Who Should Pay for the Conference Hands-on Classes? | Page 6 | For the Good of the Order | Forum

Hi Folks,
An interenting thread this! Firstly I believe in the 'user pays' principle. Hovever I do understand that some folks have financial restraints that make it dificult/imposible to pay from time to time. I recon that many good ideas have been sugested, but If you do'nt help an aspiring smith to understand the real world are you really helping them? I sugest that a small fund be set up that can be used to 'pay it forward' i.e. if you can't afford to pay for a class/demo etc. contact "Joe" you then undertake to sponsor 2 or more "unfortunates" in the foreseeable future and/or more in the distant future. This helps those who have current difficulties(discreetly)and imbibes the culture of 'no free lunch' and helps with future assistance of those that need some assistance. There is a similar thing that runs here on the sub continent with roadside assistance and you would be amaised at the goodwill it brings.
Sadly the cost of coming to the conference for just the wife and I is just prohibitive at present(p.s. its not the $100 nor the minor extras) its the Airlines and sutchlike.
Ian

Jack,
You seem a balanced man, like with a chip on each shoulder! try to be constructive and let the agro be, please?:happy:
Ian

I have been staying out of this for the last several days just because I felt like all I was doing was defending my position, not contributing in a way that was constructive. Ive been reading and watching though and one thing that seems pretty clear to me I think is a bit lost.

We all are on the same page as far as the Hands on workshops. It seems pretty universal that we need to figure out a way to make them available to anyone wanting to learn. We also seem to agree that more hands on classes make for a better conference.

The how seems to have broken down into almost a left/right debate.

The right (not correct, just conservative) focus being individual accountability and group finances (if someone wants to take a class they should be willing to help cover expenses)

The left being the classes are a service being provided by the group that should be viewed as a primary, vital function and not a liability.

I dont think either view is wrong. The goal in either case is not at odds with the other view.

To me its what end you start at.... Do you look at it from the NWBA's perspective and say... The amount spent on Hands on has skyrocketed, we want to continue to offer hands on classes but dont have the budget to do so at its current level. Is it unreasonable to expect the participants to shoulder some of the expenses?

Or from the Participant view. We need this education, its the best chance the organization has of expanding membership and furthering the craft. To charge people is a deviation from our primary goal.

There are other variations but I think those pretty well sum up the main opposing teams.

Either way the goal is to fund the hands on,

And Jack...

You said
"maybe but I see some inconsistencies in the statements we have so far.
Some provide their own materials for the hands on.
Some make a fair pocket full by the end.
Then say "must charge for hands on"
fine carry it down the line.
Sorry for not seeing it the boot strap pullers way.
I do not see it as constructive to try to take down a long running feature just because we are all a little more desperate these days.
I do think suggesting other possibilities is fair enough though.
Care to?"

You know I did provided all the materials for my class, And i spent 60 hours building tools, practicing and preparing for the class. I had about $200 in hard expenses so my "fair pocket" was maybe $800. Now I make my living as a blacksmith and can tell you that $13.30/hr will not cover my shop costs... I did not come out "making money" by doing the hands on class.... What I was trying to offer was the instructors potentially have another way of recovering some of there expenses rather than repayment by the group. I did not expect to make money or break even.... I felt like in order to provide a good hands I had to supply the tools and materials. I supplied a hawk blank with a drawn handle and a machined eye notch, H-13 slitter, a 4140 mandrel a handle drift and a bolster... and sold those sets after the class for $100...(in other words it was a token payment, I could not turn a profit at five times that price) I also supplied hawk handles at cost to everyone in the class as well as all my own specialized tools I developed for the proses If this was a paying job at my shop rate we are looking at around five grand worth of work I did for $800.... I take a offense that you imply I am taking the dough and saying stick it to the participants... I was happy to spend the time to offer what I felt was a good workshop and was and will again be willing to.

And no one has sugguested "to try to take down a long running feature just because"

And If you go back I have offered several suggestions that did not included charging the participants..

I really dont get why your in attack mode? I want the same thing as you... So does Grant.....

Between the Spring conference and the Fall conference, the board reduced the basic fee to attend a conference by $10.00 and added the option of dinner for $10.00 (about 60% of the cost of that dinner). We determined that it would help out a little for those that are not rich and live in beach resorts! We kept camping free, except for a modest fee for utilities. So, a low income member could attend the entire conference for $65. and if he brought an auction item, he could do even better. After all, isn't that the first consideration - getting folks to come? You can't teach 'em if the don't come.
We chose to charge a very modest fee for hands-on and if anyone would have approached any of the board members with a funding issue at the time of the drawing, I'll just bet you that they would have been covered. There were a half a doz. of our deepest pockets standing around waiting to be shaken down.
Again,Hands-on is free for all but those with hammers in their hand. We also added an fifth hands-on class.
most members saved enough, or nearly enough, in admission and camping to afford a hands-on class. What the board did was make our conference as affordable as any we have had.
For all of you who feel that hands-on should be free to all - I expect to see your names on the conference coordinator's volunteer list at the next board meeting.

I really don't mind paying for a hands on class, $20 ...that is cheap. Would I like it free? Yes ... but costs are costs and I would have to agree with Mr. Neely in that the more people we can get to come to conference by reducing the entrance fees and such, the better off we are at getting more members as well.

I like ... ok, love the ideas of a gallery to help cover new students costs and the other idea of "pay it forward". It definitely fosters the idea that nothing is free, but there are ways of "working it out" ... so to speak. All these ideas give good alternatives to cover the growing costs of running the conferences. Perhaps we could combine them all and use what works best for the group as a whole? A little gallery for some, little pay it forward for some and a bit of volunteering for others?

I'm liking having the more "Hands on" classes and if we need to charge a little for them to have more classes, I'm ok with that ... like Grant said, there are plenty of "free forging" things going on all the time.