What the SAF? Update.

"Midweek Musings" are a bit of a departure to offer our readers some variety and another perspective from me - Julia Petersen.
If you enjoy what we are doing, subscribe!

If you’re already a subscriber, thank you!
Your support provides the consistent funding that allows us to keep delivering the quality content you expect from Evergreen.

I have been getting a lot of feedback.

This is what I have learned:

SAF wants Chapters - there are chapters left - and they are doing everything they can to keep Chapters alive.

Most states still have some Chapters.

Chapters are having trouble getting people to participate in official positions - lots of opinions on the why of that. I suspect it is a combination of being unable to attract younger professionals, losing older members, and a lack of moxy when it comes to speaking up on behalf of constituents.

Ageism as discrimination has touched a nerve...

Ageism refers to negative attitudes, stereotypes, and discrimination directed at individuals based on their age, particularly older adults. It can manifest in various forms, including interpersonal interactions, self-directed internalized attitudes, and institutional policies.

Ageism is demonstrated in the demand that the older generation should just - "come along" with no regard to age, culture, and generational factors.

If you are treating your elders in this way and it isolates them and/or hinders their social or professional license to contribute, participate, and communicate - it is discrimination.

We can accommodate both a younger and the older, existing demographic and thus set a new standard for interaction. It must start with the expectation that 70 year old's will not necessarily have the same skill sets, communication styles, and values as 30 year old's - and they don't have to - to be informed and to participate fully.

Clarifications and observations:

We consistently hear that people are not going to renew their SAF membership. Evergreen has been on the map for over 40 years. People talk to us. We are not talking about a few disgruntled individuals.

The former Chapter I attended - there were 3 areas represented. It was voted to abolish the entire Chapter in 2023 - which took out all 3 groups.

Was communication clear, efficient, cultivated?
Did members really understand what that meant?
Were members given the choice to split out and maintain their group as a Chapter?
Were the changes in bylaws understood?

Based on what I heard and observed - it doesn't sound like it. That sits with those at the national level. If this is happening in one group - it is happening in other groups. It is a perpetuated pattern.

If a messenger cannot offer a solution because it takes the decision of upper leadership to approve - than upper leadership should be there.

As for dissenters - in my work - dissenters are the canary in the coal mine. They find the cracks in the foundation. Dissenters are often the only ones willing to say what others are thinking. And if you treat them like the problem - who is going to want to raise their hand?

The real challenge for upper leadership is to look at it that way. Would there be an issue - if the correct supports and supervision were in place? Is leadership doing what they say they do?

Loss of identity, feeling misled, dismissed, underrepresented - you don't have to agree with it - but if your members are feeling this way - you have a problem.

Someone needs to start paying attention.

More to come, I am sure. Stay tuned.