Cycling UK Forum

The voting papers say you must use all of your votes. Will my vote be disqualified, if I choose fewer candiates?

It does not use the word MUST. So IMHO

It poor drafting
And you dont need to use 4

My version does say "must": point 2 under "how to vote" on the paper voting form that came with the mag.. Normally "must" means "must" but it might not with CUK.

I've just had the following reply from CTC HQ:

"The vote will only be valid if you vote for four candidates, yes. It will be invalid if you vote for less (sic) than four people."

You have to hand it to them.
They pre-select the candidates and you have to vote for them, or not at all.

You could put your non wanted votes into an other colium

That would probably invalidate it. I've decided on my 4, though I would have probably voted for fewer had I been allowed to. Voting for my less favoured candidates could push my most favoured candidates out!

I've been having an ongoing exchange of emails with CyclingUK which hasn't been well received.

There are 4 vacancies & you have 4 votes. I have been told that you have to use all 4 votes or none of your votes will count!

I have & will continue to challenge this as I believe it is undemocratic. Four of the candidates 'meet the specification' set whilst the others don't. However, if I only want to endorse 3, for example, I have to cast my final vote for any to be counted!

According to Sue Cherry, with whom I've be swopping emails "The process for voting in any election are not contained in our constitution, rules and administration processes relating to elections are agreed by the appropriate committee. This procedure has not been changed from other years."

I have asked her to escalate the matter!

Brother Mallinder: "The Book of Trustee Voting, Chapter 2, verses 16–21."

"First shalt thou take out thy pen, then shalt thou vote for four, no more, no less. Four shall be the votes thou shalt cast, and the number of the voting shall be four. Five shalt thou not vote, neither vote thou three, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Six is right out. Once the number four, being the fourth number, be reached, then putest thou thy voting form in thy envelope, and post it."

IGMC

DrJohnJ wrote:I've been having an ongoing exchange of emails with CyclingUK which hasn't been well received.

There are 4 vacancies & you have 4 votes. I have been told that you have to use all 4 votes or none of your votes will count!

I have & will continue to challenge this as I believe it is undemocratic. Four of the candidates 'meet the specification' set whilst the others don't. However, if I only want to endorse 3, for example, I have to cast my final vote for any to be counted!

According to Sue Cherry, with whom I've be swopping emails "The process for voting in any election are not contained in our constitution, rules and administration processes relating to elections are agreed by the appropriate committee. This procedure has not been changed from other years."

I have asked her to escalate the matter!

You state that this election process was undemocractic, where does it say on the Cycling UK website or statements made that CUK is democractic?


The membership has given their rights to influence the direction of CUK away. The board of trustee know what is needed they have greater insight and abilities than the normal member they just need you to rubber stamp their choices.

DrJohnJ wrote:... According to Sue Cherry, with whom I've be swopping emails "The process for voting in any election are not contained in our constitution, rules and administration processes relating to elections are agreed by the appropriate committee. This procedure has not been changed from other years."

The election process changed following Motion 5 of the 2016 AGM which approved the broad approach outlined in the governance review.

Sue Cherry says "this procedure has not changed from other years", with such fundamental changes it might be better to restrict "other years" to just the 2016 Trustee elections.
2016 Voting Documents.

I am sure in so many years time they will catch onto the idea of treating members will respect and fairness, or at least I hope they do.

Steady rider wrote:I am sure in so many years time they will catch onto the idea of treating members will respect and fairness, or at least I hope they do.

I doubt that.

bertgrower wrote:It does not use the word MUST. So IMHO

It poor drafting
And you dont need to use 4

The voting paper does indeed say "you must use all of your votes" at least twice on the voting paper, and the on-line voting site will not accept my vote because I haven't voted for four candidates - it will not accept three.

Again I ask - is this legal - does anyone know?

bertgrower wrote:You could put your non wanted votes into an other colium

You can stick 'em where you want, but none of your votes will then be counted.