One industry that has a guild and is a strong voice for there members is the Showmen's Guild.

Definition of guild

noun
a medieval association of craftsmen or merchants, often having considerable power.
an association of people for mutual aid or the pursuit of a common goal.

Just thinking outside the square

Then push for the abandonment of Greyhounds Australia with a new body to oversea the industry but the guild would want a member on the board with any changes having to come back to the guild board.

At the end of the day it the participants that fund the investment into the product we supplying and we have no voice just bent over and cop it up the clacker. I would also push for the guild to setup and run a re education facility getting suitable greyhounds ready for rehoming and each state governing body would then be forced to help fund the facility. They don't mind spending $2500 per dog through the gap so why not fund this facility in conjunction with the current GAP facilities allowing then for a national rehomeing operation. The head office for the guild could be based at this facility allowing for better utilization of resources.

Rob,
All good ideas.
YOU can see things need to change NOW, I can see it, and a FEW others here can see it but unfortunately the majority don't want to ACTION it.
With no action there is only talk.
There is unlimited talk on this site NOW of what the problems are, how unfair they are, what changes need to be applied, etc, etc.
BUT, when it comes to the crunch and the CALL FOR ACTION is applied...

Silence.

I don't know the answer, perhaps there isn't one.

There is an answer but it will not work overnight or even over a year or two. A five year plan is the most sensible.

On the industry side, the explanation is one I have mentioned before in different contexts. I said, If you ask 10 trainers (or breeders) to comment you will get 11 different answers one will change his mind half way through. Fragmentation is the order of the day. Clean it up.

On the administrative side, you will get no answers at all because they are bureaucracies concerned only with minimising conflict and processing pieces of paper.

On the raceclub side, you will get little help because they are dependent on handouts from the bureaucrats.

On the association side, the NCA has effectively disappeared, especially from the policy-making area. GBOTAs, even from their national grouping, have become part of the establishment and therefore part of the problem, not the solution (minor exception for Queensland at the moment).

On the political side, they will refer you to the above bureaucrats, or get a comment from the bureaucrats and send that on to you, usually with the assurance that everything is really fine, thank you.

Thats the system. If you accuse me of being negative the above evidence is behind that thinking.

Having said that, my longstanding plea (and plan) is to better influence the state governments by calling attention to the obsolescent nature of greyhound organisational structures and the harm that is doing to everyone including the Treasurer collecting all the taxes and the need for major reform. Transparency, initiative, responsibility and accountability are needed but are not there.

There is nothing new about that reform process. It has been done before in lots of areas with banks, airlines, many primary industry bodies, most sporting organisations, and so on. It just needs a business-like approach and a bit of courage.

Central to that process would be the removal of any government controls over racing except, of course, for matters in involving general community standards for welfare, justice, and (within reason) taxation. Let the industry live or die by its own hand, just as happens everywhere else. Let go the apron strings which have never worked well anyway.

In practical terms, change means marches down Macquarie St (or similar efforts) to indicate that the mob is not happy with what is going on. All hands to the mill! Leaders waving the standard! Letters to pollies! Visits to local members! Talking to shock jocks! Good information.

Who do we target? Well, support from SFF is nice but it will not win you a parliamentary reversal. We all know Greens are a dead loss, but then most of the population now knows that anyway. The Libs/Nats have a poor record in reforms, while the Labor mob is much better, but both must be addressed because both will be in power at different times.

Once successful with that effort, the way is clear to form a National Commission and so install additional efficiency and influence into the system. That can happen only from a position of strength.

But, yes, we first need a leader to show the way. This is politics at its basic and its best. But not a union type please Ross. To paraphrase Keating, they are unrepresentative swill (9% of real workers) and often criminals and self-servers at best. We need a statesman to stand up front.

I have joined the AWU. I know quite a few others who have as well. There was an article in the recorder this week written by Dave Irwin about the AWU. (It had my name to it but should have been Dave Irwin, have been told it will be corrected next week).

The advantage of the AWU over starting something new would be the experience of an existing union is dealing with these matters and that structures are already in place.

Do think it's imperative that we do something though so am happy that people like you are coming up with good ideas that can benefit everyone. I will join whatever group that looks like it can make a difference because we cannot survive if things stay the same.

There are not the fundamentals for a registered union, and only those people in the industry who are employees under a relevant award would benefit as members.

The majority of industry participants would not qualify as employees, and what is the appetite of unions to take on supporting non-employees eg sole traders', employers, hobbyists, or the industry in general?

So I agree with Bruce in this respect, though unsure about his comment "But not a union type please Ross." when there was no Ross in the topic and is not an approach I have ever pushed for.

Though it is somewhat satisfying if this shows that my posts so successfully preoccupy reader minds.

My preferred approach is for GBOTA/GOTBA membership to increase, and for appropriately experienced people to take them to a higher level. This may involve ramping up the national body and then having State-based divisions addressing State-specific issues.

THE AFL Players Association is a more relevant model.

Sorry mate - I meant Rob.

But I agree with the theory of a players association model. Even so, that is the intended purpose of various GBOTAs and they have failed miserably to advance the industry, or even to hold the line (although Queensland is trying at the moment). Clearly, over the years they have lost the plot. Their actions show they are more concerned with preserving their empires than modernising the industry and competing in the marketplace.

In any event, the comparison falls a bit short in that while those associations are voluntary, they are universally supported by highly paid players and reinforced by professional player managers.

That failure is a function of something I mentioned previously - Like any club, the NSW version is dependent on handouts from the bureaucracy. Consequently, the interests of the two soon merge. One is indistinguishable from the other. It is not a new thing. In practice, it was precisely how the horrible IDC agreement was cut 18 years ago.

The better approach is the one proposed about forming a separate Commission/Guild/whatever, funded by small deductions from prize money. The trouble is I am still racking my brain to work out how that could be put into practice.

It would work if the various state authorities supported the concept (it is consistent with their legislated consultative responsibilities) but somehow I am not sure if that would be forthcoming. Even then, it requires a formalised "player" body to deal with. In turn, that needs overall "player" support to create it. Both would attract some opposition from the said GBOTAs.

Finally, I am horrified by any suggestion about joining up with the AWU and thereby contributing to other political campaigns, court fines and repairs to holiday homes down the coast. I could go into detail but I would risk losing my small fortune.

I am not suggesting a union. I suggested a guild. That way it covers the whole industry from rearers, breeders,owners,independently run tracks, trainers etc

Doesn't matter if it a guild, association or whatever just has to have strong support and a loud and strong voice.

Agree GBOTA are there in principal but are mute. The only way to get a large member base is to move away and start fresh

It started off a voluntary, and was funded by the AFL. It still is, but now has its own income sources. But every player is now a member.

It makes sense that those who provide the 'players' is funded by the industry income, perhaps by a small levy on wagering turnover.

The body could also provide advocates for participants who are currently financially monstered by the state regulators.

The union aspect started with Carly - my comment was sparked by Bruce's possible reference to me.

Also the GOTBA in Vic and Your GBOTA have been newted by how the authorities are now structured. In Vic all that GRV have to do is consult to fulfil their obligation and from past first hand experience it is easy for them to fob off any objection made. Experienced Group winning greyhound people who know greyhounds telling public servants who know nothing of greyhounds being over ruled.

Since I came back to dog racing in 2007 after being away for 20 odd years I have experienced nothing but this. I would love to see another inquiry. You only have to look at the 2015 Integrity Commission report, the Ombudsman's report of 2012 and the Judge Lewis report of 2008 to see why we are here at this point in time!

Ross,
You are 100% correct.
Several years ago I spoke to the AWU in regards to participant representation.
Basically, they will only represent employees under an award, which does NOT include Greyhound owners, trainers, breakers, or rearers.
They are classed as self employed.
They have recently represented the ACT employees of the Canberra Greyhound club and voiced their opinion.
I see no national strikes on their behalf...bluntly, it doesn't affect enough people to cause a ground swell.

There is only one group that will propel the industry forward and that is the industry itself, because no other bugger sees it important enough. It is non essential to most.
Unfortunately, that is the truth and 99.9% of the population will go on living normal lives if Greyhound racing ceases tomorrow.
TAB's and corporates will survive by replacing Greyhounds with other forms of betting mediums and life will go on.

A complex strategy needs to be hatched by a body who truly has the industry's best interest in mind and that is not the bowl of spaghetti that is now in place.

The most challenging thing for the future of Greyhound racing in this country is to find a way to unite the industry and to collectively contribute to its rightful longevity.

No, Bruce, I actually agree with everything above.

"Who do we target? Well, support from SFF is nice but it will not win you a parliamentary reversal. We all know Greens are a dead loss, but then most of the population now knows that anyway. The Libs/Nats have a poor record in reforms, while the Labor mob is much better, but both must be addressed because both will be in power at different times.

Once successful with that effort, the way is clear to form a National Commission and so install additional efficiency and influence into the system. That can happen only from a position of strength."

"Once successful with that effort..." SAY WHAT?!?!?
You've just obliterated any avenue available...and admittedly, rightly so.
So how can one be successful, Bruce?

The whole structure of governance must be changed from a Government ownership of the industry to an industry governed by a Commission of excellence who advises the Government.

Good luck with that one.

Completely agree with this comparison and I spoke about this last year. The AFL also have a Coaches association and an umpires association. 3 totally different roles represented by 3 different associations.
And so it is with our sport.
Trainers are different from breeders who are different from owners. When we lump all 3 together and call it a GBOTA, we have 3 groups in one canoe, all paddling in their own direction and the canoe going around in circles.
Let a trainers association fight the things that concern training, a breeders association fight the things concerning breeding and the owners fight about ownership issues.

I can already hear the calls of 'why split the industry....'
Well excuse me, you can only split something that is unified. And that aint us.

It is a proven model of success in every other sport on the planet apart form ours.

Jamie.

In the major dailies the only picture that made the front pages was of the march down Macquarie St. Worth a thousand words.

The biggest political influence by far was the Nats loss at Orange.

Otherwise, I suspect that the biggest influence on advisors to Baird would have been the widespread disgust at the abrupt elimination of an entire industry. That brought non-racing types out of hiding. Hadley and Jones helped.

Petitions are fine and necessary but they are a dime a dozen in Parliament. Water off a duck's back.

In the end, trade on known support ... SFF stirring the pot plus more support for the handful of Lib/Nats who crossed the floor. Grass roots efforts to educate more of them is essential - all parties.

While I appreciate what the SFF has done and Borsak is a good operator, be careful not to overdo it because SFF is only a splinter group and many folk do not like all the things he represents. Notably, the world is allergic to guns these days, and Americans, for the first time in living memory, are now seeing serious efforts to change the Second Amendment of the Constitution (bearing arms). They probably will not succeed but the thought is there.