Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Special Resolution for AGM
#1
Just got our letters today.

On first reading looks like a power grab from members by the executive effectively emasculating us from any say in the future.

I'm minded to vote against.

Am I reading it correctly - anyone got any views?
Reply
#2
(27-01-2018, 11:45 AM)DaveC Wrote: Just got our letters today.

On first reading looks like a power grab from members by the executive effectively emasculating us from any say in the future.

I'm minded to vote against.

Am I reading it correctly - anyone got any views?

I would be more worried about the special resolution if I thought that the current committee arrangements gave a strong representation to the members.
I recall when our good friend the late Kim Jones stood for election. He would have given members just the sort of voice they need but he got nowhere.
There's a Members' Forum on 19 February before the AGM on 28 February so that is a good opportunity to discuss the issue in depth.
Keep up-to-date with County Cricket at http://deepextracover.com/
Reply
#3
(27-01-2018, 11:45 AM)DaveC Wrote: Just got our letters today.

On first reading looks like a power grab from members by the executive effectively emasculating us from any say in the future.

I'm minded to vote against.

Am I reading it correctly - anyone got any views?

Yes that's pretty much how I understand it.  I think currently there is a Committee (which is members' representatives) and a Board (50% members /  50% other (execs plus appointeds).  In theory it's the Committee in charge (but my guess it's the Board that runs the show.)  If the rules change the Board is in charge and the "Members Committee" "Will have no power to make decisions binding on the club."

The board will still be 50% members but a member will only be able to stand for election with the support of the Nomination Committee "To ensure that the appropriate breadth of skills and experience within the Board is maintained."  It may be unduly cynical but I think this means only people like us need apply.  As another poster has said the truth of the matter is the ordinary member doesn't get involved and the club is run by a small circle.  But under the present rules there is always the possibility of change which is much reduced by the proposals in the Special Resolution.  So I'll be voting against. Unless I'm missing something.
Reply
#4
There's a strange answer in the Q&A.

Says if 2/3 of the members don't agree to the new proposals then the Committee will take it upon itself to decide what to do. basically no change is no option.
Reply
#5
(29-01-2018, 12:12 PM)Jon Wrote: There's a strange answer in the Q&A.

Says if 2/3 of the members don't agree to the new proposals then the Committee will take it upon itself to decide what to do. basically no change is no option.

I read it as saying an SGM will be called and we'll keep on voting until we get the answer we want.

I get Terry's point above but surely having an albeit small say in proceedings is better than what's proposed. FWIW I think the Sport England governance argument is pretty specious and lacking in any veracity.

We've voted against.
Reply
#6
(29-01-2018, 12:49 PM)DaveC Wrote: I read it as saying an SGM will be called and we'll keep on voting until we get the answer we want.

I get Terry's point above but surely having an albeit small say in proceedings is better than what's proposed. FWIW I think the Sport England governance argument is pretty specious and lacking in any veracity.

We've voted against.

Thanks. I'll almost certainly be voting against although I may attend the forum first.

If the governance argument is true (and I'm sceptical like you) then the obvious thing to do is disband the Management Board if these proposals are voted against and make the Committee the one unified body making decisions. They can co-opt the CEO and finance director.

I don't recall the Birmingham Bears name change ever being put to members to I don't see much if any accountability in place at the moment.
Reply
#7
I read it and all I know is that I am very confused!! I don't really understand any of it...If someone could put it in more friendly terms I may understand I would be very grateful!
Reply
#8
(29-01-2018, 06:46 PM)emily_marshall Wrote: I read it and all I know is that I am very confused!! I don't really understand any of it...If someone could put it in more friendly terms I may understand I would be very grateful!

Presently the decision making body of the Club is the Committee elected by the Members. CEO and Finance Director join the Committee on an ex officio basis.

However the Committee has in more recent times delegated a lot of its powers to a Management Board consisting of 5 members of the committee, 3 appointed Directors and CEO and finance director.

IMHO this is poor governance in any case because it dilutes direct accountability to the Members who the Club is supposed to belong to.

However what is happening now is a Special Resolution is being tabled to create just one body - a board to run the Club. the justification for this is modern governance practice suggested by Sport England that there is clear decision making and diversity.

In my opinion this could just as well be achieved by returning to a democratic and accountable committee structure ie one body which is the committee and abolish the management board.

As a sop they do propose a membership committee with extremely limited powers and role.

So basically its a power grab in which management of the club is kept further away from the Members and put in the hands of an all powerful Board.

It's not really clear who this board is accountable to?

Suspect the real agenda is making 'Edgbaston Stadium' ever more central to the detriment of Warwickshire County Cricket Club.

it was very amusing that snowball's letterhead gave Edgbaston Stadium as the address but the reply paid envelope gives the address of the traditional name of the County Ground, Edgbaston.
Reply
#9
(29-01-2018, 08:04 PM)Jon Wrote:
(29-01-2018, 06:46 PM)emily_marshall Wrote: I read it and all I know is that I am very confused!! I don't really understand any of it...If someone could put it in more friendly terms I may understand I would be very grateful!

Presently the decision making body of the Club is the Committee elected by the Members. CEO and Finance Director join the Committee on an ex officio basis.

However the Committee has in more recent times delegated a lot of its powers to a Management Board consisting of 5 members of the committee, 3 appointed Directors and CEO and finance director.

IMHO this is poor governance in any case because it dilutes direct accountability to the Members who the Club is supposed to belong to.

However what is happening now is a Special Resolution is being tabled to create just one body - a board to run the Club. the justification for this is modern governance practice suggested by Sport England that there is clear decision making and diversity.

In my opinion this could just as well be achieved by returning to a democratic and accountable committee structure ie one body which is the committee and abolish the management board.

As a sop they do propose a membership committee with extremely limited powers and role.

So basically its a power grab in which management of the club is kept further away from the Members and put in the hands of an all powerful Board.

It's not really clear who this board is accountable to?

Suspect the real agenda is making 'Edgbaston Stadium' ever more central to the detriment of Warwickshire County Cricket Club.

it was very amusing that snowball's letterhead gave Edgbaston Stadium as the address but the reply paid envelope gives the address of the traditional name of the County Ground, Edgbaston.

Right okay...sort of got you! So they basically want to take power away from us as members in sort of decision making and our role and keep it as management? I genuinely think it was deliberate for us all to not understand it!
Reply
#10
Now that I've heard one side of the argument, I'd be interested in hearing from someone who supports the proposals (if there's anyone on here who does!) and then I'll make up my mind.
Proud to be a Bear
Reply
#11
When Povey was appointed we reached a stage whereby it appeared all decisions were made by him or at least with his approval. At the same time paying an annual membership was/is no more than buying a season ticket at a cost saving to the supporter. It would appear this resolution is simply making this assumption a legal reality.

I am not convinced returning to the club being run solely by elected members would be a good thing. When it was like that with Amiss at the helm just remember how run down the pavilion had become and how the club came very close to losing its test match/big match status.

There needs to be some middle ground - perhaps something along the lines of UK Parliament. A professional management board making all the decisions but answerable to a Members Elected committee who have the power to veto.

Am I reading it correctly?
LE - aka John
Reply
#12
(30-01-2018, 12:50 AM)Leicester Exile Wrote: When Povey was appointed we reached a stage whereby it appeared all decisions were made by him or at least with his approval. At the same time paying an annual membership was/is no more than buying a season ticket at a cost saving to the supporter. It would appear this resolution is simply making this assumption a legal reality.

I am not convinced returning to the club being run solely by elected members would be a good thing. When it was like that with Amiss at the helm just remember how run down the pavilion had become and how the club came very close to losing its test match/big match status.

There needs to be some middle ground - perhaps something along the lines of UK Parliament. A professional management board making all the decisions but answerable to a Members Elected committee who have the power to veto.

Am I reading it correctly?

I'm against the proposal.  But you make a good job of making the case for voting yes.  All I would say is, if you want some middle ground (and I'd be fine with your suggestion of some real powers for a member's committee to keep an eye on a professional board) then you should vote no.  Otherwise the board's proposal will be adopted, the nominations committe with a majority of non members will get to decide who goes on the board and the members' committee will have no power at all.  The board have already said if it's a "no" vote they will come back with more proposals, so let's take our time and get it right.
Reply
#13
I agree RB - I was not making a case for a yes vote but instead going against a members' committee making all decisions.
LE - aka John
Reply
#14
Just to say that I had a really interesting interview with Norman Gascoigne on Tuesday. 
He had a lot to say about both the special resolution and the financial results as well as some more general observations about (e.g.) the future of the county championship. 
I will post a link when the Deep Extra Cover article appears shortly.
In the meantime, I would strongly suggest that, before making a decision on how to vote, members do attend the Forum on 28 February. 
I may be like Donald Trump who allegedly tends to adopt the views of the last person who spoke to him; but I have to say that Norman convinced me that the resolution makes a lot of sense both for the club and for us members.
Keep up-to-date with County Cricket at http://deepextracover.com/
Reply
#15
Any news on when the article will appear, Terry? Thanks
Reply
#16
(12-02-2018, 03:12 PM)Malc Wrote: Any news on when the article will appear, Terry? Thanks

Should be online this evening and I will post a link.
And I will also do a slightly longer version just for bearsfans because there are parts of the interview that won't be relevant to cricket supporters generally but will be of interest to Warwickshire members and other users of this forum.
I will try to get the longer version done by the end of tomorrow.
Keep up-to-date with County Cricket at http://deepextracover.com/
Reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Terry's post:
Leicester Exile
#17
(12-02-2018, 06:56 PM)Terry Wrote:
(12-02-2018, 03:12 PM)Malc Wrote: Any news on when the article will appear, Terry? Thanks

Should be online this evening and I will post a link.
And I will also do a slightly longer version just for bearsfans because there are parts of the interview that won't be relevant to cricket supporters generally but will be of interest to Warwickshire members and other users of this forum.
I will try to get the longer version done by the end of tomorrow.

Thanks for doing this Terry, be a great help to us all!!
Reply
#18
Here's my interview with Norman Gascoigne:
http://deepextracover.com/2018/02/propos...s-are-run/
There are a few extra points that he made that didn't make it into the article and I will post these later - plus he had some observations about the club finances and the future of cricket generally.
Keep up-to-date with County Cricket at http://deepextracover.com/
Reply
#19
(13-02-2018, 10:49 AM)Terry Wrote: Here's my interview with Norman Gascoigne:
http://deepextracover.com/2018/02/propos...s-are-run/
There are a few extra points that he made that didn't make it into the article and I will post these later - plus he had some observations about the club finances and the future of cricket generally.

Thanks Terry, that's cleared things up for me. I think I'll be voting in favour.
Proud to be a Bear
Reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Exiled Bear's post:
parkfield bear
#20
My reading of this interview is that the club will be more professionally run to match the large sums of money now generated. Thank you Terry for this interview.

I still think membership is little more than a season ticket but then it has felt like that for a number of years. And that is no bad thing - the club does need to be run by experts in their field and not just because they are enthusiastic supporters.
LE - aka John
Reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Leicester Exile's post:
Warleybear


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)