 |
|
 |
|
|
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. -- The PRCA's latest media release - a Q & A with Commissioner Troy Ellerman - is nothing but self-serving propaganda. It is consistent with the approach of current PRCA management in their efforts to cover up their own inappropriate actions by misrepresentation and vilification of the WPRA. The PRCA intends to publish the Q & A in its house magazine, ProRodeo Sports News (PSN). Upon receiving an advance copy of the Q & A and reviewing it, the WPRA was astonished at the number of misstatements and factual errors. It called PSN and asked to be given space in the same issue to respond to the allegations by Commissioner Ellerman. The WPRA even offered to purchase space in the magazine. Not surprisingly, the WPRA was denied on both counts. Before you lend any credence to the information contained in the Ellerman Q & A, we ask that you consider the source. The basic assumption being made is that the PRCA is stable and in better shape than the WPRA - hence barrel racing will be better off under the PRCA. This assumption is tenuous: the WPRA is fiscally solvent and has been for many years. The PRCA has not enjoyed the same financial stability. Further, if the barrel racing event becomes a part of the PRCA or their subsidiary, barrel racers sign up to be ruled by a Board of Directors and Commissioner who have often arbitrarily gone against the wishes of the cowboys and its other members. For example: · The current PRCA Board - has impeached a director that was elected by the members. · The current PRCA Board - has appointed to voting positions two members that were not re-elected by their members. · The current PRCA Board - has fired employees that stood for and defended the circuit system. · The current commissioner's salary, we understand, is $300,000 annually and each event director is paid $25,000 a year - have they taken a pay cut to help the struggling association? · The current PRCA Board - has voted that their GOLD card members (after 20 years of loyalty) must now pay full dues again. (Not so in the WPRA.) · The current PRCA Board - voted for a major change to the qualifications for the circuit finals that was unanimously opposed by the Circuit Presidents. · The current PRCA Board publicly announced that it was departing Colorado Springs after twenty-five years and moving its headquarters and Hall of Fame to Albuquerque despite the fact that it had no authority to move the Hall and it later had to recant. · There is even some question as to whether the newly proposed subsidiary has been properly authorized by the PRCA's Board of Directors. Even if one were inclined to give any credence to the information contained within the Q & A with Commissioner Ellerman, please note a number of glaring inaccuracies: Negotiations The WPRA has tried to reach a fair compromise that resolves the PRCA's concerns about their dollars spent on WPRA members while keeping the WPRA's responsibility to its membership in mind. This is why the WPRA has stood firm in its request for accurate, financial documentation of what - if anything - it owes. The PRCA and its representatives have thrown many numbers at the WPRA in the past year but none that the PRCA could, or would, substantiate. The WPRA has been told that the PRCA can document over $4 million (September 2005), $204,000 (May 2005), and now $500,000 (most recent press release). The WPRA Board never turned down the initial $100 competition fee that was approved by the PRCA's Competition Committee. It never even had an opportunity to consider it. The WPRA heard rumors that such a fee was being discussed and WPRA President Jymmy Kay Davis tried to contact Commissioner Ellerman prior to the PRCA Board's consideration of this proposal. After repeated attempts to reach Ellerman via phone calls, President Davis finally spoke to him and made an appointment to meet prior to the ProRodeo Hall of Fame induction ceremony in July of 2005. She asked if the WPRA would be allowed input before this decision was made. The WPRA put together numbers showing what its members were already contributing based upon fees paid to Procom Central Entry and to the judging program and circuits and delivered them to Commissioner Ellerman. In a letter, dated August 11, 2005, President Davis states that the WPRA "sincerely hopes the Board of Directors votes against the $100 competition fee." In a very telling sign of the current mind set of the PRCA Board and its Commissioner, it responded to this letter by doubling what it was asking for and sending the WPRA a $200 competition fee. Because the PRCA's concerns were based primarily on the costs the PRCA was incurring on behalf of WPRA members, the WPRA submitted a proposal in late September that the WPRA felt rectified each of the PRCA's concerns as identified to the WPRA. Namely, the WPRA offered to pay the PRCA a flat fee of $100K and to take over all costs of the barrel race, including television, negotiating sponsorships, and taking its own entries. The WPRA was told that "Procom is an independent department within the structure of the PRCA and . . . is not intended as a revenue source for the PRCA" (quote from a letter dated August 21, 2005 from Board Chairman Tom Feller.) Since additional monies being paid to Procom were not helping fund any of the programs, including those benefiting WPRA members, the WPRA felt it was fair to remove the burden of taking its entries from the PRCA. The WPRA felt this proposal was more than fair as it had offered the PRCA money in addition to reducing PRCA costs. The November 2005 PRCA Board meeting minutes prove that the PRCA agreed to quantify what financial benefits were being provided to WPRA members, and also what the WPRA was already contributing. In May of 2006 a WPRA member asked Commissioner Ellerman during a meeting at the Pace ProTour Chute Out in Tulsa if the PRCA Board was considering taking the barrel race in-house. Upon Ellerman's affirmation of this rumor and his suggestion that the barrel racers begin their lobbying now, he and Chairman Feller received a great volume of calls and emails, protesting such action. President Davis was among the callers, again requesting the financial analysis that was promised to the WPRA in the agreement reached at the end of 2005. Commissioner Ellerman contends that he never spoke with President Davis between May of 2006 and the PRCA Board meeting where it voted to create the new subsidiary. That is not true. President Davis actually did and has the phone records to prove it. "President Davis offered numerous times to establish talks between the two organizations," confirmed Leon Vick, former PRCA director. The Q & A also accuses the WPRA of keeping its membership in the dark regarding what the PRCA had offered the WPRA. Why then did Chairman Feller and Commissioner Ellerman, in a letter dated September 3, 2005 commend the WPRA for posting information on its website? The WPRA notified its membership of the PRCA's $200 proposal on its website and in the "From Your President" column in the September 2005 Women's ProRodeo News (WPRN). The WPRA's rejection of this proposal was printed in the October 2005 WPRN. The WPRA's compromise solution can be found in the January 2006 WPRN. The June 2006 WPRN also contains information on the negotiations as does the July issue. The WPRA website has also been constantly updated and WPRA members receive letters following each and every Board meeting containing the pertinent information from those meetings. To claim that the WPRA is keeping its members in the dark is laughable. President Davis suggested to Chairman Feller in July that the WPRA and PRCA create a committee comprised of three of the PRCA directors and three WPRA directors to work out a solution. Chairman Feller told President Davis that this was a good idea and that he would contact her. It never happened. Whose fault is that? When the WPRA gave good faith negotiations one last try following the PRCA Board's August 16 decision, the WPRA again proposed the formation of a smaller committee of PRCA and WPRA directors to work out a solution. This was not "exactly the same as the one (proposal) we struck last year," as Commissioner Ellerman characterizes it. The fact that the PRCA now derides the WPRA's ongoing efforts to engage in negotiation is evidence of what the PRCA's real intention is. Despite the varied opinions on how much is owed to the PRCA as evidenced by the different numbers the WPRA has received, the WPRA feels that it may not owe the PRCA anything. WPRA members pay three times as much in Procom fees as their PRCA counterparts. The PRCA sold the barrel race and WPRA members right alongside its own members and earned huge sponsor dollars on the basis of the value of the WPRA barrel race. What businessman uses a name for his sales pitch and then asks for payment from the individual he has used? In fact, the PRCA may owe the WPRA for the use of its name and members. Good for Women's Rodeo? Commissioner Ellerman states that the new subsidiary will be good for the barrel racers. One assertion he makes is that now it will be incumbent upon the judges to follow the rules. Guess what? They already do. The judges agreed to follow WPRA rules in the PRCA/WPRA contract for 2006. It was approved 6-0 by the PRCA Board on November 18, 2005. WPRA members have been paying an additional $2 per entry throughout 2006 (a net benefit of approximately $60,000 to the PRCA) so that WPRA rules would be enforced by the judges. Since the WPRA assumed that the enforcement of WPRA rules was already in place, as per our 2006 agreement, and the WPRA has had a good relationship with PRCA judges in the past, why would WPRA members need to join this subsidiary to get what they already have? The PRCA makes the point that now they will provide the "support necessary for our judges to enforce those rules and make sure they are followed to the letter." This should already be happening. The assertion is also that women are now official members of the PRCA. This is not true. The barrel racers will be joining the subsidiary, not the PRCA itself. In any squabble between the women's subsidiary corporation and the men's parent corporation, you know who will win. The PRCA now fancies itself a front-runner in promoting women's rights. However, did the PRCA stand up for women's barrel racing when the WPRA sought and got equal money for the barrel race at regular season rodeos? Did it stand up for equal money for barrel racing at the NFR (without need to strike)? Has it ever sought to make barrel racing a standard event? The answer is no. The WPRA had to fight and strike and claw to obtain these advantages. The WPRA is at the forefront of the equality movement of women-that's how the WPRA got started way back in 1948. The PRCA presumes to tell the WPRA about fighting inequality. The WPRA has nearly sixty years experience fighting for every small victory and beating down prejudice. Why should the WPRA applaud the effort of the PRCA to squash the oldest women's professional sports organization in the country and replace it with a corporation dominated by a men's organization? Is that not a step backwards for women's rights in the rodeo arena? The WPRA can't understand how anyone could deem credible the implication that losing an independent, women's only organization as its advocate can be construed to be a positive move for women. That assertion is clearly based on the "good ole boy mentality" that a man can take better care of a woman than she can take care of herself. The women of the WPRA have been proving that one wrong for sixty years. "If You Don't Agree With the PRCA, You Must Not Understand" The decision of those members who are against this new subsidiary has been called an uninformed stand. The primary reservations many people have about the new PWBR are that it will cease to be a women's only event, that the women will be paying higher fees, and that rodeos may eliminate barrel racing,: all are "absolutely untrue," according to Commissioner Ellerman. But take time to consider facts instead of rhetoric. The sanctity of the women's only race is being threatened. The WPRA, a women's only organization since 1948, had to defend a lawsuit by male barrel racers seeking to be allowed to compete in WPRA races. The new PWBR will have to fight the same battle, but without the WPRA's history and independence to back it up. Yes, the women will absolutely be paying higher fees. PRCA members pay higher dues and approximately three times higher insurance costs than WPRA members do currently. Because the PRCA claims that all fees for PWBR members will be the same as the PRCA members, then barrel racers are paying more for dues and insurance. In effect, barrel racers will be subsidizing the men's events. The barrel racers have no assurance that rodeos will not eliminate barrel racing. Many rodeo committees are committing to the WPRA for the 2007 season and are being told by the PRCA they cannot do so. They have also been told they would have to have two barrel races if they insist upon the WPRA. The PRCA has made no move to make the barrel race a standard event so how can they promise that some committees may decide not to have any barrel racing, rather than take a stand to fight the PRCA or have a new PRCA barrel race that is completely untested? And Finally … The PRCA's action is an attempt to destroy the WPRA, no matter how the PRCA tries to spin its actions in an altruistic light. The PRCA is seeking to take WPRA members and WPRA contracts with rodeo committees all across the country. It wants control. Commissioner Ellerman's recent Q & A is intended to confuse barrel racers and the general public by glossing over the facts. But - we all know what it really is - just more self-serving propaganda. ### About
the WPRA The Women's Professional Rodeo Association is the oldest, organized women's professional sports organization in the country. Founded in 1948 in San Angelo, Texas by a group of thirty-eight ladies, the primary purpose of the original Girls Rodeo Association was to give women legitimate, honest opportunities to compete in rodeo events. In its inaugural year the GRA had seventy-four members and held sixty events across the country. The GRA changed its name to the Women's Professional Rodeo Association in 1981. Its purpose remained the same: to protect and promote women in professional rodeo competition. Throughout its history, the WPRA and its members have fought for equal rights within the rodeo world. Today, the WPRA has more than two thousand members and sanctions more than six hundred barrel races a year, representing total pay-offs of more than $5 million. For more information see www.wpra.com
|
|
|
©
WPRA 2005 Disclaimer: The WPRA has provided access to
other rodeo-related web sites through this home page. The WPRA has provided
such access solely as a courtesy to rodeo fans who visit our web
site. Any opinions expressed in any other web sites are not necessarily
those of the WPRA. Under no circumstances will the WPRA be liable
for any inaccuracies in other web sites or damages of any kind incurred
as a result of using any information provided in such other rodeo-related
web sites.
|
|
