DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Discussion of the re-branding of CTC as Cycling UK.
Psamathe
Posts: 11123
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Psamathe » 27 Feb 2016, 12:07pm

Vorpal wrote:... But I agree that it isn't a club anymore, and members should not expect the rights of club members.

Trouble is, you become a member of an organisation called a Club. You get membership benefits as having paid to be a member of that club, etc., etc. So it is probably reasonable for members to assume it is a club and they are members of that club.

So the current complete re-organisation really is taking the club away from the members.

That people paying to become a member of a club are not actually becoming members of a club should be made much more clear BEFORE people pay out their money. In some sectors to take money on the basis of false or misleading information is fraudulent..

Ian

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13897
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby gaz » 27 Feb 2016, 12:41pm

Join the CTC and you become a member of the Cyclists ' Touring Club, just like anyone joining the RAC becomes a member of the Royal Automobile Club.

Just like people joining RAC, those that join CTC look at the organisation's aims, the various member benefits they will recevie and decide if they feel they will get value for money when they pay their subs/fees. A small proportion may look at the governance structures and exactly what "Club" might mean to them.

Psamathe wrote:So the current complete re-organisation really is taking the club away from the members.

If you want to attribute any event to "taking the club away from the members" you would be better advised to attribute that to the charity conversion, which was completed 7 June 2012. The reality however is that nobody took the club away, the members voted to hand it over*.

The change of name to Cycling UK does not change any of CTC's Charitable Objects. The proposed changes to the governance structures are being put forward under the existing Memorandum of Association. All the relevant powers of Council to make these changes were in the MoA before the Charity conversion.

*The Club is still governed by Council. As Directors of a Limited Company, Council were entrusted with running the Club in the interests of its members as defined in our Memorandum of Association. As Trustees of a Charity, Council are entrusted with running the Club in the interests of the public as defined in our Charitable Objects.

Edit: typo
Last edited by gaz on 29 Feb 2016, 10:53pm, edited 1 time in total.
2020 : To redundancy ... and beyond!

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 17908
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Vorpal » 27 Feb 2016, 12:48pm

Psamathe wrote:
Vorpal wrote:... But I agree that it isn't a club anymore, and members should not expect the rights of club members.

Trouble is, you become a member of an organisation called a Club. You get membership benefits as having paid to be a member of that club, etc., etc. So it is probably reasonable for members to assume it is a club and they are members of that club.

So the current complete re-organisation really is taking the club away from the members.

That people paying to become a member of a club are not actually becoming members of a club should be made much more clear BEFORE people pay out their money. In some sectors to take money on the basis of false or misleading information is fraudulent..

Ian

Is it called a club? I thought it was 'CTC the National Cycling Charity'. The current re-organisation isn't. It's just a rebranding at this point. It may have some organisational impacts, but it was becoming a charity that meant the CTC was no longer a club. Affiliated groups can still be clubs. I'm not sure about member groups. If members still thought it was reasonable to assume that they were members of a club, they did not understand what becoming a charity meant.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Bicycler » 27 Feb 2016, 1:25pm

Vorpal wrote: If members still thought it was reasonable to assume that they were members of a club, they did not understand what becoming a charity meant.

How silly of them! To be fair the changes in arrangements were not made abundantly clear at the time. It was perfectly reasonable to read the information the CTC was putting out and to believe that you were still a member of a club, that its heritage and member services were protected, and that you had a say in how the club was run

Converting to a charity the part of CTC we term the “Club” and absorbing into it the work of the part we term the “Charitable Trust” will enable us to take all our charitable work into a single core organisation, to be known simply as the Club, whilst retaining all our present membership services, arrangements, democracy and heritage

Control of Council and CTC’s activities will remain firmly with Members. The merger of the Club and CTC Charitable Trust will give Members more direct control than they have at present, not less

https://web.archive.org/web/20110702054 ... TabID=5356

Is it unreasonable for somebody who believed information like that to be angry upon finding that their membership services have been reduced, that they are no longer part of a club, that the organisation's name is to be changed without meaningful consultation and that they do not have a say in any of it?

User avatar
bikes4two
Posts: 1044
Joined: 12 Jan 2010, 10:14pm
Location: SE Hampshire, UK

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby bikes4two » 27 Feb 2016, 2:33pm

> In the event that there is a 'poll' I will of course read the opposing views with interest
> For me the name of the organisation is not important to me, not really.
> What is of value to me is that I belong to an organisation whose goals and objectives I'm largely in accord with, but primarily it's because under the club's banner my local cycling group (currently known as Portsmouth CTC) has brought together a whole host of like minded cyclist whose company I enjoy on the many rides that I do with them
> Now, if something were to happen that changed the dynamics of my local cycling group, then maybe I'd get a bit more interested in a 'poll', but for now...... :roll:
Without my stoker, every trip would only be half a journey

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby TonyR » 27 Feb 2016, 2:46pm

Vorpal wrote:A poll costs lots of money that might be better spent on campaigning.


It won't make any difference either. The vote to become a charity was 80% in favour but didn't resolve the issue and people are still banging on about it being wrong five years later. If there were a 99% vote in favour of a name change I would still expect people here to be banging on about it being against the members wishes for the next decade or few.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 48183
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Mick F » 27 Feb 2016, 4:26pm

Yes Tony. I agree.
It's the vocally loud minority who make the most noise.
The vote was 80% in favour ................ of the people who voted, not the total membership.

It's all about my hobby horse regarding "democracy" ........................ just think about the forthcoming referendum.

What are the rules?

50.001% of the people who vote want to stay in.
49.999% of the people who vote want to leave.

Who is going to make the most noise?
The voters, or the people who didn't vote?
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13897
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby gaz » 27 Feb 2016, 5:33pm

Mick F wrote:Yes Tony. I agree.
It's the vocally loud minority who make the most noise.
The vote was 80% in favour ................ of the people who voted, not the total membership.

It's all about my hobby horse regarding "democracy" ........................ just think about the forthcoming referendum.

It's quite possible that you know something I don't but before there can be a referendum the petition must attract the signatures of 200 members. I don't doubt that it will but I don't know that it has.

Mick F wrote:What are the rules?

All current members are eligible to vote. One member, one vote. Simple majority of votes cast required to "win" the poll. Council has the National Office machine on its side in terms of putting across its view on the re-brand. Petitioners have their own resources, such as they may be.

Edit: In the event of an exact 50/50 split the original decision is confirmed, i.e. Cycling UK

Mick F wrote:Who is going to make the most noise?

So far as the forum is concerned could it be all the declared non-members who have deeply held views on the CTC? :wink: Noisy bunch in my experience but very glad to have them here :mrgreen: .
Last edited by gaz on 27 Feb 2016, 7:47pm, edited 1 time in total.
2020 : To redundancy ... and beyond!

User avatar
Paulatic
Posts: 4624
Joined: 2 Feb 2014, 1:03pm
Location: 24 Hours from Lands End

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Paulatic » 27 Feb 2016, 6:11pm

TonyR wrote:
Vorpal wrote:A poll costs lots of money that might be better spent on campaigning.


It won't make any difference either. The vote to become a charity was 80% in favour but didn't resolve the issue and people are still banging on about it being wrong five years later. If there were a 99% vote in favour of a name change I would still expect people here to be banging on about it being against the members wishes for the next decade or few.

No doubt you are right.
I think I was one who voted to become a charity because I was led to believe it was the way forward. As a local club we were also led to believe becoming a MG was the way forward.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but I wouldn't agree to either of them now.
Whatever I am, wherever I am, this is me. This is my life

https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/

Steady rider
Posts: 2187
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Steady rider » 27 Feb 2016, 6:33pm

Could more than one question be asked in a poll of the whole club? edit would not apply in this case.

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby TonyR » 27 Feb 2016, 7:42pm

Mick F wrote:Yes Tony. I agree.
It's the vocally loud minority who make the most noise.
The vote was 80% in favour ................ of the people who voted, not the total membership.

It's all about my hobby horse regarding "democracy" ........................ just think about the forthcoming referendum.

What are the rules?

50.001% of the people who vote want to stay in.
49.999% of the people who vote want to leave.

Who is going to make the most noise?
The voters, or the people who didn't vote?


You have a suggestion for a better system? [Mick F decides for everyone does not count :wink:]

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 48183
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Mick F » 27 Feb 2016, 8:42pm

Mick F wrote:What are the rules?
Who is going to make the most noise?
gaz wrote:All current members are eligible to vote. One member, one vote. Simple majority of votes cast required to "win" the poll.
So far as the forum is concerned could it be all the declared non-members who have deeply held views on the CTC? :wink: Noisy bunch in my experience but very glad to have them here :mrgreen: .

Yes, the losers make the noise because their views aren't represented.
If it's a 51/49 split, the 49 are alienated ................ and vocal.
If the vocal non-members aren't considered, they will still be vocal. :wink:
Mick F. Cornwall

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 17908
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Vorpal » 27 Feb 2016, 8:45pm

Bicycler wrote:Is it unreasonable for somebody who believed information like that to be angry upon finding that their membership services have been reduced, that they are no longer part of a club, that the organisation's name is to be changed without meaningful consultation and that they do not have a say in any of it?

I'm not sure, but I think the Charity Commission is pretty clear that a charity has to serve the aims of the charity, not the members of a club.

There was a lot of discussion about that on this forum in the weeks leading up to the charity vote.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13897
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby gaz » 27 Feb 2016, 8:47pm

Vorpal wrote:There was a lot of discussion about that on this forum in the weeks leading up to the charity vote.

Weeks, months, years .... :wink:
2020 : To redundancy ... and beyond!

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 48183
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Mick F » 27 Feb 2016, 8:49pm

TonyR wrote:You have a suggestion for a better system? [Mick F decides for everyone does not count :wink:]
Some of our Scottish members may be able to cast their minds back to the referendum for Scottish independence in 1975(?)
Correct me if I have the wrong year. Could have been 1977(?)

There was a huge furore regarding the majority to pass the referendum.
It wasn't a plain 50/50 of the voters, it needed a particular percentage of the electorate to vote YES.
Mick F. Cornwall