Jump to content

SYC 2013 Notice of Motion


HeyJoe

Recommended Posts

Regarding the Notice of Motion to be put to the Sandringham Yacht Club members at the 2013 Ordinary General Meeting.

 

I have to say that as an SYC member I feel pretty insulted that the general committee have proposed that the membership of the club should not have the right to nominate or vote for flag officer positions within the club.

 

What are they saying about the judgement of the members to decide on the direction that they, the members, think the club should take?

 

I don't accept at face value the explanation that the intent of the motion is "to ensure that those elected as Flag Officers of the Club have attained the required knowledge and understanding of the complexity of the club's deverse business operations etc etc".

 

The whole point of the motion is to remove the right of members to vote for their preferred candidate. Flag Officers will be appointed by a committee.

 

Also what are they saying about the management team at the club? Has the general committee lost faith in the Chief Executive Officer, someone who is employed by the club for precisely that reason - to be across all the business operations of the club?

 

Remember people, all that is required for evil to flourish, is for good men (and women) to do nothing.

 

Attend the OGM (2000hrs Tuesday 19th March 2013). If you believe this is a good motion, then vote for it. If you think this issue smells, then vote it down. Don't sit on the fence and whinge about where the faceless men are taking the club a year or two from now, because if you relenquish the right to elect the leaders of OUR club to a small clique I don't think they'll be giving up their new found power any time soon.

 

Start a conversation with fellow members - don't let this one just slide through.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless your club has some very strange bylaws, this would almost certainly have to be dealt with as a bylaw amendment, since that is the document where the method of selecting officers should be defined. Make sure that all the i's have been dotted and the t's crossed with regard to the procedure for amending your bylaws, which should be found in the bylaws themselves, usually near the end of that document.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If that gets up then I reckon it puts in doubt whether SYC is actually a club. Certainly not in spirit.

 

Watch this space. I bet RYCT are just itching to do the same. It's already hard enough to get someone with independent thought onto the Board.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If that gets up then I reckon it puts in doubt whether SYC is actually a club. Certainly not in spirit.

 

Watch this space. I bet RYCT are just itching to do the same. It's already hard enough to get someone with independent thought onto the Board.

 

It's a multimillion dollar business isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This would surely require a change to the club's constitution. Usually that requires 2/3 majority or similar. Unless there is general apathy it should be relatively simple to have the motion voted down. It certainly sounds like it should be tossed out.

 

The obvious intent is to establish a "closed shop" where only those with the blessing of the current management committee (however called) can become a member of the MC. Often this is the de facto situation anyway, but an appearance of democracy is retained if members have to endorse the candidates put forward.

 

You will almost certainly have a club member who owns a printing business. Have him (or her) make up several hundred bar coasters with a picture of a guillotine on them and spread them around. Bumper stickers with "Viva le Revolution" might help also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On first read of the NOM I must admit to being gob smacked by the whole idea.

Removing the decision making from the general club members to "annointed" selected club members is one hell of a coup if the proposer, seconder and their backers get this through.

I tried to figure out what is the reasoning behind this?

Then it came to me, quite simple really.

Since the new clubhouse came into being, SYC has gone from a Sailing Club which supported limited functions, to a Function Centre with a sailing problem.

This NOM is simply the first step in removing the sailing problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think you are reading more things into this motion than actually exist. On my reading there is no "sinister" intent to prevent members from voting for flag officer positions. Also remember that members vote for General Committee - when an election is required.

 

The motion's intent, on my reading, is to ensure that Flag Officer candidiates are familiar with the current strategies/priorities of the Club and the way the governance operates... which, personally, I support as it helps to ensure that longer-term projects actually get done, and not delayed due to the 2-year turnover of Flag Officers.

 

However, I do think that the 5-year period could be a little restrictive.... but agree with the intent as stated on the motion.

 

There is nothing in the motion to support your statement that " Flag Officers will be appointed by a committee".

 

Also can't see how the motion is "..removing the decision making from the general club members to "annointed" selected club member..." The decision making in the Club is still driven by (the member-elected) General Committee from a policy/strategic perspective and the management team from an operational perspective.

 

 

Also worth noting that this motion has been raised by a Member..... not General Committee.

 

 

Are you are viewing this impartially, or perhaps have a personal agenda which benefits from distributing false and misleading information on public forums like this? <_<

 

May be an interesting OGM coming up...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Notice of Motion to be put to the Sandringham Yacht Club members at the 2013 Ordinary General Meeting.

 

I have to say that as an SYC member I feel pretty insulted that the general committee have proposed that the membership of the club should not have the right to nominate or vote for flag officer positions within the club.

 

What are they saying about the judgement of the members to decide on the direction that they, the members, think the club should take?

 

I don't accept at face value the explanation that the intent of the motion is "to ensure that those elected as Flag Officers of the Club have attained the required knowledge and understanding of the complexity of the club's deverse business operations etc etc".

 

The whole point of the motion is to remove the right of members to vote for their preferred candidate. Flag Officers will be appointed by a committee.

 

Also what are they saying about the management team at the club? Has the general committee lost faith in the Chief Executive Officer, someone who is employed by the club for precisely that reason - to be across all the business operations of the club?

 

Remember people, all that is required for evil to flourish, is for good men (and women) to do nothing.

 

Attend the OGM (2000hrs Tuesday 19th March 2013). If you believe this is a good motion, then vote for it. If you think this issue smells, then vote it down. Don't sit on the fence and whinge about where the faceless men are taking the club a year or two from now, because if you relenquish the right to elect the leaders of OUR club to a small clique I don't think they'll be giving up their new found power any time soon.

 

Start a conversation with fellow members - don't let this one just slide through.

 

I am not a member of your club but have been on enough boards to say with confidence that...

 

If you don't like the way the org is going or being run then get on the board yourself and "be the change that you want to see happen"...

 

My 2 cents...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Notice of Motion to be put to the Sandringham Yacht Club members at the 2013 Ordinary General Meeting.

 

I have to say that as an SYC member I feel pretty insulted that the general committee have proposed that the membership of the club should not have the right to nominate or vote for flag officer positions within the club.

 

What are they saying about the judgement of the members to decide on the direction that they, the members, think the club should take?

 

I don't accept at face value the explanation that the intent of the motion is "to ensure that those elected as Flag Officers of the Club have attained the required knowledge and understanding of the complexity of the club's deverse business operations etc etc".

 

The whole point of the motion is to remove the right of members to vote for their preferred candidate. Flag Officers will be appointed by a committee.

 

Also what are they saying about the management team at the club? Has the general committee lost faith in the Chief Executive Officer, someone who is employed by the club for precisely that reason - to be across all the business operations of the club?

 

Remember people, all that is required for evil to flourish, is for good men (and women) to do nothing.

 

Attend the OGM (2000hrs Tuesday 19th March 2013). If you believe this is a good motion, then vote for it. If you think this issue smells, then vote it down. Don't sit on the fence and whinge about where the faceless men are taking the club a year or two from now, because if you relenquish the right to elect the leaders of OUR club to a small clique I don't think they'll be giving up their new found power any time soon.

 

Start a conversation with fellow members - don't let this one just slide through.

 

I am not a member of your club but have been on enough boards to say with confidence that...

 

If you don't like the way the org is going or being run then get on the board yourself and "be the change that you want to see happen"...

 

My 2 cents...

 

heard that line before

 

but if your Sauna is being used for a self gratifying glory-hole

 

Jumping in and getting involved just might not be an option to turn things around

 

the process of creating a self gratifying glory-hole

 

begins with alienating those not approving of the desires of those thinking it's a good idea

 

 

Eventually the justification becomes:

 

"They are all volunteers" followed by "If they don't do it who will"

 

And the ever popular "No one else is stepping up if you don't like it get involved"

 

If you didn't like the Nazi Death Camps

 

Getting evolved and working your way Up the chain Was No Way to end the problem

 

on a smaller scale this situation is not so different

 

 

a commitment for a BOD position is Nothing for one with a personal agenda

 

and One Hell of Allot of a commitment for someone with pure thoughts just wanting to Give Back

 

The one w a personal agenda will always Push Harder to get the position they NEED

 

Truly Sad "TRULY"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmm, if it was me, I'd be voting against the motion. After that I would be doing my best to vote out whoever on G.C. was stupid enough to propose it in the first place.

 

Without naming names, we on the other side are just emerging from an "unofficial" version of such behaviour where, for a number of years, if rumours are true, the flags decided on club policy before meetings and the G.C was just a rubber stamp. Thankfully that is no longer the case and we now have a strategy, a road map and are starting to implement it.

 

Having worked as a CEO the purpose of a GC or Board is to keep the CEO's feet firmly on the ground. The Board doesn't need to strategise at all, they need to be expert in keeping the CEO under control. He/she does the strategy in line with the brief given to her by the Board. The primary job of the Board is not to swear allegiance to the strategy, its to make sure that the CEO has done their homework and that what is proposed makes common sense and it is translated into action properly.

 

If the strategy doesn't make sense then its the Boards job to fire the CEO and get a new one, nothing else.

 

To put it another way, its not the Boards job to make the strategy work. Its the Boards job to make sure the CEO makes the strategy work and protect the clubs assets in the process. That requires a finely tuned bullshit detector and balls of steel if it becomes necessary to face down a rampant CEO.

 

To put it yet another way, for fucks sake contact the Institute of Company Directors. Learn about Corporate Governance - what it is and isn't. Leave it to the members to vote for who they want and if there is any doubt about abilities, go and do a course at AICD.

 

If you do anything else, you are asking for trouble and you will get it in spades - leaving some poor bastard of a commodore the job of "cleaning house" as Club President Shaun McCullough had to do at the Ski Club of Victoria all those years ago. One or Two other clubs have had to do the same thing for the same reason.

 

Sorry for making a non humorous post but the last thing I would wish on you is a situation where groupthink is inevitable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

For all those conspiracy-theorists out there on this thread... this motion did not come up at SYC OGM (was withdrawn) as neither the proposer nor seconder (Note: both ordinary members and not on general committee!) could be present at the meeting.

 

But you probably already know that if you were interested enough in your Club to attend the meeting.

 

Guess you will have to go find some other unsubstaniated rumours to start.... hey I know one... how about that the evil general committee are now deliberately re-writing the Club's constitution and by-laws to otherwise achieve their sinister plans.... :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why put up a motion, and not bother to show up for it? Knew it wasn't getting up ?

maybe it was a clever way to generate interest in attending the meeting ... or not since they were not in attendance LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Notice of Motion to be put to the Sandringham Yacht Club members at the 2013 Ordinary General Meeting.

 

I have to say that as an SYC member I feel pretty insulted that the general committee have proposed that the membership of the club should not have the right to nominate or vote for flag officer positions within the club.

 

What are they saying about the judgement of the members to decide on the direction that they, the members, think the club should take?

 

I don't accept at face value the explanation that the intent of the motion is "to ensure that those elected as Flag Officers of the Club have attained the required knowledge and understanding of the complexity of the club's deverse business operations etc etc".

 

The whole point of the motion is to remove the right of members to vote for their preferred candidate. Flag Officers will be appointed by a committee.

 

Also what are they saying about the management team at the club? Has the general committee lost faith in the Chief Executive Officer, someone who is employed by the club for precisely that reason - to be across all the business operations of the club?

 

Remember people, all that is required for evil to flourish, is for good men (and women) to do nothing.

 

Attend the OGM (2000hrs Tuesday 19th March 2013). If you believe this is a good motion, then vote for it. If you think this issue smells, then vote it down. Don't sit on the fence and whinge about where the faceless men are taking the club a year or two from now, because if you relenquish the right to elect the leaders of OUR club to a small clique I don't think they'll be giving up their new found power any time soon.

 

Start a conversation with fellow members - don't let this one just slide through.

 

I am not a member of your club but have been on enough boards to say with confidence that...

 

If you don't like the way the org is going or being run then get on the board yourself and "be the change that you want to see happen"...

 

My 2 cents...

 

heard that line before

 

but if your Sauna is being used for a self gratifying glory-hole

 

Jumping in and getting involved just might not be an option to turn things around

 

the process of creating a self gratifying glory-hole

 

begins with alienating those not approving of the desires of those thinking it's a good idea

 

 

Eventually the justification becomes:

 

"They are all volunteers" followed by "If they don't do it who will"

 

And the ever popular "No one else is stepping up if you don't like it get involved"

 

If you didn't like the Nazi Death Camps

 

Getting evolved and working your way Up the chain Was No Way to end the problem

 

on a smaller scale this situation is not so different

 

 

a commitment for a BOD position is Nothing for one with a personal agenda

 

and One Hell of Allot of a commitment for someone with pure thoughts just wanting to Give Back

 

The one w a personal agenda will always Push Harder to get the position they NEED

 

Truly Sad "TRULY"

What a momentous day. I find I can understand Woody, AND agree with his description of club politics - The same all over the world it seems..

I'm worried that Woody is so lucid though. Can some local SA SD'ers go check on him?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why put up a motion, and not bother to show up for it? Knew it wasn't getting up ?

 

Suspect you already know this (or would if you were there and listening).... proposer overseas and seconder unwell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...