Reply to: PGC membership through company ?

[HairyArsedBloke]

I always knew they were scum! Come on everyone, cancel your memberships!

You know it makes sense; it's only fair.

[hugebrain]

That champagne party was an obscenity; a piss-take of the membership.

I always knew they were scum! Come on everyone, cancel your memberships!

[malvolio]

12000 to 18500 in three years. Yep, total failure.

[Ruse]

Yeah, yeah. It was publicised for at least six months. Plenty of time for people to object through any one of several routes (including on here, come to that...). Ithe final decision was not made until February, the latest time possible to cancel it without cost in case there was a groundswell against the idea. There wasn't..

But hey, let's not celebrate success, let's complain about the cost now it's too late to make any difference, and moan about not being listened to when you don't actually bother to say anything.

Pathetic...

Ahh now I know who you are, you're the head of marketing and new member recuritment at PCG. No wonder the membership numbers have barely budged for about 8 years. What is pathetic is that UK contractors/freelancers should have a strong, powerful, influential and politically astute body to represent us with hundreds of thousands of members and instead we still only have the PCG.

[HairyArsedBloke]

The PCG is a single-issue campaign body that has for ten years failed to fulfil its purpose.

It is ineffectual as a issue marketing body.

It is ineffectual as a lobbying body.

It is a bunch of incompetents selling wishes and dreams to small business people through Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.

The PCG is no better than those parasites that sell dodgy 'degrees' and 'CV reriteing servises' to the long-term unemployed.

I think they are worse than that, but I'll let that go. I'm not a contractor anymore; I'm a 'real business' and an offshore one too (in my case in a tax haven, not Bob S's, neighbour).

[RichardCranium]

PCG pants

I wasn't going to go on about this, but malvolio has.

In the end we thought sod it, we're only 10 once.

In the end we thought "sod 'em. We've got away with it for 10 years".

That champagne party was an obscenity; a piss-take of the membership.

It was affordable and the money was available.

Money that had not been invested in getting IR35 repealed, but just left in the bank.

There's still an awful lot more than we spent sat in the bank in case it's needed

IT HAS BEEN NEEDED FOR 10 BLOODY YEARS. Real charities are not allowed to make a profit. What the hell do the PCG parasites intend to do with all that money when IR35 becomes irrelevant for some other reason? Divide it amongst the elite, I expect.

Remind me how much did that web site cost. Remind me who got paid. That was the first obvious pocketing of membership fees.

Plenty of time for people to object

I did, by email. No response.

When I cancelled my membership, I gave the celebration of the 10th year of failure as my reason. No response.

Pathetic...

I agree, it is.


The PCG is a single-issue campaign body that has for ten years failed to fulfil its purpose.

It is ineffectual as a issue marketing body.

It is ineffectual as a lobbying body.

It is a bunch of incompetents selling wishes and dreams to small business people through Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.

The PCG is no better than those parasites that sell dodgy 'degrees' and 'CV reriteing servises' to the long-term unemployed.

[malvolio]

It's you that's talking Bollocks. Agains the use of we presumably being you and a few of your mates who are now in positions to make decisions. I don't remember any of the 18000 members being consulted on their subscription cash being spent on a party. Whether that cash is immediately needed or not is irrelevant it should be kept to use for compaigning.

Yeah, yeah. It was publicised for at least six months. Plenty of time for people to object through any one of several routes (including on here, come to that...). Ithe final decision was not made until February, the latest time possible to cancel it without cost in case there was a groundswell against the idea. There wasn't..

But hey, let's not celebrate success, let's complain about the cost now it's too late to make any difference, and moan about not being listened to when you don't actually bother to say anything.

Pathetic...

[VectraMan]

Ergo, a closed shop, less open than this forum, etc. Dur...

Nobody would want to use that forum. It looks like a 70s dial up BBS.

I notice the main site has had a complete redesign.

[Ruse]

Bollocks. We thought long and hard about doing it "during a recession". In the end we thought sod it, we're only 10 once. It was affordable and the money was available. There's still an awful lot more than we spent sat in the bank in case it's needed so we didn't compromise anything, nor take any extra.

The fora are not a closed shop, they're a lot more open than many (including this one). As for "Private Members Club (a) I find that deeply insulting on several levels, not least because I've put a lot of my time and effort into the PCG over the years as have many other people and (b) sitting out here crying won't change anything, get in there and do something.

It's you that's talking Bollocks. Agains the use of we presumably being you and a few of your mates who are now in positions to make decisions. I don't remember any of the 18000 members being consulted on their subscription cash being spent on a party. Whether that cash is immediately needed or not is irrelevant it should be kept to use for compaigning.

[malvolio]

There are none so blind as those who will not see...

Actually you will (hopefully!!) still gain long term from the ongoing campaigns, members or not. Obviously the more members we have the louder we can shout, but we still shout pretty effectively where it matters. The PCG now is a lot different and a lot more effective compared to even as little as two years ago. Not that you;ll believe that for a moment!

[HairyArsedBloke]

I am one of those very disillusioned ex-PCGers who does not consider membership to be of value.

+1

[NickFitz]

It's a members' only resource. Ruse is a member. Dur...

Ergo, a closed shop, less open than this forum, etc. Dur...

[malvolio]

Quote:

To view this page, you need to log in to area “PCG Members Site” on www.pcg.org.uk.

It's a members' only resource. Ruse is a member. Dur...

[NickFitz]

The fora are not a closed shop, they're a lot more open than many (including this one).

Quote:
To view this page, you need to log in to area “PCG Members Site” on www.pcg.org.uk.

[malvolio]

Of course it cost the membership, those funds still ultimately came out of membership fees. I still think it was inappropriate in a recession and with many contractors on the bench. The reason you didn't hear any voices of disapproval is that the silent majority don't use the PCG forums and if they did voice disapproval the same core would do their usual flaming down of any dissent. The PCG unfortunately is too often used by a small minority as a Private Members club to amuse themselves and help further their own political and career ambitions.

Bollocks. We thought long and hard about doing it "during a recession". In the end we thought sod it, we're only 10 once. It was affordable and the money was available. There's still an awful lot more than we spent sat in the bank in case it's needed so we didn't compromise anything, nor take any extra.

The fora are not a closed shop, they're a lot more open than many (including this one). As for "Private Members Club (a) I find that deeply insulting on several levels, not least because I've put a lot of my time and effort into the PCG over the years as have many other people and (b) sitting out here crying won't change anything, get in there and do something.