Moves by some members of the Victorian branch of the National Council of Jewellery Valuers to break-away from the national organistaion and re-join the JAA have continued, with the members formally requesting a special general meeting with NCJV management.
Correspondence dated February 5 to the NCJV, requests a meeting to be convened between March 23 and April 19 this year.
The correspondence raises issues such as; unrest among Victorian members related to education, the Valuer magazine and capitation levels.
These concerns were raised at NCJV open forums in both 2008 and 2009, according to the letter.
The group also called for the possibility of affiliation with the JAA and motioned for the NCJV to approach the JAA Board to investigate what affiliation would involve. A vote would occur in the meeting to decide whether the majority of Victorian members are in favour of this change.
“There needs to be a resolution voted upon regarding the JAA affiliation,” read the letter. “Ratification would then allow a formal, considered approach to the JAA Board. No offer from the JAA is possible without this action.”
The members also suggested that the meeting involve all Victorian valuers.
“We feel this action would settle some of the unrest amongst our members and would bring an opportunity for them to be heard on a formal basis,” read the letter.
According to NCJV Victorian branch president Monica Crofts, the NCJV is agreeable to the meeting and open to formal suggestions for change.
“We have just had a lack of communication from these members as to what they want and what their aims are,” she said. “I am happy to send this information to our membership once I receive formal notification.”
Crofts said without formal notification, the JAA would not consider any suggestions from the NCJV members: “So far it has all been pie in the sky, airy fairy ideas – ‘some of us aren’t happy and we want to drag the rest of the Victorian membership kicking and screaming out of the national body’,” she said.
Crofts said she disagreed that the JAA would be better-placed than the NCJV to cater to members’ interests.
“I can’t see why an organisation, which is a very good umbrella organisation, can look to specific members’ needs in a particular area better than those people themselves. I don’t think the JAA is capable of doing that, they haven’t got valuers capable of looking after the valuing section.”
JAA CEO, Ian Hadassin confirmed that he was aware of suggestions and moves for the NCJV to rejoin the JAA, stating he was not in any position to make a comment or assessment of the idea until a formal proposal had been offered.
“The JAA will not interfere in the dealings of another association, and regardless, the JAA cannot do anything until such time as a proposal was put to the Board for consideration,” he said.
“We would consider any proposal in the light of maintaining a cohesive industry and the JAA would always work for the best interests of the wider jewellery industry. But right now, it’s simply conjecture and the NCJV needs to try and work through the problems.”
Crofts said some members who were also GAA members were not pleased about the NCJV introducing HRD diamond courses to members. These disgruntled members argue the courses should be run by local educative bodies like GAA, instead of overseas ones.
“As someone involved in education at the GAA many years ago, I see nothing wrong with bringing-in somebody from outside who may have a wider view of, in particular diamonds,” Crofts argued. “We should have an injection of overseas people, it’s got to only do good, not harm.”