There appears to be a push by a number of influential members of the NCJV to rejoin the Jewellers Association of Australia (JAA). Some of the discontent surrounds the direction and cost of the new NCJV education course.
Many are unhappy with the way it’s structured and question its benefits to members. They prefer the old way, whereby Gemmological Association of Australia (GAA) experts conducted the training.
The discontent has reached the stage where there is now a push ‘back to the old days’ – when the individual state valuer bodies amalgamated under the JAA umbrella. The NCJV was established in 1984 to promote and maintain the highest professional standards for jewellery and fine arts valuation in Australia.
Some valuers see the benefits of the JAA, once again, acting as an umbrella organisation. One commented that there is no sense in having two different valuer groups each training a handful of students each year. He said that there was a need for valuers to get back together with the JAA, and the GAA as the teaching body, pooling resources and maximising results.
Monica Crofts, Victorian branch president NCJV said she was aware of discontent by some members. “It’s my understanding that the discontent expressed at the last two AGMs has been about the level of fees paid by our members, particularly the capitation fee paid to our National body,” Crofts said.
She confirmed that there was also unhappiness about the new education course but that confused her given that she said the cost has not been finalised.
“There has been an outline of a new Course proposed by the National body and some members have stated that the fees will be prohibitive, however fees have not yet been set for the new course, which also has not yet been completed.”
Crofts added, “This latest move by some members to move part of the membership to the umbrella of the JAA is puzzling as we are such a small organization - less than 500 members Australia wide.”
JAA CEO, Ian Hadassin confirmed that he was aware of suggestions and moves for the NCJV to rejoin the JAA but said, “We have not had any official notification”.
Hadassin stated he was not really in any position to make a comment or assessment of the idea because no proposal had been offered to the JAA Board.
“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.
“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.”
The next JAA Board meeting is scheduled for February 14, with industry sources claiming that the NCJV issues will come to a head if a planned Victorian valuers meeting proceeds on February 1.
Crofts said, “We have been waiting for a letter indicating their proposals or discontent but at this stage that has not been forthcoming so we have no true idea of their contentious issues.”