CFECA SHOULD JOIN SPI-PBA ALLIANCE
June 15, 1998
Congratulations to the members and leaders of the Plastic Bag Association
and the Society of the Plastics Industry Inc. on their prenuptials.
A marriage makes sense for two key reasons. First, it's in the best
interest of each grou p's member companies. Second, it's in the best
interest of the combined organization itself.
Since its rebirth in 1990, PBA has been a proactive voice for the
plastic bag and film industry throughout the United States and,
to a degr ee, internationally. Industry issues going forward are
a bit different than when PBA first engaged itself on the national
scene. Part of its success over those years came from teaming up
with SPI and the American Plastics Council on ad hoc issues and
projects.
Now, collective resources can be increasingly focused on industry
marketing and economic development, rather than in primarily defending
against the unfounded vitriol of economic and enviromaniacal com
petitors.
An important contributor to PBA's past success has been support
from its administrative staff, led by executive director Holly Munter
and Peter Rush, before her. Recognizing PBA's future needs and understanding
the benefit, Munter and her organization worked to make the PBA-SPI
marriage come to fruition.
Over the years, PBA worked with the California Film Extruders and
Converters Association, generally known as the country's most successful
regional film and bag association. PBA provided educational materials,
environmental promotional support and industry-issue assistance.
The associations explored mutual membership or a merger.
To PBA and CFECA members who have been involved in the discussions
it's not surprising to read of CFECA's hesitancy to join up.
The national issues facing CFECA members are the same as those
facing PBA. If anything, one might make a case that some of CFECA's
local and regional p ressures, especially environmental and regulatory,
are more challenging than those of the average PBA member.
Which raises these questions: If PBA members find more benefits
from SPI's technical, communications, regulatory and envir onmental
services rather than continuing their independent efforts, and if
CFECA's challenges are no less than PBA's, what would stand in the
way of CFECA joining SPI? If such an alliance were to benefit CFECA
but at the cost of st aff interests, would CFECA members shirk from
making that decision?
It's no secret that is what stood in the way of a PBA-CFECA deal.
An industry association has to work daily and, periodically, change
in the best interest of its mem bers, not its staff. It takes strong,
effective member leadership to make that happen. It's been under
discussion for years, but CFECA has to decide how to structure itself
to address the national issues and programs that it has re lied
upon PBA to provide in the past.
Once the PBA-SPI nuptials are complete, if their new policies eliminate
the availability of nonmember support, CFECA may find it has lost
an important and timely opportunity. Now's the time for CFECA to
either extrude or get off the pot.
George A. Makrauer
ComAd Management Group Inc.
Treasure Island, Fla.