An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby meic » 31 Oct 2016, 11:13pm

Philip Benstead wrote:
Psamathe wrote:Do those members that spend their time and money going to these AGMs appreciate that what they decide there is irrelevant and that the organisation just does what it wants irrespective of the decisions they contribute towards ?

Would anybody bother to turn-up to an AGM if they realised that the decisions made there can be and are ignored just a few weeks after they were made ?

Is this any way to treat those who contribute their time and money to the organisation ?

Ian
Members are cash cow , let them think they have some power, the poor fools :mrgreen:

The vote happened some time ago, so with the exception of Life Members I assume that they are happy enough with that situation.
Yma o Hyd

User avatar
Philip Benstead
Posts: 1411
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 7:06pm
Location: Victoria , London

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby Philip Benstead » 31 Oct 2016, 11:19pm

meic wrote:
Philip Benstead wrote:
Psamathe wrote:Do those members that spend their time and money going to these AGMs appreciate that what they decide there is irrelevant and that the organisation just does what it wants irrespective of the decisions they contribute towards ?

Would anybody bother to turn-up to an AGM if they realised that the decisions made there can be and are ignored just a few weeks after they were made ?

Is this any way to treat those who contribute their time and money to the organisation ?

Ian
Members are cash cow , let them think they have some power, the poor fools :mrgreen:

The vote happened some time ago, so with the exception of Life Members I assume that they are happy enough with that situation.


That is why membership is going down and member groups are converting to affillate groups since David Cox has been chair
Philip Benstead | Life Member Former CTC Councillor/Trustee
Organizing events and representing cyclist in southeast since 1988
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic

PH
Posts: 9947
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby PH » 31 Oct 2016, 11:44pm

Psamathe wrote:Would anybody bother to turn-up to an AGM if they realised that the decisions made there can be and are ignored just a few weeks after they were made ?

I went to the last one, it was on my doorstep so it seemed rude not to, plus I knew there'd be a decent buffet :wink:
I didn't do a head count, the room wasn't full and it wasn't even a big room, 70 people? 100? it would be wrong if that proportion of the membership did have much influence.

PH
Posts: 9947
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby PH » 31 Oct 2016, 11:50pm

Philip Benstead wrote:That is why membership is going down

Is membership going down? Do you have the numbers? At my MGs AGM yesterday I heard that local members had gone up slightly, though that may not be the case elsewhere.
member groups are converting to affillate groups since David Cox has been chair

Some are and some new ones are forming.

User avatar
Philip Benstead
Posts: 1411
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 7:06pm
Location: Victoria , London

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby Philip Benstead » 31 Oct 2016, 11:58pm

PH wrote:
Psamathe wrote:Would anybody bother to turn-up to an AGM if they realised that the decisions made there can be and are ignored just a few weeks after they were made ?

I went to the last one, it was on my doorstep so it seemed rude not to, plus I knew there'd be a decent buffet :wink:
I didn't do a head count, the room wasn't full and it wasn't even a big room, 70 people? 100? it would be wrong if that proportion of the membership did have much influence.



So, what is your solution to the problem of a maverick council who has grab control of a membership organisation.
At the agm a severing ctc councillor were offensive to ctc members present in the room and was agree with by chair of the agm.
Most ctc members who vote do not know what is going on, they are feed misdirection by ctc hq.
Philip Benstead | Life Member Former CTC Councillor/Trustee
Organizing events and representing cyclist in southeast since 1988
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic

User avatar
Philip Benstead
Posts: 1411
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 7:06pm
Location: Victoria , London

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby Philip Benstead » 1 Nov 2016, 12:00am

PH wrote:
Philip Benstead wrote:That is why membership is going down

Is membership going down? Do you have the numbers? At my MGs AGM yesterday I heard that local members had gone up slightly, though that may not be the case elsewhere.
member groups are converting to affillate groups since David Cox has been chair

Some are and some new ones are forming.


I been told the latest is around 63000 to 64000


Date Total
Jun-16 65,735
May-16 65,906
Apr-16 66,149
Mar-16 66,360
Feb-16 66,335
Jan-16 66,305
Dec-15 66,316
Nov-15 66,636
Oct-15 66,914
Sep-15 66,948
Aug-15 67,020
Jul-15 67,207
Jun-15 67,286
May-15 67,130
Apr-15 67,117
Mar-15 67,016
Feb-15 66,801
Jan-15 66,805
Sep-14 67,183
Aug-14 66,963
Sep-09 62,383
Philip Benstead | Life Member Former CTC Councillor/Trustee
Organizing events and representing cyclist in southeast since 1988
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic

geocycle
Posts: 1845
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 9:46am

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby geocycle » 1 Nov 2016, 9:19am

meic wrote:
The current Board have made it clear that in their view they did not ignore the AGM resolution, simply that they considered it and chose a different course in the 'public interest'.

They are taking a much more literal meaning of ignore than most people would.
I certainly dont think it fits with the impression that John Catt was trying to give.
Not much validity in the trust part of trustees with these goings on.
I think that he was mistaken on another point, the board can ignore a resolution of the "shareholders" without fear of repercussions.


I agree Meic, as I said above I don't think the technical legal position is for debate but the lack of political touch, 'supporter' appreciation or even business acumen is astonishing.

Psamathe
Posts: 12185
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby Psamathe » 1 Nov 2016, 9:52am

PH wrote:
Psamathe wrote:Would anybody bother to turn-up to an AGM if they realised that the decisions made there can be and are ignored just a few weeks after they were made ?

I went to the last one, it was on my doorstep so it seemed rude not to, plus I knew there'd be a decent buffet :wink:
I didn't do a head count, the room wasn't full and it wasn't even a big room, 70 people? 100? it would be wrong if that proportion of the membership did have much influence.

But that is 70 to 100 people who went there to participate in making decisions about the organisation, who paid for their own travel, gave their time and it was always going to be completely wasted as the Executive then just completely ignore the decisions that were made there and the assurances that were given.

and given that the organisation is a charity and has an obligation to spend its money wisely, should they be paying for hire of room, employee time organising and attending, providing a good buffet for 70-100 people, etc. when any decisions made are just ignored and have no "status" anyway. There are far faster, cheaper and more effective ways to achieve nothing that don't involve wasting the time and resources (or members as well).

The organisation needs to start behaving n a responsible manner.

Ian

PH
Posts: 9947
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby PH » 1 Nov 2016, 10:25am

geocycle wrote:the lack of political touch, 'supporter' appreciation or even business acumen is astonishing.

Is it? We don't of course know the full reasoning of the board and trustees, they may well have accepted that loosing the support of a couple of thousand traditional members was a price worth paying for what they see as the good of the organisation.
I'm still sitting on the fence, I dislike the political manoeuvrings, but I've long felt the CTC was too niche and needed to change. I also appreciate the better support that Member Groups are starting to get, so I'll see how it goes over the next few years. I don't necessarily disagree with much of what Phillip says, but he seems to be fighting battles that are already lost. The Club handed over the assets to the Trust, from that day on it wasn't the tail wagging the dog, the tail became the dog. People relate the present position to the charity merge, but considering those assets were already held by the charity it was just confirming a reality. Maybe we should remember that the action of giving the club away was taken by councillors, all of whom were I think long term CTC members.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14160
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, lorry park of England

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby gaz » 1 Nov 2016, 10:41am

Psamathe wrote:But that is 70 to 100 people who went there to participate in making decisions about the organisation, who paid for their own travel, gave their time and it was always going to be completely wasted ...

Everyone who voted at the meeting could have voted either on-line or by post instead, at minimal expense to themselves. It seems reasonable to believe that anyone who went to the AGM did not attend just to cast their vote.

They may have also gone to the AGM because they wanted to hear the executive's commentary on the annual report, to voice their opinions in the debate on motions (even to support Council's views :shock: ), for the volunteer awards or even just for the buffet :wink: .

Every member who attended can make their own personal judgement as to whether or not it was time well spent.
Last edited by gaz on 1 Nov 2016, 10:48am, edited 1 time in total.
There'll be tarmac over, the white cliffs of Dover ...

PH
Posts: 9947
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby PH » 1 Nov 2016, 10:47am

Psamathe wrote:But that is 70 to 100 people who went there to participate in making decisions about the organisation, who paid for their own travel, gave their time and it was always going to be completely wasted as the Executive then just completely ignore the decisions that were made there and the assurances that were given.

Anyone who thought that they could influence the outcome of the motions by being there was seriously deluded, without any understanding of how the vast majority of votes had already been cast. Even many of those in the room, myself included, had already voted, the only way to make sure it would be counted if for some reason I'd been unable to attend. Gone are the days when you could round up enough people to attend an AGM and make a difference, it’s hard to make the case that that was in some way more democratic.

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby JohnW » 1 Nov 2016, 10:54am

Ethics, you see. This raises with me question - is a body of decision makers acting ethically if that body knowingly operates against the wishes of an AGM, expressed by resolution? My opinion is that it is not. I'm sure that Council have really carefully explored all legal and constitutional regulation and have satisfied themselves that they've not acted illegally...........well, you would, wouldn't you.

I honestly don't think that all this heartache and deliberation is going to bear fruit in any way. My personal view is that it's all over - we're going the way Council/Trustees (or whatever) and 'They-Who-Must-Have-Their-Own -Way' decide. I think we have to get on with it and move forward where we can - supporting what we can believe in. There's so little of our CTC remaining that almost all I can believe in is our local section family (which is wonderful) and the hope that CUK nationally, and as a whole, will become effective in campaigning for cyclists' rights. But let's see. All this debate and deliberation is deflecting energy and resources away from what CUK SAY they're about.

From the self-citations of the candidates for the board of trustees I'm doubtful whether they understand either - from their schpeel on the voting paper I've no idea of their agenda. However as things are we're becoming 'a house divided against itself' and it's tragic.
Last edited by JohnW on 1 Nov 2016, 11:29am, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14160
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, lorry park of England

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby gaz » 1 Nov 2016, 11:09am

JohnW wrote:... The votes as expressed by the very small number of members who actually voted to express their wishes as cast by the postal ballot and show of hands at the AGM were decisively against conversion. ...

You are mistaken in your recollection of the 2012 AGM at Sheffield.

It was Motion 1 of the 2012 AGM at Sheffield that finally sealed the Charity Conversion. I wasn't there, but this isn't the first time that I've linked the ERS records for the vote which suggest the room was strongly in favour (90%) as were a significant majority of returned voting forms that gave directed proxy votes.

JohnW wrote:... The only way that the chairman could gauge the mood of the membership was to heed the wishes of those members who'd actually expressed their wishes. ...


If the Chair's undirected proxy votes had been left uncast the result would have been 3978 For, 646 Against (86% in favour). The Chair cast the undirected proxies in accordance with the mood of those who'd expressed an opinion.
There'll be tarmac over, the white cliffs of Dover ...

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby JohnW » 1 Nov 2016, 11:27am

gaz wrote:
JohnW wrote:... The votes as expressed by the very small number of members who actually voted to express their wishes as cast by the postal ballot and show of hands at the AGM were decisively against conversion. ...

You are mistaken in your recollection of the 2012 AGM at Sheffield.

It was Motion 1 of the 2012 AGM at Sheffield that finally sealed the Charity Conversion. I wasn't there, but this isn't the first time that I've linked the ERS records for the vote which suggest the room was strongly in favour (90%) as were a significant majority of returned voting forms that gave directed proxy votes.

JohnW wrote:... The only way that the chairman could gauge the mood of the membership was to heed the wishes of those members who'd actually expressed their wishes. ...


If the Chair's undirected proxy votes had been left uncast the result would have been 3978 For, 646 Against (86% in favour). The Chair cast the undirected proxies in accordance with the mood of those who'd expressed an opinion.


Yes gaz - indeed we have debated this before, on these threads. The record that you've linked is certainly at variance with my recollection but whether I believe it or not, there it is......official......and thank you anyway. You'll see that I've amended my post to remove all traces of reference to that Sheffield AGM. I'm sorry to be at variance with you of all people; if apology is appropriate, please accept.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16680
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: An update on Cycling UK's Board of Trustees' elections

Postby mjr » 1 Nov 2016, 3:18pm

gaz wrote:They may have also gone to the AGM because they wanted to hear the executive's commentary on the annual report, to voice their opinions in the debate on motions (even to support Council's views :shock: ), for the volunteer awards or even just for the buffet :wink: .

Or possibly to hear the debate and let it help them make up their minds... that's a vital element of democracy which seems to have been rendered completely impotent in the current CUK model, so it makes the AGM seem like a thin façade of democracy which is now crumbling with the board overtly ignoring its instruction. The membership are no longer the supreme power - they've given the organisation away.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.