Editor’s note:
In the interest of safeguarding the author’s well-being and preserving an open environment for diverse opinions, we have chosen to publish the following letter anonymously. We would like to assure our readers that the author’s identity has been thoroughly verified. The author is a respected veteran realtor within their community and is not currently serving on a board or in an elected position.
The decision to withhold the author’s identity was made to protect them from potential harassment or backlash that has unfortunately been experienced by some contributors, allowing the focus to remain on the content of the letter rather than the author’s identity.
At Real Estate Magazine, we value and encourage open discussion; we also believe in providing a safe space for voices to be heard.
Throughout my 38 years as a realtor, I’ve witnessed countless heated debates in our industry. Having served as a two-time past president of my local association and getting involved in local politics, I’ve definitely faced resistance to change from friends and colleagues.
I still remember the intense backlash we received when introducing the Data Distribution Facility (DDF). People were furious, claiming we were “giving away their data.” Of course, as time went on, fellow realtors realized that the DDF actually gave us more control over our data, and now it’s just standard practice.
When I came across OREA’s initiative to create a benefits program for all members, particularly the Ontario Realtor Wellness Program (ORWP), it stirred up much controversy, especially on social media.
When I first heard about the plan, I wasn’t supportive either. I thought it was redundant since I already had benefits through my wife, a retired teacher. But my perspective changed after digging into the details and speaking with former TRREB President Kevin Crigger, who helped create the plan.
I became a proponent of the plan once I realized that the ORWP would complement my existing coverage. It’s not just about me; I see the value it brings to our profession. Many across the province who previously lacked coverage will now have access to various benefits, including my son, who lacks any coverage.
Sure, I understand some aren’t thrilled that the ORWP is mandatory, and they’d prefer the option to opt-out. But practically speaking, for it to be an affordable group plan, everyone needs to participate.
Considering their extensive services, I’ve always believed that OREA’s annual dues were good value. Now, with the benefits plan coming at a cost that’s less than what most of us spend at Starbucks or Tim Hortons in a year, it’s evident that we’re getting excellent value for our money.
In my many years of selling homes and cottages, I’ve come to love the people in this profession. I know we realtors are fiercely independent, and that’s probably why there’s some pushback against the ORWP. But I really wish some critics could be more constructive in their feedback towards the volunteers who worked hard on this plan. After all, they’re realtors like the rest of us, volunteers who genuinely want to support their colleagues and raise our professional standards.
It’s never pleasant to be yelled at while trying to do good; I’ve experienced it myself. So my advice to fellow realtors is to take the time to read up on the ORWP. Ask questions, voice concerns, and seek clarity— it’s your right. I did it, and despite my initial reservations, I believe it’s a good plan.
Looking ahead, OREA’s planning an extensive communications campaign, and it would be great to have as many in-person meetings as possible. Zoom fatigue is real, and meaningful conversations are more likely to happen face-to-face. We excel at selling, so let’s use that skill to communicate effectively.
Doing the right thing isn’t always popular, at least in the short run. But I genuinely believe the ORWP is right for us, and it’ll have a lasting, positive impact on realtors in Ontario.
Is it right though? Is it something beneficial for real estate agents, or is it to benefit TRREB who will be collecting massive sums from their members and, I would imagine, getting an administration fee from doing so?
Or is it to benefit OREA, the organization that lost is raison d’être when it lost the mandate to provide real estate licensing education? They’ll reap admin fees too, right? And what about that huge nest-egg (of our money) they’re already sitting on: it’s questionable at best for a non-profit to be in possession of this amount of money with no plan for it.
I’m thinking a lot of folks see this as an unfair situation. More of OUR hard-earned money going to well-padded outfits we already support.
You state that OREA will be rolling out a big communications plan (again, with our money), methinks they should have spent that communications budget BEFORE they came up with this life-support idea. Then again, I think the architects of this plan knew full well that the members wouldn’t have agreed to a mandatory insurance plan for which some have no need, and the idea of springing it on 96,000 members out of nowhere made more sense to those ‘volunteers’ who cooked it up.
I actually believe it’s a pretty inexpensive plan, but since no one can opt out I think it’s like condo fees quoted by the developer at the pre-construction launch party at $0.32 psf that somehow grow by year three to $1.22 psf. Oops, heh heh-guess we didn’t realize how much money the smaller associations needed to administer the plan so EVERYBODY has to pay more to ‘make it fair’.
No. No one likes to have someone else’s hands in their pocket; it’s not just independent contractors, which we are, it’s everyone who takes their money and doles it out before they see a dime! These fees we pay add up: fees for mls, fees for CREA, fees for OREA, fees for RECO registration, fees for insurance, fees and commissions to our brokerage firms, costs for marketing our clients’ properties, fees and costs for advertising, and entertainment and gifts for clients – and all that payable whether we’re successfully landing listings and buyer mandates or not- and don’t forget HST, and then there’s taxes to the CRA, and costs paid to keep books and prepare those tax returns.
At some point the scales begin to tip!
Inflation and high interest rates affect our business clients, but they also affect us as consumers.
This new fee and the way it was clandestinely shoved onto us is perceived as tipping that scale.
Or maybe it feels like someone’s finger’s on the scale.
btw I’m protecting myself by camouflaging my identity as well. But I look to find answers and discussion here.
The OWRP plan is very poor in its benefits. No vision or dental etc
On top of that the benefits drop big time for those older
Realtors. Many of us have much better plans and do want to opt out of OWRP. That’s all we are asking. And that is a democratic ask.
Try and purchase life insurance as an older person. Find out what it costs. And you will find that you may not even be able to buy life insurance once you reach a certain age. At age 80 your life expectancy is considered to be zero. Go buy a dental plan, $2,500 per year and up. And yes this is was a democratic process and you have the democratic right to leave OREA. No one is stopping you or standing in your way. If you do not like it , stop complaining and leave please. Exercise your democratic rights.
Excellent point Brock! Looking into to future, after you’ve been paying OREA dues for 15 or 20 years, when you decide to retire you will not be able to get a life insurance at a reasonable rate. You will find yourself in a situation of retiring and not having a life insurance. Your choices will be to die while being a member of OREA or die uninsured.
But yes, in the meantime keep drinking that Kool-Aid.
What exactly is your point? When you are older you will not be able to get life insurance period, or it will be so expensive you would already have to be very wealthy to purchase a policy. Which is redundant at that point. All term life insurance policies expire once you have outlived the term. So, yes, many people do retire with no life insurance, or reduced payout until your age of expiry. And these people have also paid into a policy for 30+ years. You could purchase a permanent life insurance policy. At a rate of $1,100 + per month. And that is a rate for young people. Yea benefits drop as people get older. You think life insurance companies are idiots? They know the numbers. Insurance is a risk assessment. There are other benefits to this plan for OREA members. So enjoy your Cool-Aid as well 🙂
1. Issuing opposing statements is exercising one’s democratic rights.
2. Just because you couldn’t find a good plan for yourself, it doesn’t mean other people don’t have a better plan.
You are demanding people living a good life to subsidize your personal expense, so you can live a good life as well. Yet, you sound incredibly arrogant for someone who is begging for subsidies from the others. That is not how a beggar gets what they want.
3. Last time I checked, you are not even a registrant in Ontario. Why are you even commenting?
Iam sure you are aware that we have been paying for a lot of years life insurance to TREB. $108.00 a year which would pay $50,000 and if you are over 65 they would pay you $30,000. The new mandatory plan is the same, There is no dental or vision plan. The only benefit is the drug plan, plus a nice message. If your over 65 the goverment pays for your drugs. Iam assuming you have been a real estate for a long time. If you recall they started a benefit plan before. It did not last long, they took our money, said they were sorry and said they made a mistake. Companies usually pays insurance, but not Orea. Someone said that Orea has over 30 million dollars in the bank. 96000 agents equals 60 million dollars a year.
Dear Brock Just a reminder we already have life insurance that we pay $120.00 a year for the same coverage. Your are a senior your drugs are paid for from the goverment. What you are getting for the extra $540.00 a year is a massage, and like Charlotte said every year the insurance will go up. I also heard that in 2025 it might be mandatory to get car insurance from Orea
Holding us hostage by denying our access to MLS if we do not participate is not “democratic”. Forcing us to leave the industry if we do not agree to be held hostage is not “democratic”. As has been outlined by others there are other benefit plans available through various brokerages in which you can VOLUNTARILY participate that offer far greater benefits at a lower cost. There are many realtors who will LOSE much better benefits that they now have because they are being FORCED into this plan if they want to remain in the real estate business which then will NULLIFY their present and much better plans. Neither you nor OREA have the right to force your views on anyone who disagrees with you. If this was VOLUNTARY that challenge and problem would be resolved.
Once again I see how I’ll informed sales reps are. Yeah TRREB and OREA are doing this to pad their bank accounts. Do you realize both are NFP (Not For Profit) organizations? And I guess you do not like paying taxes as that money goes to help others? Not everyone is married to a retired teacher. My wife happens to be a teacher as well. However the life insurance is well with the $600 alone. I know sales reps that can not even buy life insurance now due to their heath history and age. The travel insurance is also worth it. Travel a few times a year and you have spent a couple of hundred dollars. That alone is a benefit to realtors in the Province. You pay mandatory insurance fees to RECO. You do not have the option to purchase your own business insurance plan. Why should I pay the same amount as others? I have had no infractions in over 25 years. But I am still mandated to pay $500. And to say a $600 heath insurance plan creates accounting problems , I suggest you find a different accountant. Realtors claim they want to elevate the industry, be known as professionals yet do not want the responsibilities of being a member of a professional association. It is a joke. My father was an Engineer. He was a member of a few professional engineers associations. And paid fees. One association carried a life insurance plan. He never complained and when he did suddenly pass away that money was helpful to my Mother. And as for being independent contractors you had better do some further research. We are independent in the eyes of the CRA but are considered employees of a brokerage. A true independent contractor is a stand alone entity not associated with any other entity. Such as a brokerage. It has never ceased to amaze me how uniformed sales reps are. This really highlights why consumers rate realtors just above that of used car sales people. OREA should have merely said that we have a heath care plan in place and that will be reflected in your membership fees January 1,2024. Stating that it was mandatory was a mistake on their part.
Hello Mr, Newhouse. Please tell me, you are either writing under an assumed name or you are not a RECO member. Which one is it ? I find most if not all your comments rather ridiculous but will not waste more time on battling the ones that don’t want to listen. Have a wonderful day !
Thank you Sabine. And I am glad to read that you believe RECO is a group of members. Enjoy your battles.
If you were half as intelligent and educated as your father was, you would know that
1. unlike real estate agents in Ontario, your father’s ability to trade his time for pay was not limited by whether or not he was a member of those professional associations;
2. unlike RECO insurance that protects the consumers real estate agents serve and the real estate agent’s pay held in a brokerage’s commission trust account, ORWP has nothing to do with our professional activities and does absolutely NOTHING to elevate our profession.
3. the consumers loathed real estate agents for the MLS monopoly that you are in support of OREA using to enforce ORWP. If you are actually a real estate agent in Ontario, the consumers would rate you “just above that of used car sales people”.
And yet one more who for some curious reason just doesn’t get that the opposition is not to the plan, it is to OREA’s audacity to make it mandatory under threat of losing access to the MLS.
These volunteers may have meant well, but their insulting, dismissive and inconsiderate responses belie that premise. Furthermore, the way this entire thing was handled, they were out of their depth, meaning well doesn’t cut it in our industry when we venture into an area in which we have no expertise and pretend we do. Every single director should know that one simple fact.
There is no excuse for them.
Finally, this coffee and $2 a day and $50 a month talking point has fallen victim to the industry’s want to copycat. It’s the current, ‘“won’t last long.”
It is not convincing that 96,000 was the magic number especially given the constant touting that it’s a great plan. People flock to great plans they don’t run away from them. After all, the simple math just doesn’t pass the coffee test.
The same amount of premium could be collected from 70,000 for an additional 67 cents a day.
If it’s about giving up a cup of coffee at $2 bucks a day, might as well give up the coffee and two timbits as well.
Unless if course no timbits is a bridge too far…
Stop The Gaslighting!
I don’t believe anything should be compulsory, many people are already covered with better plans, I looked at the plan and it’s expensive when you think they have 96,000 paying should be cheaper. I’m with the Chambers with my wife, I pay it myself and it’s much better and includes dental also, I could care less about life insurance but the plan isn’t cheap, they should of gotten a better price and better benefits. I never agree with compulsory that’s like living in a dictatorship. But we know that in Canada with the Liberal government today. Now I will be covered by OHIP and I’m a Senior, covered by Chambers which is better and now the Real Estate plan.
If this is news, it should not have been made anonymous. If this person wants to bloat speak up, they should be known. After all, isn’t that what open communication is all about.
We debated it quite a bit but after seeing the abuse others have been receiving, including some who have received actual physical threats, for posting positively about ORWP we gave them the option. They were originally going to pull it after seeing abuse others have taken. Unfortunately a small segment of the anti-ORWP community has taken things too far and has made this something we had to do.
I guess that makes us a “fringe minority”.
you mean like the “fringe minority” within the pro ORWP people who harass and threaten supporters of the anti MANDATE proponents ? That behaviour goes both ways.
I haven’t threaten anyone. Not my style. I will call a spade a spade.
Andrew, where is your proof of abusive behaviour? And physical threats? I find that very hard to believe! Just because we push back and we are angry how this all came about you don’t like the push back!
And has anyone been as to give an opposing view in your magazine??? Why aren’t our voices being heard? Everyone is ok digging into our pockets for something that has NOTHING to do with real estate but REM doesn’t want to put an article out on why we oppose this being mandatory ! What a one sized magazine. I used to like reading it but now no trust in your article.
Have you ever had a situation whereby someone decides to take money from you without your opinion or input??? Think about it!
Correction…. one sided magazine
We have published content from both sides, most recently from Cameron Nolan.
I’ve seen the abuse happen, its not a large amount of people but its there. There have also been a lot of anti-ORWP who have been amazing at calling out the poor behaviour (people like Barry Lebow and Melanie Piche for example)
We get messages daily from people coming in to REM accusing us of both being against OREA/ORWP and being for them. We publish the majority of letters to the editor that come in.
If you feel strongly about it, you’re welcome to write one, too.
Sabine – if someone wants to submit a anti-ORWP article and remain anonymous publicly we would consider that as well. As long as we can verify they are indeed an active member of the community.
Thank you Jason. You saved me writing what needs to be written. “Show up or shut up”- we are not CIA or FBI
BINGO. I agree with you Jason 100%. It brings to question the integrity of REM publishing anonymous articles. The first question I have with this sensoring is what else are they not publishing. I know some of my comments have not made the screen. I’ve been licenced in China for over 20 years and I can tell you when you hear the words “greater good” it mean “choice has been removed, live with it”.
rem lost all integrity over the past month. The magazine is just another orea mouthpiece. This article is just icing on the cake.
Omer 100% !! This mandatory insurance against us, created by a few is classic dictatorship!!
I fully agree. Slogans like “for greater good” mean exactly what you said and growing up under communism we are very familiar with it indeed from first hand experience. Instead of more propaganda maybe REM should for a change publish a story from the opposition of the Mandatory plan?
Look up the most recent letter to the editor from Cameron Nolan for one on the opposition. We publish the majority of letters to the editor that are submitted.
You say “I see the value it brings to our profession”
It absolutely does nothing for our profession or how we serve out clients. No to mandatory!
I am still waiting for my board and Orea to provide me with evidence that 96000 people have been asking for this mandatory plan. They are either unwilling or unable to do so.
Terminating members for not paying the insurance premiums is not warranted….it only demonstrates the insecurity of Orea’s existence. Invoicing 96000 members is far easier than tackling a province wide MLS implementation which is what a majority of members have been wanting in place for many years.
I bet it is the same list of people that asked for the “exclusive listing mandate” from CREA… where is that list, did it get misplaced?
To Jason Steel, I absolutely agree with you. It should not be anonymous and the person who posted is surely showing signs of fear of repercussions.
The biggest mistake OREA and TRREB MADE was omitting the MANDATORY part and using our existence for justifying their intention to put more money in their pockets.
Seriously though, why should any of our colleagues fear repercussion for sharing their perception? It’s OKAY to feel there is value in this plan. That is NOT deserving or repercussions of ANY kind. What part of that can you not understand?
What you’re saying about “omitting the mandatory” part is factually incorrect. That wasn’t omitted at all. It was purposefully included to secure the price it is. It’s clear you need to do a LOT more listening and reflecting.
Pretty simple actually. If you’re FOR Mandatory you are AGAINST Freedom of Choice!
Sir, with all due respect, this does not bring value to our profession. Bringing value to the profession would be lowering our E&O Insurance because I’ve heard that other professions pay a lot less than us; so apparently we are a cash cow for that insurance as well. That insurance is seldom used and yet, year after year, the premiums continue to rise, despite the 96,000 buying power. You don’t need a PhD to understand how much our premiums will rise when most agents will max the benefits out.
On that note, please explain how it is of value to our profession to allow OREA, or any association, carte blanche to raise fees/dues/premiums without any oversight, opinion, input or approval. How does such an arrangement benefit our profession?
It has been called a “safety net” but let me put this “safety net” into perspective. My medication costs between $45,000-60,000 per year so OREA’S plan helps me out for 4-6 days. By January 7th I’m maxed out. One of my medications caused me to have both cataracts done in my 40’s, requiring prescription glasses. No coverage for glasses in the standard plan. I was in a car accident a few weeks ago and need physio and chiropractor. OREA’S plan would help me out with that cost for 3 whole weeks. If I was out of work due to serious illness, $25,000 would cover today’s living and ongoing business expenses for maybe 6 months…. Maybe. My friend had a stroke in May 2022 and still isn’t back to work. Her “safety net” would have run out a long time ago. I could pay into this plan for 20 more years, but the minute I give up my license, to retire or because of critical illness, my benefits are gone. Now I have NO life insurance.
So while I respect your happiness that this plan is a positive thing for you and your son, it is useless for me, so why would I bother to buy it? Why would I be happy about being forced to buy it?
You need to understand sir, that we are setting a dangerous precedent. Allowing OREA/TRREB to mandate us, bind us to something that has no bearing on our profession opens the door to, what next? Having to use their chosen cell phone provider? Only being able to recommend one law firm to our clients? All of us having to be members of TRREB?
Anybody who is in favour of this plan, or indifferent, isn’t considering the long term implications of allowing this mandate to become a reality. Once they do, they will understand why we are fighting. And it has NOTHING to do with benefits or money.
I am a 72 yr old realtor.
I have an excellent plan that covers everything including dental and vision.
This ORWP plan has absolutely no benefit to me. I do not have any other family members to add. My spouse is covered under my plan. I do not need to top up or enhance anything. What I have is sufficient. I understand this may be beneficial to some but it is not at all beneficial to me. I do not want to take part in this program. I dont approve of someone telling me what is good for me. I and only I decide what is good for me in my personal life. OREA needs to stop medling in my personal affairs and do the job they are supposed to do by making enhancements to the profession. I do not want to pay for something I do not need or want. It should never have been a mandatory program. I was not given a vote yet I was expected to pay for it WRONG!! I will be opting out. I will not be paying any further OREA fees.
You are absolutely correct. I am 72 as well, and see no benefit in this plan.
I am a member of the Ottawa Real Estate Board, and have been active since the early 70’s. My board voted against this mandatory insurance, and yet we are stuck with it. OREA should rethink their position before January 2024, and allow those small real estate boards to opt out, that voted against the plan. I have been a Real Estate Broker since the 70’s, and if push comes to shove, my thoughts are to continue being active with my own company, without all the associations like OREA. I am sure many of my colleagues are thinking the same way. We joined associations to share information, and we can still do that if we are kicked out of OREA, and our own boards. REM should be ashamed of themselves for taking sides in our affairs; reporting is suppose to be unbiased and neutral, I don’t see here. It would be interesting to see who the Insurers are, and what their track record is for the past numbers of years. We have mandatory insurance already, and it is for the benefit of others, and not members.
I agree 100%. I called the labour board and apparently there is nothing they can do, because we are indepentent contractors and not employees there is nothing they can do. They said to contact a labour lawyer. As agents we should get together and see what a lawyer has to say. Orea says that if we don’t pay we are not able to sell real estate. Orea could be liable for not earning a wage. Someone said we should take legal action
This is an ill-conceived plan, approved by a number of local boards without their membership even being aware what was about to happen. It cannot be mandatory and I can assure you that the mandatory element will have to be removed or OREA will hasten their demise…..which now all real estate professionals are looking at and wondering what is the purpose of this organization..and why are they sitting on a nine million dollar reserve fund?
Dea Anon,
Please elucidate on how the OREA plan “complements” (does not interfere or denigrate in any way) your existing coverage.
What type of EXISTING coverage do you now enjoy? obtained through a spouse/partner or former employment?
Have you received an answer to the question “what happens to the ‘sustaining/retired’ TRREB members who each year only pay the annual Life Insurance premium?
Thanks for stimulating the conversation?
I have written TRREB and the PRESIDENT of CBS, Peter Lauve, asking what happens to our life insurance for those that have paid in for over 25 years. Once the policy terminates so do our benefits that we paid into. I’m still waiting for answers which I doubt I will receive. The policy handbook states “Termination of Plan Member Insurance ….at the earliest of the following dates (3) the date of termination of this policy. Member Life Policy 103848. According to TRREB agreement with CBS that terminates Dec 31, 2023, those insurance payments were also mandatory on our TRREB dues.
It is very simple, isn’t it? OREA has no right to mandate a benefit that is personal and not in the best interest of the public. Realtors have always been free to get their own health/life insurance. The tax implications are then clear. With OREA wanting to add it to our dues (which makes it 100% deductible) instead of a separate “benefit” (but wait, they’re not our employers), which would be put on the 3% calculation for medical expenses, I can’t wait to see what the CRA says about all this and I am worried. For many of us who are opposed, we’re only opposed to the “mandatory” side. What will OREA mandate next if they get away with this?
This smacks of propaganda. If REM were to be unbiased; they would publish another article of other members where were “opposed to mandatory”. The plan is poor. You can’t even get your teeth cleaned with the basic plan! Only $750 max for drugs? Sure it may sound affordable -but it’s useless. You may as well have no coverage and pay as you go. I feel they did a poor job finding a plan – and secondly it should NOT be mandatory. If you were to make it OPT-in; you would know by numbers how many people feel the plan is “a good deal”.
We have, most recently from Cameron Nolan.
Is Cameron Nolan the only person who has written in. You keep quoting his name.
I’d have to confirm with our editor but I believe so. A lot have said they would or that they would consider writing one and they don’t come in. Not uncommon in general for getting contributors, not specific to this topic. People have businesses to run that are a priority. It’s a lot to ask people to take time out to write something, especially in summer during vacation time!
We get way more messages of “what we should look into” or “how you should cover this” instead of something to publish. First couple weeks way more messages that were on the opposition side but fairly even now in terms of messages coming in.
Confirmed. We’ve had 3 letters to the editor submitted on the topic of ORWP. 2 for, 1 against.
I figure that I am a fairly intelligent person, although some may not agree, but I see no reason why we need Orea to `bring the real estate community together`. What kind of lame logic is this editorial. The fact is many of us are simply asking for an opt out option. I promise that when that is acknowledged I will still be a supportive member of the real estate community, as this anonymous writer is referring to. Further, by choosing to remain anonymous, the writer isn`t a legite member of the real estate community, instead a coward. Also. this tells me which side of the discussion REM is leaning towards.
First of all I do not understand why a letter has to be posted annonymously. If ths person believes in this plan but yet can’t put their name to it. Secondly the membership never voted for this as only a small selection of member boards voted and some completely ignoring the fact that their members were not in agreement with a mandatory. We are independent contractors and not employees of OREA and as such they have no business mandating anything insurance related to us. This has nothing to do with our work and furthermore by telling us we can’t do our job if we leave Orea because we do not want this plan is oppressive. They will take away our rights as a Registered Ontario Realtor to use the MLS system. How does this equate to better working relationships with OREA and for our clients. This is beyond OREAs reach as an association who are supposed to be supporting their members. This is by no means a safety net for realtors! If there are members who want an insurance plan then let them have it but it is of no use whatsoever to many thousands of realtors who already have a plan, their spouse has a plan, they don’t need a plan and those of us who are over 65 who do not want to pay for someone else’s plan. At 65 our prescriptions are covered by OHIP, we have had our own Life insurance plan for many many years and at 70 we no longer have any critical illness plan. Yet we have to pay the same as anyone else. That is not right. Furthermore, for Orea to be comparing those of us over 65 to someone 65 or older trying to get a new life insurance plan is ludicrous. No one is going to be looking for a plan a life insurance plan at 65 as they would have already dealt with that probably as much as 30 – 40 years ago so they would not be looking at thousands of dollars for a life insurance plan at 65. As realtors we have always looked out for ourselves, taken care of our families and had insurance in place long ago. It is time to back off and take this plan to membership as an optional plan or discard it completely.
Oh there is an awful lot of incorrect information in your comment, Gail. For someone running the attack against OREA, it might be helpful if you actually knew what you were talking about.
A “small selection” of member boards wasn’t the voting turnout – it was all boards. The way boards voted was a mutual decision by those boards’ directors, who are officials elected by the realtors belonging to that board to – quite literally – make these decisions on your behalf. If you don’t like the decisions that are being made, then you need to take that up with your board. It’s not OREA’s decision, and OREA has no authority to arbitrarily claw back a decision made by its voting constituents.
Further, “mandatory” isn’t new in the various associations in Ontario, let alone globally. TRREB agents have been paying for “mandatory” health insurance for years that the majority of agents have never used. You all supplemented each other there forever and nobody ever said boo about it. But now you’re upset? Because it’s more than you were previously paying?
Well, THAT’S interesting. Because most of you who have been embarassingly vocal about it have been screaming from the rooftops for years for our “useless” associations to raise the bar of entry and maintenance to the industry. Get out part-timers, people that do less than 5 deals, and everyone else that isn’t focussed 60 hours a week or making 6-figures. Right? I mean, I’ve SEEN comments by you specifically wishing the bar were higher. How does one do that? Raise costs! How do you raise costs in a justifiable fashion? Do it in a way that puts that money back in as many pockets of the payers as possible. That’s the very definition of “benefits”.
You don’t have a “right” to use the MLS. Don’t be so self-important. It’s a service of organized real estate, which you purchase. That’s not a RIGHT. It’s a purchased service. In organized real estate, not just here in Ontario, but typically globally, those memberships will come with a variety of services and benefits, in accordance with what the stakeholders and voting constituents agree to. That’s what’s happened here. There’s no conspiracy to completely SCREW you into subservitude. It’s positively mind-boggling that this small group has come to that conclusion.
You’ve done so much generalizing in this comment “nobody is going to be looking for a plan, nobody needs this, we’ve always done this ourselves, we’ve never wanted this, etc etc etc” which shows that you CLEARLY have not taken into account anyone outside of the limited group of people that are totally unwittingly yelled “uhhhh, YEAH” beside you. This *does* benefit the vast majority of members – all those members – the other 90% that have not signed the petition, or joined the group of master insultists, nor spoken out for literal fear of personal threat and safety – from YOU – are pleased. Not just to give themselves additional care that most really need, but also to raise the bar of entry to the industry.
Only when your group can acknowledge the value, will your argument against ever be seriously considered. The viciously opposed are an absolute embarrassment to an industry that should only ever be known for tolerance, compassion, empathy and selfless support to our communities.
Well said BOLDLY!!
Again an anonomous comment! I personally have not “attacked” anyone. And as for mandatory health insurance from TRREB you have your facts incorrect because the only portion of TRREB insurance that was mandatory and that I have is for their life insurance, which I never needed. I have never had health insurance from TRREB. I have my own plans and I also have my own life insurance so for OREA to say try to get it cheaper at 65 or 70 is a farce because I would say all the people I know who have life insurance didn’t seek it out at 65 or 70, and they have a far superior plan to this which is cut in half when you are 65.
Furthermore we do have a valid argument and if this plan is so good for 90% of the people then you should not have any issues with making it optional as according to your figures you will only have 10% opt-out and that will do nothing to your premiums. Surely with 86,000 members in your plan the premium will not go up and if it does perhaps it is better to look at different insurance companies to provide this.
We are not asking for a lot – we have never said to abolish the “wellness plan”. Our only focus in our group is to have it changed to Optional.
And perhaps there are some in the group who have made comments unbecoming to them or someone else as there will be in any group but you can rest assured that we are monitoring those comments and when they are seen by any of the admins they are removed.
So I do have my facts correct but some of yours are not especially with TRREB having MANDATORY HEALTH INSURANCE! I have been a TRREB member since 1988 and have never paid for mandatory health insurance with TRREB.
However, I do agree that it is the Boards that have voted this in and it is the boards that can change it. My post is from me Gail Patricia Cornacchia, not someone hiding behind an anonomous post.
And on the seventh day you rested.
So well said, and I agree 100%! As someone who has posted comments in favour and been viciously attacked via private messages and phone calls by those opposing, the need to be anonymous is sad but necessary. I would think that our Realtor community would behave better than to threaten OREA BOD, the underwriter company and individuals who support the program. This type of bullying is unacceptable and shameful. There are just as many anonymous posts against ORWP, just take a look on social media or this “petition” that has hundreds on names that are not registered with RECO.
Please tell me more of all the names that are on the petition that are not realtor . How can I see the list which I then would have to compare to RECO registrations. In fairness, I am sure there will be some “non realtors” on the petition, just like the folks commenting in this forum pretending to be licensed realtor in Ontario when they are actually not.
HI Sabine I called OREA to find out who the insurance company is, and apparently they don’t have one yet. They are still negotiation the details
Well written and said. Leadership here. Sadly none evident from the task force that made this mandatory.
How is this possible? I wish to make a comment. And my name is REQUIRED, and my email is REQUIRED, so everyone knows who I am. But you publish a lengthly comment in favour of this arguement anonamously! Can someone also anonamously publish in this REM not in favour please? I read REM every issue and have liked it. But you just lost my confidence in your integrity.
Bingo!
If you’d like to write a not in favour letter to the editor you can submit to our editor anytime.
If you wish to do so anonymously and we can verify you’re a member of the community we would consider that as well.
We have also published pro and anti orwp letters to the editor with other writers having their name attached.
Side note – you can also put in a fake name and email. Most of the requirements for publishing comments are to get rid of spam comments that were coming in fast and furiously before. Some also requested a feature to be notified of replies which are only possible if we create accounts for them.
Actually a not in favour has been sent to you and it has not been published. So Andrew Fogliato perhaps it is time to publish that letter you are asking for.
To all of you that think it is such a good idea, how about you pay my share. It is very generous to be good with somebody else’s money. The problem is not the Insurance, the problem is that some agents want it but let the others subsidy it.
Sure, if you may my RECO E&O insurance in the meantime – I’ll never need that, and therefore shouldn’t pay it. Oh, also, while you’re at it, could you pay the school tax on my property tax bill? I don’t have children, so I shouldn’t pay for the local schools. If you give me a few minutes, I can come up with a few thousand other things I don’t use but still pay for….
The author is obviously a shill for OREA who just regurgitated all of their talking points. It’s not a good plan and the statement, “for it to be an affordable group plan, everyone needs to participate.” is patently false. REM has lost all credibility by supporting OREA in this assault on the freedoms of Ontario Realtors.
You’re welcome to write a letter to the editor if you like. We publish the majority of them we receive whether its on either side of a debate.
This is letter number two supporting OREA’s ORWP. Maybe it’s time to publish one against the MANDATE ? As to backlash and harassment ? I think that argument should go both ways. Having read pretty much every single comment on REM regarding this program, what about the harassment and backlash by the proponents of this program against us, who are against the MANDATE ? Not a word from REM criticizing that behaviour. I guess that’s ok. Once again, the “anti ORWP folks” are NOT against a possible insurance scheme by OREA, the only thing that we oppose is the MANDATE. If it is so popular after all the research and surveys OREA allegedly has made for the last number of years, they should not have any problem getting enough people opting into this program.
Letter number 2.
Excellent sub point Sabine.
This plan is popular and so good for Realtors and such a safety net that in 7 weeks the pro side is up to
letter number 2.
Add in the pro comments in the 5 ,6, 7 or so articles and even on OREA’s meta posts they might be up to
10 pro persons in total.
Okay let me be more extremely generous and utilize a great deal of puffery…
1,000 pro persons in total.
Problem for OREA is 12,000+ against signed a petiton and 7,000 against are forming several challenges.
We have published one against it recently from Cameron Nolan. You’re welcome to submit more.
If someone is facing backlash and harassment who are against it and would like to publish anonymously we would consider it. We originally had the authors name attached to this and after the previous letter to the editor had a lot of harassment and abuse (which we saw) they were debating pulling it. We spoke with them and agreed that we’d be willing to publish it anonymously.
OREA has recognized there is power in numbers and that is why they think they’ve struck a great Health Plan coverage for us on our behalf. The problem is; it has to be made OPTIONAL. Otherwise what is next? Are they going to “mandate” our cell phone carrier? Our cell phone type? etc etc. When will the decision making on our “behalf” end?? Currently our membership receives offers of discounted plans from cell phone providers, furniture companies, cell phone purchases and the like who are appealing to our “numbers” . It is all OPTIONAL. Members can accept the offers or decline it-but they have the right to choose elsewhere. For the 50% of members this plan will benefit- the other 50% will be negatively affected by it.
My question is why does TTREB have to cancel the present life insurance program they have ? Just because the OREA plan has a life insurance plan ? Makes no sense? Why can’t you have two more life insurance plans at one time.
All of the retired TRREB members who are currently paying the yearly premium could keep their ongoing coverage and those members, myself included, who plan on retiring in the future would still have a choice to continue with TRREB ‘s present life insurance policy.
OREA is complaining about backlash and abuse, yet appear to be completely tone deaf to the groundswell of complaints about the OWRP. Are Ontario Realtors guilty of apathy? Speaking for myself; you bet. I’m standing over here with my hand up. I do not read every email that hits my inbox from OREA or CREA. I pay my dues and trust elected board members to represent me at the table.
Like most Ontario Realtors, I’m just over here running my business, and as a commission based sales person, it has never occurred to me that I need any sort of ‘safety net’ subsidized by my peers. I carry my own insurance thank you very much, because I wasn’t born this morning.
Was this plan communicated well, with adequate input from the members? One hundred percent no. And bad news gets attention. I certainly started opening emails and reading surveys when the news came out of a now ‘mandatory’ insurance plan.
Interestingly, not a single (notably slanted) OREA survey had a ‘do you support a mandatory insurance plan’ question in it before the June 20 vote. I believe REM had a one question survey that DID ask this question which I took. Has REM published the results of that survey?
While I respect the work that our voluntary board members do, and the lobbying OREA has done on our behalf at Queens Park, I think this insurance conversation could have ended as soon as the word ‘mandatory’ came into it. Surely OREA could find something trade-related and member-supporting to work on instead. Or at least backed off to make sure that all members knew all of the details of what was being contemplated. There are far too many Realtors who still don’t know this is coming.
Interestingly, now that I’m opening ALL my trade organization emails, I noticed that CREA now offers a fairly robust insurance plan which is clearly laid out and includes dental and vision and options to add family members. Will I buy it? No. I’m insured for what I need. But if I wasn’t I’d look into it as an OPTION while shopping other plans.
Hi Elaine,
We did publish the results of our survey. It was roughly 80% against the mandatory coverage.
Thank you Andrew. I missed that article with the survey results. I appreciate the work REM is doing to publish both sides of this.
As a past president of a local association are you entitled to your annual Dues being covered like other associations?
The $660 premium will be $1,000 in 2026 and $1,500 shortly thereafter; however, by then most would have given up there “other plans” and when OREA discontinues this program, we will all have to pay more for private coverage.
This plan is better for Families then it is for Individual members
That’s two letters now supporting that i have seen and 12,164 opposed that have signed the petitition against the word MANDATORY.
Anyone other than the Scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz would know how messed up that is. I would have the utmost respect for a corporation to come back to the members and say, Sorry every one we screwed up, we will take the word mandatory out of our offer. Is it possible, or will it come down to a line drawn in the sand? At that point all respect will have been lost.
OREA can’t make it optional at this point on their own. The boards need to call a special assembly meeting and vote for them, too. OREA can’t make changes without direction from the boards voting members.
I just can’t help wonder, would it not have been a good idea to include a link to where people can read up on the mandatory ORWP.?
“So my advice to fellow realtors is to take the time to read up on the ORWP. Ask questions, voice concerns, and seek clarity— it’s your right.
For the greater good. For the greater good. I keep mulling this over.
As examples, there are many agents that actually can’t afford this extra dues and so they will be negatively impacted by this new plan (I am not one, I am just listening to the concerns of others). There are agents who currently have plans who have far superior current plans that may be compromised, which could negatively impact their health care and lives. We’ve heard over and over from many of the aged 65 + agents that are nervous about what’s to come because they don’t have sufficient coverage with this new mandatory plan and now it’s costing them more than before for the insurance they need for their own safety net. I empathize for them, this must be an extremely nervous time for some of them with the rollout of the mandatory plan where there is still so much unknown and unclear about it. So when we speak about the greater good, who are the boards/Orea to decide whose lives are going to be sacrificed for the greater good of a few others?
I’m happy that certain people will benefit from this. That is excellent. To be honest I will benefit somewhat from this (somewhat, but to be clear I would MUCH rather shop around and buy a plan that serves my individual needs. I would MUCH rather be able to cancel an insurance that I buy and sign up for another one, if I so choose, which I will NOT be able to do under this mandatory plan). But with respect to ‘the greater good’, who gives the people that are implementing this the right to choose whose life will be negatively impacted and whose will be improved?? I just don’t understand this ‘playing God’ phenomenon.
To get to the point, the simplest solution is to make the program optional. In this way you’re satisfying everyone and hurting no one. And if it cost a few bucks more for those who would like to use it, they can make the decision if it’s worth it for them to purchase the insurance. End of story.
I feel that most of the backlash is because all the information we are receiving now should have been sent to us prior to a decision being made on behalf of the members. If this plan is so wonderful then why was the information not available? Why were all these emails and notifications in the Real Estate Magazine not done prior to the voting? Most of the members are feeling that this was done quickly and without educating the members plus the fact it is mandatory was not disclosed till the end as well makes it very frustrating especially to those who have coverage already. This could have been handled so much differently and there would have been a different outcome and not so much anger.
What is right for you may not be right for others. No sensitivity about the fact that some may be able to afford it, do not want it or do not need it. Seniors who do not need or are ineligible for many of these “benefits”. Mandatory is the complaint. OREA continues to ignore the voices of those with an opinion different than yours. If OREA wants to offer a Plan, fine. But it should be optional for a variety of reasons that have been well articulated to them by thousands of Realtors whose ability to practice real estate hinges on paying for it. No respect for OREA and how they have handled this.
It’s just mind blowing how personal mixed together with professional 🤦🏻
Road to hell paved with good intentions. It feels like we are already there, as this whole mandate cause great distress to all of us and our well being. Oh… wait … we have unlimited mental support virtual coverage here.
I see how it’s done
Plan of actions
# 1 Create a problem.
# 2 offering mental support to convince us it is actually beneficial for us.
Did I miss something?
Careful with your quote now Valentyna.
They might file a complaint against you for suggesting people would be going to hell.
People are watching.
Weak sauce. Absolutely no need to make it mandatory for all. They could have gotten the same deal without it being forced onto us that don’t want or need it. Any one of us Realtors as “professional negotiators” could have gotten a better deal. That I am certain.
Emailed to our president
I will keep this short and to the point;
Ontario Realtor Wellness Program in my opinion is the third insurance scam forced sales to licensed realtors
First SCAM was the liability insurance SCAM
Question; who received the commission on the thousands of forced policy sales
Second SCAM was the life insurance SCAM
Question; who received the commission on the the thousands of forced policy sales
Third SCAM is now the health insurance SCAM
Question; who is about to receive the thousands of dollars commission on the forced policy sales
Last question; when the vote took place did you vote to make it mediatory
This is wrong on many levels but at its core “MANDATORY” is where they lose me and I suspect many others. Those who were involved in that part of this plan should be ashamed of themselves!
This anonymously written letter is just another Smoke and Mirrors attempt at justifying the ridiculous acceptance of a minority-tabled and minority-accepted overreach! It was once said that the government has no place in our bedrooms and the Real Estate overseers have no place to make us spend where we do not wish to.
Forcing a plan on all has nothing to do with selling Real Estate. When the vast majority of salespeople entered this profession under the rules at the time, there was no mention or expectation that this type of forced coercion would exist, As with all organizations, changes in rules do not apply to people already invested, and their lack of wanting to participate is grandfathered into their existing agreement of , Terms of Employment.
Why does RECO believe they are above the norms of employment standards and Practice?
Step back, you are not Omnipotent!
From a personal standpoint , I am in favour, BUT , YOU CAN’ T FORCE THIS on the membership!
Dear Anonymous,
While I can appreciate your own opinion, let’s make one thing clear, I do not care what you think. It is what I think that matters.
It’s not YOUR choice to decide I need to agree to this, or like it, or feel good for the whole of the Real Estate Community etc.
That is the beauty of opinions and being able to say YES I want it or NO I do not want it.
I do not pay OREA to act on my behalf for insurance.
OREA in not in the Insurance business. They are in the Real Estate Business. If I want insurance I will go to an insurance provider.
OREA does not hold my purse strings, please get you hands out of my wallet. I am all for offering insurance when it is NOT MANDATORY. It’s not about the insurance or the money!
I find it extremely naïve that they thought this would be ok. Please don’t tell me it has been out there for months, when half of the agents still don’t know about it. It was not CLEAR by any means the plan that was being put in place and the unfolding of it all.
Then the GALL to tell us we pay or else we lose access to the MLS system, is just outrageous.
I am all about choice, personal freedom, what is right, just and fair. I am not an employee so what part of that does OREA not understand.
So take my money, but the underground railroad is being built and it will not stop.
Dear Concerned Anonymous Colleague,
I wanted to take a moment to acknowledge your thoughts on the Mandatory Ontario Realtor Wellness Plan (ORWP) Your perspective, shaped by over 38 years in the industry, is incredibly valuable, and your dedication to our profession is evident.
You’ve rightly pointed out the various changes you’ve witnessed during your tenure. I too have over 41 years of experiencing change, from the old MLS catalogues to computers, from handwriting offers, meeting at office to sign, to DocuSign, From hand delivering offers to fax machines to email, to the advent of social media. You and I both have had to adapt to these industry changes. All of these changes were good for our industry even though there were those in opposition, as you mentioned. This change now (a Mandatory health insurance plan) is not as you stated “for the greater good” . ORWP and most importantly its mandatory nature have absolutely nothing to do “for the greater good” of the real estate industry. I have a deep connection to my work and desire to have a say in decisions affecting my career. A “wellness” plan has nothing to do with my career.
You state that many across the province who previously lacked coverage will now have access to various benefits, including your son. Many of us in opposition already have our own plan of some sort, be it a private one or through a partner or other job. The ORWP will NOT compliment many of these plans. It will make it a claimant’s nightmare. It will become the primary plan. And what happens when you leave the business? ORWP will be gone. My “safety net” has been my own initiative by seeking out my own plan (if I chose to) to investing, buying properties etc.
I have a huge aversion to potentially subsidizing younger realtors (including your son who lacks a plan now) and that the ORWP might be a form of forced retirement. Perhaps your stance is to retire soon anyhow and pass the torch to your son. I would like to continue practicing and would appreciate the flexibility in choosing initiatives that align with my individual needs. An opt-out provision here deserves careful consideration.
The concept of an opt-out provision is not impossible at this stage. By offering an option to realtors, it might be possible to strike a balance that respects the diverse needs of our membership. It’s true that even if a portion of the membership were to opt out, I’m sure a significant collective could still negotiate a favorable arrangement.
As our industry evolves, it’s important that we have open and respectful discussions about changes that impact all of us. Your perspective adds a valuable layer to these conversations, and I believe that a collaborative approach, one that considers the needs of ALL realtors, can lead to solutions that benefit everyone.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts candidly albeit anonymously. Your dedication and commitment to our profession are evident, and I hope that as we move forward, we can find solutions that honor both your experience and the changing needs of our industry. But a MANDATORY health plan is not the answer. Perhaps an optional one is.
REM feeling the need to protect the identity of the writer is disappointing, but sadly also necessary. While disagreement and discussion is always fair, the anger directed by some (not all) of those opposed to ORWP towards the hardworking volunteers who lead our boards and associations (local and provincial) has been unkind, and frankly, over the top.
Um Roger…….those volunteers are unkind , if they were kind and concerned for us they could easily listen to their fellow members and KINDLY make this insurance optional. And let’s be clear on who is “over the top”. These volunteers are over the top and should stay out of our personal business. I suggest they work hard on something to do with real estate.
A lot of us in Kingston are against the forced insurance planned by OREA. Insurance has nothing to do with our profession in real estate, dealing with the public, listing and selling houses . OREA can stay out of our lives. Say No to mandatory insurance.
Talking about threats,
They’re also rolling in to the people of the anti-ORWP from several sources including blatant ones in this publication threatening retribution against their registration status.
Specifically, they say, names and screenshots and lord knows what else is being compiled to send to RECO probably, after they collect every $660 possible.
Incredulously the top of the complaint is that they’re being mean to Tim Hudak.
Tim Hudak is not a protected class against criticism in TRESA. He is not a registrant, but the head of an association who contacted the publisher of this medium and caused him to edit and censor an already published op-ed.
Furthermore, the moderators of a multi thousand group cannot possibly catch every offending post, but the name takers should know they will run up against a documented accounting that shows warnings, comment deletions, bannings and rule reminders long before these threats to report to RECO and CREA were being purposefully initiated so as to scare them into silence.
It’s also a two way street. The vitriol from those in authority who control every member’s status – the directors as they reply formally for the board or OREA is well documented in the dozens of their emails. So too is similar commentary along from the pro side.
Similarly in here, including a threat issued by a former director that can only mean retribution as to their board membership while he carried on berating the anti side and of alerting the authorities for crimes not even committed or valid.
Then there are those directors, ex-directors and officers who against the stated requirement and forwardly advertised position of the group, decided to ignore same and seek by deceit to join, some getting in until they’re identified. If not to spy and stir trouble, then why go where you are not welcome? Did they seek first to say they’d like to have discourse? No!
It’s heated, it gets heated, and it doesn’t need to be but it is because the powers that be refuse to hear a simple request, make it opt- in.
Last but not least we have those who violate the Competition Act as they outwardly defend this plan as a call to cull the membership.
So RECO will be busy and maybe others but it isn’t going to be a one sided affair if it comes to that.
Andrew, I’ll say it again, you have a tough job and no one, not a reader, contributor, Realtor, director or CEO should be abusing you for giving everyone a voice in your media outlet.
I appreciate that you do try.
To be transparent about the “censoring” of the op-ed you mentioned. The only part of the piece that was edited was a brief section that stated people above 65 received no benefit from the plan. We made the decision to amend that one part because it was factually incorrect. We never should have allowed that part to remain in when publishing it. When Tim Hudak reached out about the article, that part of his request we looked at as fair.
Instead of just deleting that section we thought it was only fair to add the editors note as to why. We will give people a voice and have published every letter to the editor to date on the topic of ORWP.
If in the future, someone submits a letter to the editor with something on any side of any debate that is factually incorrect, and we publish it and miss that, we would amend and include the note as to why.
Hi Andrew: The survey was done in 2019. At the time there were only 75,529 members registered, versus 96,000 now. Looks like the 20,000 didn’t have a vote. Maybe they should have another vote since 28% did not vote. As of now they still don’t know who the insurance company is and the broker that orea hired is still negotiating. Don’t know if all members know. Maybe a good article would be appropiate.
This is theft! Orea pretends they know better than everyone else and makes this mandatory. Its not right. I don’t need it, there are going to be realtors who want it, and those realtors potentially make a lot more money then I do. But I fit the bill for their benefits? Its disgusting…… do not make this mandatory
Is it right tho? Mandatory just so everyone benefits. I don’t think so. Why am I being forced to subsidize someone else. Every realtor has the ability to get benefits for themselves. Being self employed means that’s something you look into and pay for. Call Manulife, GreenShield, etc. and get yourself some. Why do I have to subside them for you? I can take care of myself so other realtors should know they have to do the same. Are people forgetting that they can just make a call and apply? These are hardly good benefits either. Rather poor, in my opinion. No dental and no vision. I don’t want or need this crap that I am being forced to take. Disguising the payment as dues so they could pass this leaves a sour taste in my mouth and I hope the entire board is walked out over this.
REM has allowed people to engage in open dialogue with respect to the issue under debate. They are not arbiters of the truth or the merits of any statements made by the various contributors.. All participants should be grateful this media vehicle exists. However, it obviously can put the spotlight on either the pros or cons of ORWP. Good luck to all…..it does look that a win-win for either side will be improbable. Such a shame!
I am now 80 years old and have been heavily involved in organized Real Estate for over 57 years. I was President of my local Real Estate Board a long time ago. I have been paying dues to two Real Estate Boards for almost 50 years. I had $50,000.00 worth of paid for Realtor Life Insurance Come January 1st 2024 I will have none. This is not fair or just. I have better Health, Dental, Travel, Drug insurance than you are offering. WHAT USE IS THIS TO ME OTHER THAN MLS. I will be opting out of this plan PERIOD.
It should have been Optional PERIOD
Interesting how an anonymous post is given a place in a magazine that says it hasn’t chosen a side?
_I am Lake lands and TREBB member. Lake Lands board did a survey about the health program and mentioned the mandator y nature. That same week TREBB did a similar survey but no mention of the mandatory nature of the health program. TREBB also has 49% of the power in OREA…..Not biased at all!
Hi andrew
I do think that your publication is being biased by allowing an anonymous person a platform.
More importantly lake lands sent a survey mentioning the mandatory health program and it’s feasibility.
Trebb sent a survey no mention of the mandatory nature of the health program. They also have the 49% or the vote at the orea board.
I guess Orea’s business is more than a few cry babies like myself
All the best