Syndical Chamber of Sophrology

On March 13, 2014 the Board of Directors of the Syndical Chamber of Sophrology has changed their membership criteria. It is now free for passive members. So we asked a few questions to Catherine Aliotta, President of the Chamber, around these new criteria.

Hello Mrs. Aliotta! The Board of Directors of the Chamber you are chairing has just made an important decision: the possibility of joining for free. What is the reason for this decision?

We took this decision to redress an injustice and allow all sophrologists to be represented by a professional organization regardless of their financial means. We have found that those who need the House the most are those who have the weakest means.

We also wanted all sophrologists to have the possibility of being covered by professional liability insurance, which is far from the case today.

Why not have made a minimal contribution of 5 € for example?

Because the administrative and accounting treatment would have cost more than the gain of this contribution. You must be aware that a contribution leads to an administrative and accounting process and that human resources are needed to implement it. We only work with volunteers and we want to keep this management method. We do not want to consume our budget in operating costs.

Is membership free for all members?

The Chamber has two types of members, active and passive, only passive members will be free of charge.

Will House services also be free?

No, because we believe that the user of a service should contribute to it. In addition, the finances of the House would not support it, because behind a service there are incompressible costs.

Will this new provision have an impact on the operation of the House, particularly with regard to the budget?

The Chamber has good cash flow and can meet its obligations. In addition, the Chamber is not intended to make profits so we prefer that sophrologists use their budget to develop their activity.

Only active members will be able to access mandates and vote. How do you respond to those who might criticize you for depriving passive members of the right to vote?

I will tell them that in fact nothing has changed. Passive members never had the right to vote. What has changed is that previously, an installed sophrologist had no choice but to pay a membership fee and be an active member. In addition, a passive member can always pay their subscription if they wish to vote, so it is he who gives himself this power and not us.

In this case, only the active members and therefore the contributors will take the decisions?

Yes, because the right to vote in meetings is used, among other things, to validate the actions to be carried out but above all the budgets to be devoted to them. It therefore seems normal to us that it is the contributors who decide what will be done with their contribution.

Do you not fear that ultimately decisions will be made by a minority of members?

This is already the case since only 5% of members participate in general meetings and less than 1% participate in the life of the Chamber. This low participation is logical because sophrologists already have busy days and I understand that the Chamber is not their priority. However, we expect to reach the 2,000 members quickly and if the proportions are confirmed, we should have more than 100 voters in the assemblies. I think that number should be enough to respect the democratic debate.

Members have access to different services, but can they represent the Chamber? If yes, how ?

Passive members can chair or participate in committees or hold the office of regional or departmental delegate.

Only directors’ mandates are inaccessible to them.

What do you say to those who say that this will affect the quality of sophrologists?

The Chamber is not a labeling body which decrees that a sophrologist is good or bad. It is a representative body, its mission is to bring together and not to divide.

Furthermore, evaluating the quality of sophrologists is a difficult task because it would be necessary to define the “good sophrologist”. Attempts¹ in this sense have already been attempted in the past, but partisan interests have unfortunately gained the upper hand and the only quality criteria that have remained are those of the training time or the training method. But today the world is moving fast and technology² changes the way you teach. I think that our sector of activity is not yet ready for this debate even if I am convinced that it will have to take place one day. We will probably have to call on people outside of sophrology to help us stay objective.

1 – The “Estates General for the Training of Sophrologists” in which the Chamber did not participate.
2 – Large universities are now developing online courses to increase educational opportunities.