DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Discussion of the re-branding of CTC as Cycling UK.
Psamathe
Posts: 9790
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Psamathe » 13 Mar 2016, 1:03am

Labrat wrote:
Philip Benstead wrote:As stated elsewhere, there could be more than one course of action or inaction that could or may fullfill the aim and objective.

...
I fully support your right to bring about a poll of the club, as per the rules, I don't think you have gone around it professionally, responsibly, or reasonably, and I think the deliberate over personalisation and abuse, along with accusations of all sorts against staff and officials (possibly in a fit of pique at not getting your own way or not being reelected) have been thoroughly out of order and shameful, and I hope that other members of the club see that and vote against your proposal accordingly.

I think you also have to remember the post the CTC CEO made about Philip. I wont re-post it as it was not nice and not directed at me (so re-posting it would be inappropriate). I think it might be on this forum somewhere but not for me to point people to it (can't remember if or where it is anyway).

Ian

Steady rider
Posts: 2160
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Steady rider » 13 Mar 2016, 4:53pm

How many charities advertise themselves not using the registration name? http://www.charitychoice.co.uk/charities

User avatar
honesty
Posts: 2509
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 3:33pm
Location: Somerset
Contact:

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby honesty » 13 Mar 2016, 5:06pm

Psamathe wrote:
Labrat wrote:
Philip Benstead wrote:As stated elsewhere, there could be more than one course of action or inaction that could or may fullfill the aim and objective.

...
I fully support your right to bring about a poll of the club, as per the rules, I don't think you have gone around it professionally, responsibly, or reasonably, and I think the deliberate over personalisation and abuse, along with accusations of all sorts against staff and officials (possibly in a fit of pique at not getting your own way or not being reelected) have been thoroughly out of order and shameful, and I hope that other members of the club see that and vote against your proposal accordingly.

I think you also have to remember the post the CTC CEO made about Philip. I wont re-post it as it was not nice and not directed at me (so re-posting it would be inappropriate). I think it might be on this forum somewhere but not for me to point people to it (can't remember if or where it is anyway).

Ian

Except the more posts I read from PB the more the CEOs words seem to make sense...

User avatar
Philip Benstead
Posts: 1147
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 7:06pm
Location: Victoria , London

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Philip Benstead » 13 Mar 2016, 8:35pm

Except the more posts I read from PB the more the CEOs words seem to make sense...[/quote]

Apologies if I sometime I express myself poorly when I write fast and post the email without re-reading my script a few times. I keep on being told I am dyslexic, so be it.
Please give some details as to your concerns.

I was asked to start this process; I will see it to the end. I see nobody else prepared to put their head on the block or be prepared to take the slings and arrows (of outrageous fortune). I welcome all the support I can get. if I have made errors of judgement apologies, I am human. If you would like to communicate with me, please do contact philipbenstead1@gmail.com or 07949801698

I will try to triple check my submission to remove typographical errors.
Philip Benstead | CTC London and FORMER CTC Councillor SE
| 0794-980-1698 | philipbenstead1@gmail.com |
Organizing events and representing cyclist in southeast since 1988
Cycle Ride? http://www.meetup.com/socialcycling4u/
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic

Euskadi
Posts: 164
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 8:16am
Location: London

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Euskadi » 14 Mar 2016, 9:03am

Psamathe wrote:
gaz wrote:The Poll of the Whole Club is a referendum of the members on a single issue: Council's decision recorded in the OP as 'to replace the existing “Cyclists` Touring Club or CTC” and associated logo(s) and heritage marks with “CYCLING UK” or another branding name and logo(s)'.

The decision has been made. The question to be posed is whether the membership endorse or reject that decision.

Council will present the case that the change of name is in the best interests of the charity. They will show that their decision was reached after two and a half years of consultation, reflection and consideration with the aid of professional guidance. They will set out the entire brand, not just the trading name. They will explain how our heritage remains part of that brand and how member groups can continue to use it. They will show why they feel it is the right decision for the charity's future.

Council's role is to seek endorsement of their decision. Council will not suggest that the status quo has equal merit.

The members will vote.

I had assumed the organisation has to put the actions on hold as the decisions of the Council can be overturned by the membership and they would be forced to wait 6 months (I seem to remember) before re-considering/acting. I'm sure somebody posted some regulation that should the membership vote against something the Council is bound to accept the decision.
http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=78803&p=990227&hilit=6+months#p990227 wrote:11.5 All decisions arrived at by a poll of the whole Club shall bind the Club and the Council for six months.

So if vote goes against the change of name/brand then the new branding cannot go ahead for 6 months (at which point somebody might organise another petition, etc.).

To rush through and "get it out there" after the poll had been called but before the poll has happened would be the height of irresponsibility. Also, membership had no previous idea exactly what and when he Council were acting (there might have been long term "we are looking at" and mentions of "bringing it before an AGM", etc. but people (members) cannot make a decision if they are largely unaware of what is proposed). So to decide, it leaks out and then happens whilst waiting for a membership vote ... no organisation would act like that.

Ian

Completely agree. It would also be a huge waste of CTC money should the poll go against the current leadership. We need CJ back in charge. That's the lesson for me from this sorry mess.

AndyK
Posts: 776
Joined: 17 Aug 2007, 2:08pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby AndyK » 14 Mar 2016, 10:30am

Euskadi wrote:Completely agree. It would also be a huge waste of CTC money should the poll go against the current leadership. We need CJ back in charge. That's the lesson for me from this sorry mess.

Nitpicking, but CJ was never "in charge" of the CTC. He had a much more important role than that. :-)

Steady rider
Posts: 2160
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Steady rider » 15 Mar 2016, 2:57pm

The poll is due to be advertised in Cycle June/July, it may be several weeks in conducting the poll. Whichever way the poll goes a serious division of opinions may be ongoing.
If the new brand is used prior to the poll serious concerns would also arise. It may be possible to resolve the situation by discussing the options with possible modifications to the brand and when it is used. I think that both sides of the issue would see progress. I wonder if a meeting could be called following the AGM to discuss proposals to resolve the issue. In a pm message I could detail how this may work.

The articles allows for the club to call Extraordinary General Meeting.

8.3 Whenever they think fit the Council may convene an Extraordinary General Meeting. An
Extraordinary General Meeting shall also be convened on such requisition or in default may be
convened by such requisitionists as provided by Section 303 of the Companies Act. If at any time
there are not within the United Kingdom sufficient of the Council capable of acting to form a quorum
any member of the Council or any two Members of the Club may convene an Extraordinary
General Meeting in the same manner as nearly as possible as that is which General Meetings may
be convened by the Council.


The proposal could be put in an email and circulated, it CTC and Phillip considered it worthwhile an EGM could be called for the 7 May to follow the AGM. It may not cost very much and may resolve the situation with an agreement.

User avatar
Philip Benstead
Posts: 1147
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 7:06pm
Location: Victoria , London

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Philip Benstead » 18 Mar 2016, 10:49pm

Philip Benstead comment is the CTC Councillors up to the job?

This article can be found on LinkedIn and was written by Shivaji Shivapadasundaram who is the CTC Honorary Consulting Solicitor
It was not written nor commissioned nor endorsed by the CTC, it council or members of its council and does not represent their view or policy.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-goe ... =prof-post



• Shivaji Shiva
Charity Lawyer - Anthony Collins Solicitors
Following
• What Goes Around Comes Around – Charity Governance in 2016
Mar 5, 2016

• It became apparent last year that trustees face increasing scrutiny.
The fundraising scandals of summer 2015 and the closure of Kids Company focused attention on the importance of good governance. At the start of this year Sarah Atkinson of the Charity Commission emphasised that development, saying:
“2016 will be the year that good trusteeship takes centre stage.”
Two months on, there is already a wealth of new material for trustees trying to meet that challenge.
January saw two reports in quick succession from the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (‘PACAC’). Both are critical of trustee performance and emphasise trustees’ responsibility for securing good governance.
According to the first report on the role of charity trustees in fundraising:
‘Last summer’s controversies were evidence of a failure of governance by trustees … [who] were either negligent or wilfully blind’
The second report on the lessons to be learnt from the closure of Kids Company observes that:
‘… the Chief Executive and Trustees relied upon wishful thinking and false optimism and became inured to the precariousness of the charity’s financial situation.’
It emphasises that:
‘It is … a charity’s Board of Trustees that bears full legal responsibility for maintaining proper standards of governance within the organisation.’
and:
‘[a charity of significant size and complexity] requires a Board of Trustees that will demonstrate leadership, judgement and a willingness to challenge assumptions [as well as expertise in the activities of the charity].’
before concluding that:
‘[The board of Kids Company] failed to exercise their proper function as Trustees.’
The MPs’ conclusions do not reflect the complexity of the sector or the many ways in which the vast majority of charities differ from those at the centre of their investigations. Those failures have been challenged, notably by Andrew Purkis and Karl Wilding of NCVO and it was interesting to see the forthright MP Paul Flynn (who notably complained about the ‘verbal ectoplasm’ of Camilla Batmangelidh) acknowledging that the committee’s report was flawed. He said:
“All I was talking about was members of the board who had internally criticised the organisation and tried to reform it – I think we gave a blanket criticism that wasn’t justified … In the case of Kids Company, the trustees failed – but I’m not saying, as we did in the report, that all the trustees failed. There were some who tried to make changes.” ‘[Paul Flynn]’
It is also important to place current concerns about governance in context. Mention of Kids Company has become lazy short hand for the suggestion that there is a wide-spread and unprecedented crisis of governance in the sector. That is not the case.
It is reassuring to reflect that this is far from the first time that the reputation of the charity sector has been damaged in this way.
In his 1995 book The Governance and Management of Charities, Andrew Hind observed that:
‘It is important for individual charities to create the environment in which trustees and paid staff work together in a symbiotic relationship to produce effective results in line with the charity’s vision. This is important from the wider charity perspective as well because …the charity sector as a whole is damaged by the poor standards of governance displayed in isolated cases, such as War on Want, where things have gone badly wrong.
(As an aside, it is interesting in the context of the lobbying ban to note the next sentence: ‘In this respect the charity sector appears to be more harshly treated than the commercial sector.’)
It is of course critically important that charities pursue good governance but the example of Kids Company is of limited direct relevance to most boards. That is important, because the intense interest in charity governance currently expressed by government, funders and large sections of the public will fade – but charity trustees must continue to pursue good governance. For most charities, that task is underfunded (and often entirely unfunded) and noticed only when things do not go as planned.
So what should charity trustees do?
Well, to quote Hind again:
‘Recognition of the fact that good charity governance is difficult to achieve is a useful first step.’
or to switch authors:
‘Governance is a subtle, multi-faceted subject and the rules are far from simple’(Mike Hudson, author of Managing Without Profit).
To address the subject comprehensively would take a book (and for anyone who has not already read them either of the two named above would be a great starting point). Much of our work with charities, concerns two ‘facets’ of good governance:
1. getting the ‘nuts and bolts’ right – the mundane and easily overlooked task of putting into place and maintaining rigorous and internally coherent structures and processes to govern the charity, which Sarah Tomlinsonexplores further in her article;
2. supporting trustees as they make the changes necessary to change behaviours that undermine their effectiveness as a board. Achieving such behavioural change is a considerably more complex task – and will form the basis of a future update.
• For more information
Please contact Shivaji Shiva.
Philip Benstead | CTC London and FORMER CTC Councillor SE
| 0794-980-1698 | philipbenstead1@gmail.com |
Organizing events and representing cyclist in southeast since 1988
Cycle Ride? http://www.meetup.com/socialcycling4u/
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic

Labrat
Posts: 168
Joined: 3 Mar 2014, 11:58am

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Labrat » 19 Mar 2016, 12:27pm

So, you've raised the issue here of the suitability and role of the councillors, as trustees.

By law, the trustees have to act in the best interest of the organisation, in accordance with the constitutional objectives.

I asked you a couple of pages ago to explain to me how you thought that the rebranding was in opposition to the objectives (1.7 of the articles) or the powers (1.8 of the articles)

I'm afraid that you still haven't responded to tell me what you think they are doing wrong. To now go around questioning their role or suitability, you really need to come up to the plate and tell us exactly which of those objectives or powers you think they have breached

Psamathe
Posts: 9790
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Psamathe » 19 Mar 2016, 12:38pm

Labrat wrote:...
I'm afraid that you still haven't responded to tell me what you think they are doing wrong. To now go around questioning their role or suitability, you really need to come up to the plate and tell us exactly which of those objectives or powers you think they have breached

For me (not the person you were addressing you comment to) there are many reasons including
    It is not distinctive and will not help the club to prominence
    It does not suggest the aspects the club is involved with (e.g. hammering round a velodrome for hours, olympic team competition, etc.)
    It is easily confused with other cycling organisations (e.g. British Cycling) and confusion detracts from everybody
    Such exercises are expensive and time consuming
    Whilst CTC has been focused on this other achievements have "unwound" and they didn't even notice
    It is another step away from what the members were promised in the Charity or not vote
    The membership has not been consulted and they are still "members"
    Member Groups will have to change or lose out on the PR and benefits from the parent organisation
    etc.

A few quick thoughts.

Ian

Steady rider
Posts: 2160
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Steady rider » 19 Mar 2016, 2:28pm

I asked you a couple of pages ago to explain to me how you thought that the rebranding was in opposition to the objectives (1.7 of the articles) or the powers (1.8 of the articles)


The articles are approved in the name of the
ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION
OF THE CYCLISTS’ TOURING CLUB
As amended by the AGM on 12 May 2012
The name of the Club is the “CYCLISTS’ TOURING CLUB”.

Section 1.7 appears not to make any provision for trading or advertising under a different name.

1.8.8 To establish or promote any company or society, association or trust, whether corporate or
unincorporated, for the purpose of furthering any of the objects of the Club;
and thereafter to assist such company, society, association or trust in such manner as the
Club shall think fit;

this appears not to include brand names

Section 1.8 does not make provision for trading or advertising under a different name.

All actions approved in the Articles are for the “CYCLISTS’ TOURING CLUB”. Where do the articles allow for trading or advertising under a different name?

User avatar
honesty
Posts: 2509
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 3:33pm
Location: Somerset
Contact:

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby honesty » 19 Mar 2016, 3:31pm

They don't have to. That's how trading names work.

Steady rider
Posts: 2160
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Steady rider » 19 Mar 2016, 4:38pm

Honesty wrote
They don't have to. That's how trading names work.


It may work for general businesses but the CTC has been governed for about 130 years based on the Articles and membership has been based on that understanding. Councillors are obliged to follow the Articles. If the Articles do not contain provision for using brand names then they are acting outside the Articles as far as I can see.

1.8 The Club has the following powers, which may be exercised only in promoting the Objects:
with a list of provisions.

Using brand names is not included.

CTC Council may have acted in good faith or with good intentions but do not have specific backing from the Articles. Unless it can be shown that they have acted within the provisions of the Articles, they should call an EGM and withdraw the decision to use a brand name. At least that is my view. It could also be pointed out that the Articles were amended in 2012 and no provision for brand names added.

Labrat
Posts: 168
Joined: 3 Mar 2014, 11:58am

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Labrat » 19 Mar 2016, 7:48pm

Steady rider wrote:
Section 1.8 does not make provision for trading or advertising under a different name.

All actions approved in the Articles are for the “CYCLISTS’ TOURING CLUB”. Where do the articles allow for trading or advertising under a different name?


1.8.25

Steady rider
Posts: 2160
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: DEMAND FOR A POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB

Postby Steady rider » 19 Mar 2016, 8:33pm

1.8.25 To do all such other lawful things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the
above objects or any of them.


This is the nearest but is general and not specific to the name or brand issue.

1.7 The objects for which the Club is established (the Objects) are to:
........1.7.1 promote community participation in healthy recreation by promoting the amateur sport of
cycling, cycle touring and associated amateur sports;
........1.7.2 preserve and protect the health and safety of the public by encouraging and facilitating cycling
and the safety of cyclists;
........1.7.3 advance education by whatever means the trustees think fit, including the provision of cycling,
training and educational activities related to cycling;
........1.7.4 promote the conservation and protection of the environment.


The 'Objects' do not contain any reference to promoting the CTC or increasing its profile or branding. 1.8.25 does not directly apply to branding.

The whole articles are based on the given name and without provision to change that name or re - brand. The Objects and support for them also stems from the membership.
If a significant number of members object to a brand name change, it may be counter productive. My view is, if the Articles had details for providing a new brand name that would have been sufficient to proceed with due care but as they stand the case is not sufficiently strong.