Trustee elections 2017

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14154
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby mjr » 27 Sep 2017, 11:32pm

gaz wrote:
mjr wrote:And another thread in this forum discussing the ballot has currently been removed.

It has since been merged into this one.

Edited somewhat, as you can see from the lack of sense it now makes!
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.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13769
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby gaz » 28 Sep 2017, 8:23am

The thread was two posts, an OP by steady rider and your own reply. The former has been edited, your reply is no longer in context.

IMO the editing was in line with published forum moderation policy and the revised verison of steady rider's post makes more sense. YMMV.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Steady rider
Posts: 2172
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby Steady rider » 28 Sep 2017, 9:19am

It appears that nearly every time Cycling UK do anything connected with elections or how the club is run, a degree of control is taken to ensure the outcome suits their own agenda. Other views by members are not allowed to be fully included by means of selection processes, conditions for AGM motions and changes to procedures. The bias shown in the current elections being one example. What was once a club representing members with regional representatives and fully accountable to members has taken on a different format.

thirdcrank
Posts: 28648
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby thirdcrank » 28 Sep 2017, 9:35am

Steady rider wrote: ... What was once a club representing members with regional representatives and fully accountable to members has taken on a different format.
(My emphasis)


Replace the bit I've underlined with "is now a charity" and it may be a bit easier to move on.

Steady rider
Posts: 2172
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby Steady rider » 28 Sep 2017, 9:40am

Even 'Charities' should be fully accountable, not bias and fair in dealings.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13769
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby gaz » 28 Sep 2017, 10:31am

http://www.cyclinguk.org/sites/default/ ... r-2016.pdf

App.6 wrote:The Nominations will provide a statement on each individual candidate stating whether:

• The candidate meets the person specification, is fully competent to carry out the trustee role and would complement the skill mix on the Board
• The candidate meets the person specification and is fully competent to carry out the trustee role
• The committee has no recommendation to make on the candidate
• The candidate does not meet the person specification and is not recommended for election

All candidates shall be entitled to stand for election should they wish following receipt of their statement. The election material will note what statement has been applied to each candidate.

The voting papers state all eight candidates either meet or exceed the second category:
These candidates exceeded the Trustee criteria by offering two or more of the additional skills, qualities and characteristics sought.

The voting papers place four candidates in the first category, giving them "glowing" endorsements:
The Nominations Committee have also endorsed four candidates whom they feel match the skills required currently for the board.

The election system Members now have is broadly the one that Members voted for in the Governance Review Motion at the 2016 AGM, including the endorsement of individual candidates by the Nominations Commitee.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Psamathe
Posts: 10606
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby Psamathe » 28 Sep 2017, 10:33am

Steady rider wrote:It appears that nearly every time Cycling UK do anything connected with elections or how the club is run, a degree of control is taken to ensure the outcome suits their own agenda. Other views by members are not allowed to be fully included by means of selection processes, conditions for AGM motions and changes to procedures. The bias shown in the current elections being one example. What was once a club representing members with regional representatives and fully accountable to members has taken on a different format.

It's the way CUK operates under the current CEO. N Korea and Kim Jong Un would be proud.

What is maybe more amazing that the pre-selection committees, regime telling electorate how to vote, etc. is that people come on and support the organisation given their modus operandi.

Ian

thirdcrank
Posts: 28648
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby thirdcrank » 28 Sep 2017, 10:45am

Steady rider wrote:Even 'Charities' should be fully accountable, not bias and fair in dealings.


They are accountable, although I don't know to what extent that can be described as "fully." The main accountability is the personal accountability of the trustees, under the oversight of the Charities Commission, to the courts. This is altruism: in voting for the charity conversion, the CTC membership gave away what they collectively owned for the greater good of cycling as a whole. Some may have been misled into believing that nothing would change and that's unfortunate, but they were warned. Anybody who was being selfish in believing that charity status would simply be a jolly good tax-saving wheeze without strings attached is now discovering the truth.

Having said all that, whether membership is up or down, it hasn't collapsed so a lot of people must be sufficiently satisfied to stump up for membership. No way of us knowing whether that's the same people renewing or new converts to cycling - the latter being "a good thing" but either way, the satisfaction seems quite high.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13769
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby gaz » 28 Sep 2017, 10:56am

Members can tell the Nominations Committee exactly where to put their endorsements if they so wish.

I've voted, four candidates now have my personal endorsement.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Psamathe
Posts: 10606
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby Psamathe » 28 Sep 2017, 11:07am

thirdcrank wrote:..... No way of us knowing whether that's the same people renewing or new converts to cycling - the latter being "a good thing" but either way, the satisfaction seems quite high.

I saw something on this forum (more than a few months ago) giving churn - surprisingly high.
https://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=113397&hilit=membership+leaving&start=105#p1130757 wrote:...it was hard to fathom how 16,000 people had joined but Membership dropped overall.

Which in itself is staggering, both that they can't fathom what is happening and that so many are leaving.

If they can fathom 16,000 joining but membership dropping - obviously more people are leaving than are joining! (amazed they can't work that out for themselves). So more than 16,000 are leaving!

Ian

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13769
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby gaz » 28 Sep 2017, 11:51am

Churn amongst the Membership is nothing new. Oct 2013 Council minutes, Item 15 appears to show 14,000 members "leave" every year, presumably meaning that they do not renew.

16,000 seems a significant rise on that "average", it is disappointing to note that there is little apparent effort to determine why the figure has risen.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14154
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby mjr » 28 Sep 2017, 12:10pm

gaz wrote:http://www.cyclinguk.org/sites/default/files/governancepaper-2016.pdf

App.6 wrote:The Nominations will provide a statement on each individual candidate stating whether:

• The candidate meets the person specification, is fully competent to carry out the trustee role and would complement the skill mix on the Board
• The candidate meets the person specification and is fully competent to carry out the trustee role
• The committee has no recommendation to make on the candidate
• The candidate does not meet the person specification and is not recommended for election

All candidates shall be entitled to stand for election should they wish following receipt of their statement. The election material will note what statement has been applied to each candidate.

I'm not seeing the power of the vetters to make those "exceeds" statements or extra endorsements there. Have I overlooked it or have the vetters exceeded their powers?
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.

Psamathe
Posts: 10606
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby Psamathe » 28 Sep 2017, 12:49pm

gaz wrote:Churn amongst the Membership is nothing new. Oct 2013 Council minutes, Item 15 appears to show 14,000 members "leave" every year, presumably meaning that they do not renew.

16,000 seems a significant rise on that "average", it is disappointing to note that there is little apparent effort to determine why the figure has risen.

When you are losing more than 25% of your membership each year and not asking why or what is going on it really makes you wonder what abilities and experience those running the organisation have. Any company losing than many customers would be urgently researching what they are doing wrong. CTC/CUK just seem to identify and overlook it.

Ian

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13769
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby gaz » 28 Sep 2017, 1:14pm

mjr wrote:I'm not seeing the power of the vetters to make those "exceeds" statements or extra endorsements there. Have I overlooked it or have the vetters exceeded their powers?

I would have preferred that the Nominations Committee had stuck to a strictly literal interpretation of those endorsement options and had attached nothing more than those exact wordings to every candidates' personal election statements.

As for determining whether or not they are exceeding their powers, that would need me to know what those powers are. I do not.

The Trustees have previously confirmed that the version of the Terms of Reference for the Nominations Committee included in the report of the Governance Working Group approved by the 2016 AGM was not the final version of the Terms of Reference approved by the Trustees. I have quoted from the former as I have no access to the latter.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

PH
Posts: 7663
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Trustee elections 2017

Postby PH » 28 Sep 2017, 2:08pm

Psamathe wrote:
gaz wrote:Churn amongst the Membership is nothing new. Oct 2013 Council minutes, Item 15 appears to show 14,000 members "leave" every year, presumably meaning that they do not renew.

16,000 seems a significant rise on that "average", it is disappointing to note that there is little apparent effort to determine why the figure has risen.

When you are losing more than 25% of your membership each year and not asking why or what is going on it really makes you wonder what abilities and experience those running the organisation have.
Ian


There may well be some analysis of these figures, I'd be surprised if there wasn't. For example, how many of those leaving rejoin shortly afterwards? I've left and rejoined three times over the last two decades, but never for more than a few weeks, once because I forgot, and the other two times because it wasn't convenient to pay the annual membership in the month it was due. Then, how many of those leaving were recruited via promotions? And how does that compare to other organisations? We don't know many are no longer cycling, a large proportion of the traditional membership are at an age where that's increasingly likely and sadly some may no longer be with us.
It'll be interesting to see how the long overdue ability to pay for membership monthly helps recruit and retain members. I know from a MG point of view it makes it an easier sell. On a positive note, my local group has gained around eight members in the last year which is considerably up on recent years.