Association Merger Still on the Table By Traci Matt Associate Editor Although the Electrical Rebuilder’s Association (ERA) board voted unani- mously in August not to “move forward” on a proposed merge with the Automotive Parts Remanufacturers Association (APRA), last month ERA formed a com- mittee to further consider the idea. ERA President Jim Thomas said the committee to “study the feasibility of the ERA running the Electrical Division of the APRA” will be chaired by former ERA President Mike Schroeder. “T feel this will give the ERA the fairest, most honest appraisal of the pos- sibilities for the future of both organiza- tions,” said Jim Thomas. “We will look at any possibility that we have misunder- stood any of the information presented, but it will be on our time schedule and not the APRA’s time schedule.” Emotions have run high since the pro- posal, the result of informal closed-door talks for two years, was brought to the boards of both associations this summer. The proposal was drafted by two APRA past chairmen, two ERA Executive Com- mittee members and APRA Electrical Division Board of Governors Chair Dennis Jacinto. APRA approved the agreement in June. “As one who has served on the boards of both groups I can tell you that much effort has been put into being mutually supportive rather than competitive or con- frontational. This agreement would simply be the next logical step,” said Jacinto. Under the proposal the ERA would be assimilated into the APRA Electrical Division. It states that the ERA president would become the division chair and select the board members. Other points of the one-page proposal include: ¢ Dues for ERA rebuilder members in their first year with APRA would be the same as the “lowest tier” APRA rebuilder dues ($215). Dues would be prorated to avoid overlap during the first year. e After the first year, all members would pay “the going rate based on number of employees.” (According to Jim Thomas, there was discussion of current ERA members being grandfathered in with the lowest dues rate indefinitely, regardless of number of employees.) ¢ The division would have “autonomy” with its training budget, which would consist of a $50,000 contribution from APRA, and ERA funds remain- ing on the date of the merger. The goal would be to eventually create a self-sustaining training budget with “all revenues derived from training” used to fund the program. eAnnually saving an_ estimated $57,000 in ERA overhead (office expense, technical services, printing, etc.) and $23,000 by discontinuing support of the ERA Trade Show and Electrical Rebuilder’s Exchange subscriptions. The proposal also included a support- ing document stating that each associa- tion has approximately 350 members that do not also belong to the other organiza- tion. It estimates if 80 percent of ERA- exclusive rebuilders and suppliers joined APRA it would increase the APRA’s dues base by more than $65,000 a year. At the September ERA meeting, ERA Executive Committee Member Dan Smith, who helped draft and present the proposal, resigned. Smith said he will be replacing Jacinto as chair of the APRA Electrical Division Board of Governors. He will continue to be an ERA member and hopes to “help maintain an amicable relationship between these two important organizations.” Jacinto will move to the APRA Executive Committee this fall. Smith said that “like many others” he had issues with the APRA and was not in favor of the merge when first approached, but was convinced it was best after “many conversations” with APRA Executive Board members. “T see the APRA today, as opposed to 10 years ago, as leaner, more focused and dedicated to the small rebuilder,’ he said. “They have seen how the ERA has man- aged to address the needs of our members and are looking to do the same for theirs. The most sensible, economical and intel- ligent way to do this would have been for the two groups to join together.” E-mail correspondence from both Smith and Jacinto to some members of the ERA board and other industry players after the August meeting indicated APRA planned to move on with its own training and electrical rebuilder-focused Web site similar to the ERA’s. This correspondence was forwarded to the Exchange by a num- ber of different parties. “We put a lot of things on hold with the expectation that we would incorporate some of the ERA programs into our own,” wrote Jacinto. “As that is not going to happen, it’s time for us to refocus on those things that we want to accomplish.” Although Smith wrote that he takes responsibility for the proposal not being affirmed in August, he issued a five-page admonition to the ERA board: “Anyone who thought (or didn’t think) that the APRA would just go away and not become aggressive is mistaken. People who see the ERA as a detriment to the APRA will be pushing hard to bring the APRA back to its position as the preemi- nent association for the electrical rebuilder and we will have no say in it…They have