THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
A riders’ union could and should give the peloton power to influence their sport. So why hasn’t it?
Given that Gianni Bugno currently sports facial topiary reminiscent of one Guido Fawkes, it’s perhaps no surprise that the Italian heads up a shadowy organisation set on gaining more power. Rest assured, though, that there is no danger of the Cyclistes Professionnels Associés (CPA) attempting anything as audacious as the Gunpowder Plot. Founded in 1999 to protest against the Italian Olympic Committee’s introduction of its own blood tests alongside the UCI’s, the CPA has belied those militant beginnings to become the toothless tiger of cycling associations. Under Bugno, the CPA still attends the 20 or so UCI stakeholder meetings held each year, still nominally campaigns for better working conditions on behalf of its members, yet still falls so short of giving the pro peloton the united voice it has long craved that we mention it here to highlight it as the Power List’s most significant no-show.
“I wouldn’t be scathing but they have no influence or power,” says the Garmin-Sharp team manager, Jonathan Vaughters. “The CPA is poorly designed and underfunded. I’d say half of the riders don’t even know it exists. Why? Because the CPA doesn’t have enough on-theground reach, with reps, translators, and so on. They also need a real tangible asset, like the riders’ pension fund. And they need to contractually incorporate all of the riders, so they can move in unison... But I don’t see any of this happening in the near future.”
Vaughters’ view of the CPA is a common one. Others are more critical, such as one regular attendee of UCI meetings who says that CPA representatives often seem disorganised and unsure of their remit. The same individual, who prefers to remain nameless, claims not to remember a single change in cycling that the CPA has significantly helped to bring about. As a slight caveat, he stresses that, “Since Cookson’s arrival, there’s a much better dialogue and everyone seems to be pulling in the same direction, the CPA included.”
Bugno wants riders to use the CPA to shape their own destiny but the organisation is one of the last ports of call for a chronically disenfranchised bunch. Typically, most riders have a contact at the UCI or their national federation that they will consult directly on important matters or via their team management or even the media.
Luuc Eisenga, the president of the AIGCP (International Association of Professional Cycling teams) says that the CPA isn’t helped by its structure: eight major cycling nations currently have their own riders’ association and representative, and more plan to come under the CPA umbrella in the near future. “It doesn’t make sense arranging it by nation,” says Eisenga. “It would be much more effective if the teams had a representative.”
Even with a rethink, though, the only power exerted by riders might remain the kind measured in watts by their SRM meters. As Jonathan Vaughters puts it, “Bugno does what he can with the limited budget he has. He does a good jobob of representing the ridersriders’ needs at UCI meetings.tings. But in the end, ASO decides what the rules in cycling are. End of story.”
“BUGNO DOES A GOOD JOB OF REPRESENTING THE RIDERS’ NEEDSS AT UCI MEETINGS. BUT IN THE END, ASO SO DECIDES WHAT THE RULES IN CYCLING LING ARE. END OF STORY”