now the d's are not going to be able to afford to run the groomers on a saturday afternoon because so and so feels like going grooming, with paid employees that machine isn't moving until afterdark or it won't be long till the groomer isn't moving at all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...