OK... so, the underlying theme I seem to hear over and over is that the Powers That Be don't place a lot of emphasis on what the contractors (AKA riders)and their crews feel about the rules and regulations that are issued to them. IF anyone speaks up about a rule change that they view is unfair, they are basically told to "love it or leave it." If someone CONTINUES to issue opinions on this matter, the first of the two options is eventually eliminated.
Wow.
Yes, I am fully aware that this is a BUSINESS, butI can think of another eight-letter word that begins with the letter "B," which I feel describes this practice just as well.
When a company has reached the point where its "employees" are no longer offered even a token voice in the procedure and regulations under which this business operates... well, that sounds an awful lot like tyranny and self-service, to me.
Surely, no one is going to tell ME (a star-struck newbie, who thinks flat tracking is truly the greatest of all past times) that certain organizations would DARE to ask its participants to lay their finances, time, and physical well-being on the line to pad the pockets of investors, without at least CONSULTING these same participants on rule changes and exclusions, prior to setting them in stone?
Now, I am not a racer. I have, however, read the rule book... which is more than I can say for SOME of the folks who were INVOLVED in the Great AMA Acquisition of '08. (If you don't believe me, check out the transcript from the May '08 press release. See? "I haven't even looked at the rule books."
Is this also common practice in other successful businesses?
"Hey, this company is wanting to get rid of its line of Green Goober products. I'll buy it... even though I really don't know what in the heck a Green Goober is."
Then, to start ripping off rules and regulations for employees...
"Well, we want to keep all of our employees on equal leverage, so we will only hire men that are exactly 5'8" tall, with green eyes, auburn hair, and wearing only brand-new Nike shoes."
After all, a 5'10" tall woman may have an advantage of reaching top-shelved Green Goobers quicker than her counterparts, which would give her a potentially quicker time on the production line, and an unfair advantage toward future promotion opportunities. And perhaps blue or brown eyes have better color vision than green... or slightly WORSE color vision. Who knows?
"And Nike is our sponsor, so we have to insist that our employees exclusively wear THEIR shoes, although other brands might work as well."
If THAT is the case, then the first change I would make (if I were in any such position, which I am not) would be to consult with the other Higher Powers about the need for a representative panel, comprised of riders, crew members, etc. whom had been selected by their peers, to review any rules and regulations currently in place as well as to offer input and suggestions on any new ones being considered... PRIOR to their addition to the books.
Now, I'm going to assume that a well-respected organization like the AMA/DMG already HAS such a panel in place. I mean, don't all of the other Big Businesses? At least, the more successful ones? In which case, I would stick with my initial answer...
Keeping your non-existant pets leashed or caged while they are in the paddocks where they are not allowed to be at all, under any circumstances.
(The previous is skewed by my view and opinion only, and does not reflect the views or opinions of anyone who has posted on this thread prior to myself, unless otherwise indicated elsewhere. Any disagreement or dispute on this part of the thread which can not be expressed peaceably here may be directed to my e-mail, where it may potentially be read and taken into consideration at a later date.)
Hey, this Higher power stuff may have some use, after all!
You asked for it!
OK a long list.
