Mountaineering

Participants

Absent

Claire Spouse (CS) – Chair

Hugh Sanderson (HS) – Secretary

Alex Everest (AE) – Gear Secretary

Alesia Vallance (AV) – Social Secretary

Adam Parsons (AP) – Walking Secretary

Robin Regan (RR) – Orienteering Secretary

Nathan Strange (NS) Climbing Secretary

Thomas Hodges (TH)– Climbing Secretary

Grace Darcy (GD)- Treasurer

Amy Goncalves (AG) – Media Secretary

Ollie Howell (OH) – Walking Secretary

Reuben Strickett (RS) – Orienteering Secretary

Item

Discussion/Description

Action required from

33

Introduction from Committee

Committee members in attendance introduced themselves and outlined the responsibilities of their roles

34

Budget Update

Budget at start of year totalled £6352 of which £3500 was allocated to activities (i.e. trips), £2342 for insurance (plus additional £5 pp from insurance product) and £550 for gear. Currently have £342 left in gear budget. Club is yet to be charged for MPVs so exact amount left in activities is unclear.

Trips are run with a 20% subsidy from the club with the exception of Freshers trip which is capped at £55 pp and ISB which is not subsidised.

Club made £15 loss on BritRock.

35

Constitution Changes

Secretary – Update of Responsibilities

Addition of statement for secretary regarding British Orienteering Insurance (point s):

• s) Responsible for maintaining British Orienteering insurance and affiliation

27 votes for yes, 0 votes for no, 4 abstained

36

Committee for 2023/24

First year committee has been run as 12-strong after new SU rules came into being limiting committee size. Used to be 15-strong but after lengthy debate Voting Member, W&I Officer and Postgrad Secretary were all removed as committee roles.

Discussion as to whether, with this new structure, the workload of committee is distributed fairly, particularly with regards to Orienteering role requiring two secretaries. Argument is they run one trip and organise BUCS orienteering as a minimum, so does that need two people? Therefore, three options proposed.

• Option 1 – maintain committee structure as is
• Option 2 – strip orienteering down to one role and introduce a new role – either reinstatement of W&I officer or a Voting member

Question as to the possibility of voluntary roles? Whilst are allowed they do not have access to club emails or trip planning forms/event planners and ss such committee end up middle-manning correspondence or filling forms out anyway. This was trialled last year with BUCS organiser a non-committee member.

What would the duties of new roles be?

• W&I – attend W&I training, promote these issues to wider club audience, work with wider SU community on these issues, reporting of issues to relevant SU bodies and signposting and providing support to members who need it.
• Voting member – more vague in that they are a helping hand and to provide experience to committee. Exact duties on the committee to be agreed upon with the chair prior to first committee meeting.

Can we increase size of committee? No although pressuring the SU on this stance has not been attempted. Understood that canoeing also had concerns about reduction in committee size. Note: at previous AGM a vote was made to actively pursue reinstatement of full committee.

Question as to how much work W&I is to be its own role?
Purpose of separate role is to be a champion and if mixed in with other responsibilities then this may slide. Argued that W&I should be threaded throughout committee and that maybe committee doesn’t take this into account as much as they should.

Whilst club endeavours to make its events as inclusive as possible there is a feeling more could/can be done. Should the club not promote wider inclusivity schemes, e.g., colourup Bristol, more widely (i.e. on its’ public social channels and not just internally to its members)

If orienteering is to be stripped to one role should that vacant role not be better suited to reflecting the needs of the club demographic, with climbers supposedly making up the largest proportion of its members?
Pointed out that the same amount of time and effort is required regardless of number of attendants to an event. Also, with less than 10% of club members responding to feedback form is not a true reflection of the actual makeup of the club.

Vote as to keep orienteering as two roles:

0 votes for yes, 23 votes for no, 6 abstained

Vote on the identity of the now vacant role:

Voting member reinstated – 21 votes
W&I Officer reinstated – 7
Abstained – 3

Proposed Amendment to Appendix II: Meetings

On the back of this vote and the discussion regarding W&I in the club, it was proposed whether an amendment could be made to the constitution which would compel committee to prioritise W&I within decision making and promotion of wider W&I schemes to the club and public. Proposed addition would be to point 2f (role of club committee meetings) and addition of subpoint viii) To discuss welfare and inclusivity within the club.

Vote on proposed amendment

30 votes for yes, 0 for no, 1 abstained

Note: changes to committee structure in constitution took place after the SU’s deadline for confirming committee positions for next year and SU refused to accommodate these changes despite explanation to our constitutional need to go through AGM process. Therefore, the advertised committee roles at hustings and thus the committee roles for 23/24 will be different to those as outlined in the latest draft of the constitution.

37

Transport

Feedback survey had raised questions as to why transport has been such an issue this year. With the exception of freshers’ trip, for trips to run the club relies on volunteer drivers within its membership.

Club, and all other SU clubs in general, have had an issue with MPVs since Covid with the SU scrapping its’ fleet. Current solution is to hire in at minimum length of 1 week at a cost of £240 plus fuel. Furthermore, to drive an MPV there are requirements of having held a licence for a minimum of one year and to put a driver through MPV training costs the club £30 therefore need to be selective of who to train.

SU is working towards short term hire agreement with MPV company, to be completed within one month, which will alleviate some problems as greater passenger:driver ratio. Currently have 10 trained MPV drivers with 3 more to be trained. 
Walking trips impacted disproportionately as majority of drivers in the club lean more towards climbing side of the club

Current incentives to drivers:

• Pre-sign up (i.e. confirmed spot on trip) and 25p/mile reimbursement form SU

Is there scope to increase the reimbursement rate? Not as far as we understand as set by the government.

Raised that other clubs do drivers tickets (i.e., cheaper trip cost) however BMC insurance means we are unable to offer the same. Other clubs also do transport more unofficially – e.g. book accommodation and tell people to make their own way/arrange lift sharing. However, by offering a more official set-up the club makes trips fairer on everyone.

38

Trips

Main issue raised from feedback form is lack of notice to them. Pointed out that trips are advertised as soon as committee are confident they can run. This also extends to sign ups often being the week before the trip runs, which is short notice to decide on whether to commit to the trip or not.

Reason sign ups have been short notice is again that organisers are awaiting on confirmation from drivers as this impacts on number of available spaces.

However, could trips/trip dates not be advertised much further in advance with a ballpark cost figure as to allow both drivers and non-drivers alike more time to decide whether to go on a trip or not?

Whilst Sunday email may contain all the info one needs not everyone reads it so need to exploit multiple platforms to get the information out to members. Club google calendar also promoted with a link to be shared to members so they can add to their own calendars

39

Leaders

Are all volunteers and not paid/reimbursed and face the same trip cost as the rest of tripgoers. Balancing the teaching with ensuring the leaders also get something out of these trips is fine act and both sides feel can lean one way more than the other.

Can the club do more to teach trad climbing skills? Difficulty is the quality and safety of the local trad crags and access to them. What about classroom based skill sessions teaching basic rope skills, anchor building and gear placement theory? Some are planned but pointed out that, since they are classroom based do not need to wait until good weather to do this. Also, by running these classes the leaders can develop better rapport with potential learners which might in turn encourage more independent teaching away for a club environment (e.g. independent trips down to Avon to teach trad)

Argued that not enough trad climbers in the club to pass on these skills but conversely highlights the imperative to make sustained effort to pass on skills.

What about coaching/guides? In theory yes but due to specialisms can be very expensive. SU typically offer a coaching budget, could the club look at that to subsidise some teaching by a professional? Size of existing budget may make this tricky and purpose of this is typically for BUCS but still worth enquiring.  Club should also make more use of BMC Safety Seminar and other skill courses which should be promoted outside of committee and to wider membership,

40

Health Declaration Forms

Point raised on feedback forms that they handed to wrong person however upon explanation of the process this complaint was withdrawn.

Separate complaint that they may be unfit for purpose and need amending to provide more useful information for future years. To be discussed with the SU.

41

Socials and Inclusivity

AV listed planned socials alongside Thursday regular – e.g., trampolining, joint socials with Surf, Kayaking and Snow Sports, and a film night

With regards to inclusivity the committee t-shirts are great for making it obvious when they are present but conversely also conspicuous when absent. Can be hard to identify if club members are present at a wall or not – helped by more club stash (e.g. t-shirts)

Feels like growing disconnect with those who climb in Bristol from bath and members of the club. Given climbing is more popular now than ever the need of a club is lesser as greater wider community already exists. But question then becomes how can we engage with this more effectively to foster a greater relationship with non-club members who climb and also increase inclusivity and promote initiatives to get people to climb regardless of whether they are a club member or not?

Club should take a role outside of just its members within this regard by promoting where people can find friendly faces etc. on public social media and more actively promote and engage with other climbing groups – e.g. colourup Bristol and other groups with less equity – both to members and publicly. 

As to how we can increase inclusivity within the club, given the barrier to entry of climbing gear a more concerted effort should be made to advertise the gear store and gear loaning system we have to members. This may as well act to encourage current non-members to join if advertised publicly as a benefit of joining.

Should be noted much of the talk of inclusivity was in response to climbing specifically and less so to the walking aspects of the club as no specific points regarding them were raised, beyond the positive.

42

Orienteering

Tuesday evenings at night and with the need for headtorches isn’t very welcoming however this was the only time the orienteering secretaries could host these sessions. With longer day time of S2 hopefully be less intimidating and attract a stronger crowd.