Attempt by our Committee to change the Club rules without notifying the members

[No Regrets]

Either you're a Club person, or you are not.

And either way, it matters to nobody but yourself!

I joined a club 6 years ago, and have enjoyed many benefits, and a very small amount of drawbacks, which makes it well worthwhile to keep my membership alive....

It has to be said (And has been in this thread!) that if you don't like whats happening in your club, you really should move on ASAP, and let them get on with it. If you can't find a club you find agreeable, then you probably don't fall into the 'Club person' category and in everybody's interests you would need to change your opinions and habits, or 'stay single'

Simple as that...

 

[Cantata]

.................Simple as that...

Indeed. I've never understood this anti-club stuff that springs up on here from time to time. I've belonged to various club for the last 55 years and simply do not recognise the stuff that people describe. I got back just now from our cruising club Sunday lunchtime, the place full of happy smiley friendly people. I've made lifelong friends in clubs over the years. I visit clubs when we are away, never failed to get a friendly welcome. It's all a mystery to me, and ever shall it remain so.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Indeed. I've never understood this anti-club stuff that springs up on here from time to time. I've belonged to various club for the last 55 years and simply do not recognise the stuff that people describe. I got back just now from our cruising club Sunday lunchtime, the place full of happy smiley friendly people. I've made lifelong friends in clubs over the years. I visit clubs when we are away, never failed to get a friendly welcome. It's all a mystery to me, and ever shall it remain so.

I was a member at several gliding clubs over the years. Most ran well, some ran very well and a few were riddled with internecine bitchiness and politics. Which, of course, some people like. The difficulty comes when a previously harmonious club gets taken over by committee members determined to exercise their authority.

 

[Daydream believer]

Either you're a Club person, or you are not.

And either way, it matters to nobody but yourself!

I joined a club 6 years ago, and have enjoyed many benefits, and a very small amount of drawbacks, which makes it well worthwhile to keep my membership alive....

It has to be said (And has been in this thread!) that if you don't like whats happening in your club, you really should move on ASAP, and let them get on with it. If you can't find a club you find agreeable, then you probably don't fall into the 'Club person' category and in everybody's interests you would need to change your opinions and habits, or 'stay single'

Simple as that...

That is a fair comment.
One always have to show a bit of give & take when acting within a group
I just feel that this thread has given a false impression of "club life" & has certainly been bad for the club
If one does not like the club move on .
Do not air bitchiness to all & sundry because some people ( some who might have been NickC's friends) like that club & this one sided airing has done them no good whatsoever

 

[JumbleDuck]

If one does not like the club move on .

But why should a long-time member of a club "move on" just because a few yahoos have taken over the committee?

 

[Daydream believer]

But why should a long-time member of a club "move on" just because a few yahoos have taken over the committee?

Who says they are " yahoos" we only have one persons description of what he feels they are like
The club members voted them in by majority & in fact the commodore was so good they asked him to do an extra stint- or so we are told
There are ways of changing the way clubs are run but you do not do it by whineing to the public. Plus you need a majority & if you do not get that then you are the one in the minority which might suggest something

Incidently i do not recall if the Op has said how long he has been a member. If he has been a long term active member- with active being the operative word- he would know how things work & how to influence the politics

In my club i do not always like the way some things are done, but i try to respect the actions of the committee & accept that there has to be give & take & i apreciate the time & effort they give
. When I really did not like something I put proposals to the membership & got knocked down.
But life moves on & I do my best for the club as an active member.


I do not put my objections on a public forum

 

[Floyd Raser]

But why should a long-time member of a club "move on" just because a few yahoos have taken over the committee?

For his own peaceful enjoyment of his hobby. The workplace is the usual source of stress for most people so why subject yourself to it in your spare time by your own choice. The last few posts here show there are some brilliant clubs out there, but equally, if you are lucky enough to find one at the first go, well done! You are a very lucky person and will never understand the anti club threads.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Who says they are " yahoos" we only have one persons description of what he feels they are like

You are assuming, erroneously, that I was referring to the committee in this case. Though in view of the engine saga and the emails we have seen since, "yahoos" seems like a charitable form of expression.

Incidently i do not recall if the Op has said how long he has been a member.

Forty years, as I recall.

 

[NickC]

Forty years, as I recall.

Not quite that long, nearer about twenty-five years.

There seems to be a lot of anti-club discussion going on here at the moment. Lets just be clear it has previously been a great Club, I have never said otherwise, and I have made many good friends there over the years. The majority of the members are very nice people. It is only the current Committee who seem to be intent on rocking the boat, probably for their own agenda.

 

[Poecheng]

It has just been pointed out to me by a member that the whole vote by the Committee was unconstitutional anyway.



At the time of the vote there were TEN committee members in addition to the Flag Officers & Officers.

Then there was a proper committee because there were four non-Flag officer/Officer committee members. The fact that there was more than four does not matter - there were four there.

Get out while you are sane !!!

 

[NickC]

but i try to respect the actions of the committee & accept that there has to be give & take

Would you really! Even if they were completely ignoring the Club Constitution and making-up the rules as they go along to suit their own agenda. Even completely ignoring all the requirements of the RYA document Expulsion of Members.

This has nothing to do with give & take, it is simply a consortium of Committee members abusing their position for purposes of Personal Vendetta.

 

[NickC]

The fact that there was more than four does not matter - there were four there.
Get out while you are sane !!!

The fact that there is more than four does indeed matter. The ten should have been reduced to four as per the Club Constitution by a vote of the members. There should then have been only the remaining four allowed to vote on the issue of expulsion, not ten.

Sanity's not real, it's only a state of mind!

 

[Poecheng]

The fact that there is more than four does indeed matter. The ten should have been reduced to four as per the Club Constitution by a vote of the members. There should then have been only the remaining four allowed to vote on the issue of expulsion, not ten.

Sanity's not real, it's only a state of mind!

Does the constitution say "four and no more than four"? If not then I do not agree. If there are ten then there are certainly four.

 

[NickC]

Who says they are " yahoos" we only have one persons description of what he feels they are like

Perhaps you missed the pictures of what they did to my boat in that outboard engine thread. Assume you must have missed the rather arrogant emails posted as well?

The club members voted them in by majority & in fact the commodore was so good they asked him to do an extra stint

I know for a fact that at least one other person had offered to take up the role of Commodore but seemingly the Committee overruled that and the members were not given a choice.

 

[NickC]

Does the constitution say "four and no more than four"? If not then I do not agree. If there are ten then there are certainly four.

What it actually says is:

6.2 - The management of the Club shall be in the hands of the Committee which shall consist of the Flag Officers, Officers and four other Members of the Club. The immediate past Commodore shall be an ex-officio member of the Committee.

6.3 - At every Annual General Meeting, all the members of the Committee shall retire but are eligible for immediate re-election, except that no person shall be eligible for election as Commodore at more than three successive Annual General Meetings. The retiring Committee is deemed to hold office until the end of the Annual General Meeting.

7.2 - If the number of candidates duly proposed and seconded exceeds the number of vacancies to be filled, the election shall be by ballot.

So that is not 'at least' four, or 'four or more' but just simply four.

 

[Poecheng]

Reading that, I do not think the committee's decision can be challenged on the basis there were ten "other Members of the Club". This would be interpreted as requiring not less than four but no upper ceiling since any greater number necessarily includes four. It is not ideal as it was meant to be "just four" but no challenge would be successful on that score ultimately as there is ambiguity.
If the Commodore has done his stint by being elected at three successive AGMs (I have seen the hint but not read all the thread so have no idea) then he is ineligible for election. Either the club changes the rules or his election is ultra vires and void. A person elected when ineligible may be personally liable for decisions carried out purportedly when in office.

 

[Pete54]

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

It would seem that a reasonable number of members want a man who comes across as a right pain, out of their club. He portrays himself as a great fighter of wrongs and injustice and does so by quote the minutiae of the rules. Well I suspect hell will freeze over before they let him back - regardless of whom initially was right or wrong. The situation has irretrievably broken down - not much helped by the OP inadvertently letting readers know which club it was - and the OP now has to walk, because he cannot get back across the bridges he has burnt.

Does that mean the saga is over? My judgement is the OP, like all pendants will not let it e........

 

[NickC]

Reading that, I do not think the committee's decision can be challenged on the basis there were ten "other Members of the Club". This would be interpreted as requiring not less than four but no upper ceiling since any greater number necessarily includes four. It is not ideal as it was meant to be "just four" but no challenge would be successful on that score ultimately as there is ambiguity.

Not sure I agree with you there, what is the point of rule 7.2 then?

If the Commodore has done his stint by being elected at three successive AGMs (I have seen the hint but not read all the thread so have no idea) then he is ineligible for election. Either the club changes the rules or his election is ultra vires and void. A person elected when ineligible may be personally liable for decisions carried out purportedly when in office.

Yep, he has had his three years and was not eligible for re-election at the recent AGM. However the members were not offered a vote on this despite the fact that other(s) has offered to take on the role.

 

[Daydream believer]

Yep, he has had his three years and was not eligible for re-election at the recent AGM. However the members were not offered a vote on this despite the fact that other(s) has offered to take on the role.

In our club, to become a flag officer one has to serve a few years on the committee. Too often I have been in clubs where somebody takes on a job & disappears soon after .
it may well be that the committee were possibly aware of some failing in the " volunteer" that would suggest something similar or make them unsuitable.
normally these " volunteers" need a proposer & seconder but if there was none then that suggests that it was not a deffinate proposal, just an off the cuff comment without substence.

Typically someone ( often a newish member)becomes quite vocal but when placed in such a position they do not meet expectation. I recall one such person who was all up for change. He was voted on the committee, missed lots of meetings, when he was there sat fiddling with his phone, rarely added to debate & when given a job to do performed it so poorly that a major event, normally sold out, was poorly attended

he then resigned from the club full of criticism of it & committee claiming he had been shouted down etc etc which i am told was totally untrue

I have seen this in non yachting clubs & i am certain it happens elswhere. So whilst committees sometimes seem to resist these people perhaps they actually have a point

But that does not mean to say it has happened here

 

[Poecheng]

Not sure I agree with you there, what is the point of rule 7.2 then?

Apologies, I think you are be correct (I had been focussing on 6.2 not 7.2) that the committee is comprised exclusively of those identified in 6.2 and who arrive there via r.7.2. There is no scope for ten "other members" other than by ignoring r.7.2.


[/QUOTE] Yep, he has had his three years and was not eligible for re-election at the recent AGM. However the members were not offered a vote on this despite the fact that other(s) has offered to take on the role.[/QUOTE]

Not sure the vote matters unless it was a vote to change r6.3 which may require an an EGM. Fact is he is ineligible and nothing short of a change to r.6.3 can make him eligible. He is an ex officio member of the Committee afterwards (r6.2) but is not Commodore on the facts outlined.

Stiffy from a solicitor is what is required. England is not what it was and needs to be great again.