Remember Me
Register | Forgot Password?


June 29, 2015

Join the Conversation

2000 characters left



Bill Mullally

7/28/2015 10:33 AM

Jon, I think you embody the cooperative spirit of the Credit Union movement. Keep on keeping on!

Jon Hernandez

6/30/2015 12:47 PM

The fact that we try to maintain each credit union's distinct identity is important to each of these institutions. Each credit union has a unique membership that requires its own way of being served. We don't need to merge just to achieve scale instead we should find ways to achieve it by collaborating and working with other credit unions just like sharing employees and resources. There is a cost to remain independent, but that's the cost of keeping your identity. There's savings in having shared employees. Compensation, benefits, training, and succession planning have a lot of advantages when negotiating with vendors. As long as the credit union is operating efficiently and effectively, then it has the right to remain its own separate entity.


6/29/2015 11:51 AM

Intriguing. I enjoy the simplicity of a smaller credit union and interaction with members to make a difference in their financial well being.

Henry Wirz

6/29/2015 10:58 AM

The obvious question is why are the three credit unions still independent and not merged. The collaboration they have now is only a small taste of what the efficiencies would be if they were one credit union. The article would have been more interesting if Jon had talked about what advantages they retain as independent credit unions. There is a cost to remaining independent and members bear that cost. A credit union should be able to point out clear advantages that offset those costs. I have tried hard to find any advantage to remaining independent.

Platinum Suppliers   |   Get Listed
Copyright © 2016 Callahan & Associates, Inc. All rights reserved. Website design and website development by