GCSAA RESTRUCTURES?? HMMM....

[Mike_Young]

THE FOLLOWING FROM GOLFDOM ARTICLE:
Several long-time employees lose their jobs as a result

The Golf Course Superintendents Association of America announced a restructuring that will eliminate the jobs of several long-time employees. Jim Fitzroy, the president of the GCSAA, made the announcement in a letter to members late last week. Fitzroy cited the difficult economic environment, particularly in the golf course industry, for the restructuring.

Bonnie Stephenson has ended her tenure at GCSAA after 36 years in a variety of administrative positions, most notably her tenure as director of conference events and meeting planning.

Teri Harris departs GCSAA after 20 years in various positions, most recently as senior director of development for the Environmental Institute for Golf.

Ed Hiscock leaves GCSAA after 14 years, the majority of them as editor in chief of Golf Course Management magazine.

Clark Throssell, Ph.D., leaves the association after nine years as director of research.

“In recent years, my predecessors and I have shared with you the steps we have taken to ensure that GCSAA remains a viable and sustainable organization that delivers value to you, your facility and the golf industry,” Fitzroy wrote in the letter. “The economic recession, particularly in the golf industry, has been deep and severe. Since 2008, GCSAA has reduced expenditures $5.4 million with the objective of having the least amount of impact on members as possible. Earlier this year, the GCSAA Board of Directors conducted an extensive strategic planning session to review our mission and vision, and chart our path for the upcoming years. Our responsibility as leaders is to keep GCSAA strongly positioned for the future by seeking new resources and optimizing the ones we have in order to execute programs and services on the members' behalf. … In the last three years, we have reduced staff from 122 to 85, so taking these additional steps places additional responsibility on those that remain. Working with interim CEO Rhett Evans, we will continue to focus on those areas we have deemed to be a priority.

"There is no denying that we will discontinue some activities and reduce the magnitude of others as we manage the association through this difficult period. But the reductions are also necessary to create the capacity to expand into areas of significant opportunity such as field staff, continued international expansion, advocacy/outreach and professional development, among others.

"Traditionally, we have not publicized the departure of staff below the executive level. However, because we will be parting with some longtime employees, I do think it is appropriate that we recognize them for their contributions and thank them for their service.”

[RJ_Daley]

It is sad to see the gutting of a fine organization like GCSAA.  I only belonged for a few years, but went to some conventions and took some CEU seminars.  I met her briefly in NOLA and was assisted in registrations and questions I had about taking some seminars by Bonnie.  My recollection was that she was very intsturmental in keeping those big events and conventions running smoothly.  I hope she is set up for a comfortable retirement even though it might have been sooner than desired.

[Joel_Stewart]

I don't understand what 125 employees do?  Do they compete with the USGA green section.

[Anthony Gray]

  Some "professional associations" are good old boy stuff that nobody needs and can be just one large pissing contest.

 Anthony

[Don_Mahaffey]

I feel for the folks let go, but GCSAA has been a bloated organization (I'm a 17 year member) for a while now. Sort of like a lot of things in golf it really didn't make financial sense to have such a large staff. I'm guessing some of the long term staffers were let go because of their pay grade and hopefully with years served they were given an early retirement package.

[Mike_Young]

I feel for the folks let go, but GCSAA has been a bloated organization (I'm a 17 year member) for a while now. Sort of like a lot of things in golf it really didn't make financial sense to have such a large staff. I'm guessing some of the long term staffers were let go because of their pay grade and hopefully with years served they were given an early retirement package.

I think it is interesting to see how Industry associations in every business go over the next few years.  When we speakof golf as a business, one of the parts that grew the most was associations....not to say there is not some good education to be gained from some of this but much of it was self serving.....you got CMAA , GCSAA, PGA, NGCOA and all are working at the same place....and there is only going to be one chief....it all got to complicated....

[John Kavanaugh]

Supposedly veteran superintendents who have achieved, earned a high pay grade are being let go to clear room in the budget. It's much cheaper to hire a kid out of school.

Yes, I hear Escuela Nacional Preparatoria is graduating an excellent class this year.

[TEPaul]

Joel:

I can't imagine that the GCSAA isn't competing with the USGA Green Section and numerous other entities that have to do with golf course agronomy, at the very least when it comes to support dollars. Obviously the GCSAA is a professional trade association of golf course superintendents and the USGA's Green Section is just a service arm of the USGA but they are both focused on golf course agronomy as are numerous state associations of superintendents as well as numerous college and university agronomic entities. With all that there has to be a number of redundancies, at least in the eyes of the people who get tapped to contribute support dollars.

[Chris Johnston]

A sign if the times, I'm afraid.  Golf has been hit particularly hard.

Lets hope those displaced may find other opportunities.

[Bill_McBride]

Given the state of the economy, I'm sure the trade show revenue is way down.  Less income = budget cuts.

[Don_Mahaffey]

I'm guessing some of the long term staffers were let go because of their pay grade

Supposedly veteran superintendents who have achieved, earned a high pay grade are being let go to clear room in the budget. It's much cheaper to hire a kid out of school.

Kelly, I was speculating. I'd like to think the long time staffers were given a severance/retirement package that softens the blow. I believe GCSAA has a good history of treating their staff well and I hope that continues.

As for the veteran supt who is being let go, all I can say is we all need to make ourselves as valuable to our employers as possible. The economy is not good and it is worse in golf. If a super is not adjusting to that he could be in trouble. I hear all the stories about good people losing jobs and I know it happens. Personally, my experience is everyone I've ever worked for valued employees who understood the challenges the business faced. Doesn’t mean we often aren’t put in a position of increased expectations with shrinking resources but doing more with less is the way of the future. Anyone who doesn't get that is headed for the unemployment line.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Supposedly veteran superintendents who have achieved, earned a high pay grade are being let go to clear room in the budget. It's much cheaper to hire a kid out of school.

Kelly,

I have seen the young guys be less expensive until the first crisis or unusal situation hits.  A veteran super is more valuble for the out of the ordinary which he/she has probably seen before.  I have seen clubs save $50K per year with a kid, and then spend $700K rebuilding the greens he lost.  IMHO, it costs what it costs over the long haul.

As to GCSAA, they seem to be just professionally adjusting with the times.  They may have gotten bloated, as many organizations do, and were constantly offering new services to members to try to be more valuble, not all of which proved to be as valuble as their cost to run.  But I believe the membership has been active in some of the senior management issues and were surely on top of all that.   As noted, with their major source of revenue being the annual golf show, and attendance way down, I am sure changes had to be made.

As such, I don't quite understand the negative connotations in some of the posts here.

[John Kavanaugh]

To me as a golfer the GCSAA reminds me of the football players union.  Every step they take is meant to improve the conditions of the supers with little regard to the product.  Follow the money, who funds the GCSAA, who funds the funders?  While I feel badly for those who are hurt in the process this will be good for the golfer who pays the ticket.

[Mike_Young]

To me as a golfer the GCSAA reminds me of the football players union.  Every step they take is meant to improve the conditions of the supers with little regard to the product.  Follow the money, who funds the GCSAA, who funds the funders?  While I feel badly for those who are hurt in the process this will be good for the golfer who pays the ticket.

Capitalism and the free enterprise system are wonderful things....if left alone they will adjust....
My wife's grandfather was one of the founding members of the GCSAA and looking at some of their old pictures etc..it was just mainly an annual meeting where all could get together and exchange ideas etc...of course these things become larger but across the board Americans have created an industry of associations....but now the funders have an excuse not to fund....think of what it cost the turf products industry....and mostly because their competitor is doing it...not that helps them that much....and look at NGCOA....preferred buyer system?  come on...al that does is cut the price for whatever product you wanted in the first place....You hear all of the old PGA guys talking of when they used to go to Orlando each year and how it has changed....remember a few years ago when some of the major vendors pulled out of the show....we are going to see a lot of that across the board....
AND certifications such as CGCS and Master Professional....well that's another subject....
All industries are cutting what they can cut....it is the time of "git er done"....

[Anthony_Nysse]

Kelly,

I have seen the young guys be less expensive until the first crisis or unusal situation hits.  A veteran super is more valuble for the out of the ordinary which he/she has probably seen before.  I have seen clubs save $50K per year with a kid, and then spend $700K rebuilding the greens he lost.  IMHO, it costs what it costs over the long haul.

Jeff,
  I have seen the complete opposite of this, first hand, even. I've spoken to several architects that are working with clubs and the club runs the Superintendent with 20 years experience off because they don't feel as though they can go through a renovation/restoration/redesign. They terminate or remove the Supt and hiring in a younger guy, OR someone with more experience in that field. Is it right? No, but will it continue to happen? Probably. Will it happen to me? Maybe.
  A lot of young guy in the business grew up in the business and have 1o-12 years in it BEFORE ever becoming a Superintendent. Couple that with the understanding that it is so important to network-talk with other Supts, visit other courses, see a renovation, etc. I think that the gap you speak of is much smaller than you really thin.

[RJ_Daley]

This all started, as I think I understand the history, with winter meetings in "Toronto"  , in the 1920s, where greenskeepers decided to gather and compare notes and share techniques and practices for growing their turf.  It was probably something of a Laurel and Hardy routing of "let's all go to Toronto, and the wives will be none the wiser" filled with both professional sharing of knowledge and lots of libations at night. 

But, they soon probably realized their profession faced more issues than they knew.  The depression hit and they were able to keep those early ties together.  After the war and when golf course proliferation really took off, they got more complex as a professional org, and began to face more complexities of an identifiable industry of practioners.  One thing that probably sent them into a more complex professional mode was recognition that they needed a representative to the public perception, and more importantly a lobby for legislation in the burgeouning world of agri biz and chem-fert applications.  Then like most professional orgs, they saw a need to protect their turf (pun) and decided to regulate as best they could, entry to their profession along with an effort to standardize and legitimize turf maintenance practices.  So like many 'guilds' they developed a master journeyman novice sort of concept and started certifiying their members with internally controlled criteria of education, practices and techniques.   The agri-biz manufacturers and producers also used the process to help them grow, while being dependent on them for increasing costs to keep the merry-go-round spinning, ever more complex.


In the 70s and 80s the professional org got even more aware and weary that they needed to be a force for advocacy of their profession when the anti-pesticide groups gained more power and legislator influence on the anti-turf management side of the regulation equation. 

Big conventions, big political industry issues, and the whole scene grew like hopsy.

[Greg Chambers]

I'm guessing some of the long term staffers were let go because of their pay grade

Supposedly veteran superintendents who have achieved, earned a high pay grade are being let go to clear room in the budget. It's much cheaper to hire a kid out of school.

Kelly, I was speculating. I'd like to think the long time staffers were given a severance/retirement package that softens the blow. I believe GCSAA has a good history of treating their staff well and I hope that continues.

As for the veteran supt who is being let go, all I can say is we all need to make ourselves as valuable to our employers as possible. The economy is not good and it is worse in golf. If a super is not adjusting to that he could be in trouble. I hear all the stories about good people losing jobs and I know it happens. Personally, my experience is everyone I've ever worked for valued employees who understood the challenges the business faced. Doesn’t mean we often aren’t put in a position of increased expectations with shrinking resources but doing more with less is the way of the future. Anyone who doesn't get that is headed for the unemployment line.

Unfortunately, Don, there are also those owners/operators that don't value the employees that understand the challenges and how to best see it through.  These people have nothing but the bottom line in mind and could care less about the long term ramifications.  Sad, but true.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Greg, yes I know. But, if you find a way to add to the bottom line.... at least you know what motivates them.


ps...the really snarky owners/management companies usually have a history...apply at your own risk.

[Anthony_Nysse]

Greg, yes I know. But, if you find a way to add to the bottom line.... at least you know what motivates them.


ps...the really snarky owners/management companies usually have a history...apply at your own risk.

Management companies have always scared me.....

[Jeff_Brauer]

I was speaking with another industry veteran today and he mentioned that besides golf show revenues being down, membership is down.  Apparently, many courses used to pay the dues for the super and even assistants, but many don't now, and in particular, the assistants are cutting their membership with GCSAA. 

At top levels, the super certification program was a source of cash, and the many are letting that drop, since it doesn't seem to be recognized by potential employers as much as it was among the supers themselves, and didn't lead to getting jobs or pay raises.

[Brian Chapin]

Hopefully this is the first of many changes to GCSAA.  I have been asking myself lately if I would continue my membership if my club refused to foot the bill.  The answer is probably no.  I just don't see the value in it, and I can't really get behind anything they are doing for me personally / professionally, the game of golf, or superintendents as a group.  The PGA has a very nice add campaign going right now promoting the thousands of club pro's and the training/education they go through to get to where they are.  They were especially prevalent during the PGA Championship.  Every time I see the ad I think to myself..."Where is the GCSAA promoting me?"

Top 4 things I would like to see the GCSAA do or improve on:

1.) Work with the USGA and PGA to manage the expectations of the general public through improved communications regarding the aesthetics, conditioning and presentation of televised tournaments.

2.) Provide agronomic assistance to superintendents in times of struggle. (Similar to the USGA site visits)

3.) Educate and assist clubs with hiring the right candidate for the job.

4.) Fund and direct RELEVANT research. 

[Bradley Anderson]

The conditions that we enjoy are because we have all worked together to improve the game. The GCSAA, the PGA, The Club Managers, the USGA, the Architects, the Builders, and the various Turf Foundations associated with the top turf schools - all working together with not that much clashing of egos for the most part. Granted there are differences and disagreements but you have that in everything.

I have been a greenkeeper for 25 years and I have never encountered a union mentality amoung my peers. When I go to the conference it is all about learning and improving my skills to do a better job. And the GCSAA has provided some really good seminars for helping us. It has always been about what is best for the game.

[Bradley Anderson]

I was speaking with another industry veteran today and he mentioned that besides golf show revenues being down, membership is down.  Apparently, many courses used to pay the dues for the super and even assistants, but many don't now, and in particular, the assistants are cutting their membership with GCSAA. 

At top levels, the super certification program was a source of cash, and the many are letting that drop, since it doesn't seem to be recognized by potential employers as much as it was among the supers themselves, and didn't lead to getting jobs or pay raises.

The reason I became certified was because of the challenge. And I learned a lot that has benefited my club in the process. I think most certified superintendents would say that. I don't recall any of my certified friends saying that they expected a raise from it. One of the men who steered the development of certification, Ted Woehrle of Oakland Hills, just passed away. I just worte a brief bio on the man for our local newsletter. Ted was a good friend of mine and I know that he had the most noble intentions in everything he did for the GCSAA and for golf.

[Mike_Young]

The conditions that we enjoy are because we have all worked together to improve the game. The GCSAA, the PGA, The Club Managers, the USGA, the Architects, the Builders, and the various Turf Foundations associated with the top turf schools - all working together with not that much clashing of egos for the most part. Granted there are differences and disagreements but you have that in everything.

I have been a greenkeeper for 25 years and I have never encountered a union mentality amoung my peers. When I go to the conference it is all about learning and improving my skills to do a better job. And the GCSAA has provided some really good seminars for helping us. It has always been about what is best for the game.

Bradley,
I have the utmost respect for supts....but I cannot agree that associations have improved the game...individuals do the work and the owners and clubs are the ones who put up the money to improve the game....things are changing...I have seen much union mentality when I see a young supt tell an owner that he needs to do something a specific way because it is "his reputation" (supt's) if it is done another way...the day is coming when an owner will say.."you have this many $$$ to do the job"  do it....and will not be asking for budgets.....
and yes, there is a clashing of egos within the organizations....CMAA completely stepped on the PGA and they manipulate the GCSAA....the NGCOA is for the executives of the organization more than the owners and and the architects and builders are subtly described efforts at restricting trade...bottom line is that all trade groups are a line item that every club an owner can eliminate from their budget and see no difference....

[Greg Chambers]

The problem is that there are too many guys in the GCSAA wearing FootJoys and not enough guys wearing Boots...