DJE
Well-Known Member
3) Stand for election to the committee.
If it's anything like our club we have a lot more complainers than volunteers.
Attempt by our Committee to change the Club rules without notifying the members
- Thread starter NickC
- Start date
- Status
3) Stand for election to the committee.
If it's anything like our club we have a lot more complainers than volunteers.
NickC
Well-Known Member
When faced with what feels like totally irrational behaviour from our Committee it is sometimes necessary to get a sanity check from the wider sailing community in general.
As you will see from my post at the beginning of this thread the Club remains anonymous, I haven't identified the actual Club in question in any way. I just wanted, seemingly in the face of adversity, to obtain advice and opinion from my fellow sailors.
NickC
Well-Known Member
I've done my time on that Committee years ago in the past.
sailorman
Well-Known Member
Call an EGM stating no confidence in the current lot
Q
quimby
Guest
Blimey! Surely its just a simple case of asking the Commodore the question? Or is the status of his office is so high you are not allowed to ask?
If you are not satisfied with the answer, call for an EGM.
If you are not satisfied with the answer, call for an EGM.
NickC
Well-Known Member
Now before we continue with further updates to this thread may I please ask that no one identifies either the Club or individuals involved otherwise this thread will end up suffering the same fate as the others which were suspended due to reasons of identification.
Many thanks,
Many thanks,
PuffTheMagicDragon
Well-Known Member
I seem to be missing something, perhaps because English is not my first language.
It seems to me that the 'original version' does not make sense while the 'new' one does.
If an appeal is to be made TO the Committee over unfair/unjustified dismissal/refusal or whatever it only makes sense that any eventual appeal is lodged BY the member/s who is/are affected by the Committee's decision.
Anybody care to explain please?
It seems to me that the 'original version' does not make sense while the 'new' one does.
If an appeal is to be made TO the Committee over unfair/unjustified dismissal/refusal or whatever it only makes sense that any eventual appeal is lodged BY the member/s who is/are affected by the Committee's decision.
Anybody care to explain please?
VicS
Well-Known Member
I am inclined to agree with you that the wording in the second version is marginally better. Both are rather ambiguous though.
It is wrong. however, that the wording has been changed, if it is a deliberate change, without being sanctioned by the members at a general meeting.
The club's constitution should set out the procedure(s) for making rule changes.
The procedure by which members can request a general meeting should also be set out in the constitution.
Last edited:
lpdsn
Well-Known Member
Sounds like that if the committee's decision is to kick someone out, they can no longer appeal as they are no longer a member and appeals can only be made by members.
Dave-Shafa
N/A
I attended on Saturday past, an AGM, my first for many years. AS above. Semicolons; were discussed at length, ands and butts, and paragraphs.
Chap wideoconferecing from Ullapool had to be avoided at all costs as looking at him necessitated trying to avoid the breasts to my left.
Large low cut paragraphs.
Chap wideoconferecing from Ullapool had to be avoided at all costs as looking at him necessitated trying to avoid the breasts to my left.
Large low cut paragraphs.
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
I've had an enlightening and thoroughly defamatory email from one of the other people involved in this saga. It has only increased my sympathy for the OP.
sailorman
Well-Known Member
any proposed rule changes would have to be on the AGM Agenda & voted upon @ an AGM
davidej
Well-Known Member
this thread was started a couple of months ago.
does anyone know the outcome
does anyone know the outcome
VicS
Well-Known Member
RichardS
N/A
Sounds like great fodder for the forum. :encouragement:
Redact (love that word!) the club and any individual names and copy and paste.
Richard
davidej
Well-Known Member
I hope he does !
niccapotamus
Well-Known Member
correct. rather than an appeal direct to the "members"
I have to say that unless the club has a history of infighting/difficult comittees/members, and general piss poor club politics then it looks like a typo. Then cttee can issue an amendment and correct the handbook on next re-print, all done over a sociable pint of foaming ale (or substitute of your choice)
cliff
Well-Known Member
"made to members" implies (to me at least) an appeal can be made to the club members as a whole (not the committee) who could overrule the committee's decision.
"made by members" implies (to me at least) an appeal can be made by the aggrieved (potential) member to the committee (who are unlikely to change their original decision)
"made by members" implies (to me at least) an appeal can be made by the aggrieved (potential) member to the committee (who are unlikely to change their original decision)
Burnham Bob
Well-Known Member
Surely it only matters if there is a disagreement over what would comprise "conduct or character likely to bring the Club or sport into disrepute". In any sane environment (although as we are all paying good money to get tired, wet and cold sanity might be questionable) being chucked out of the club should not arise. However, having once attended a function at a relative's golf club, wearing the wrong colour socks was probably thought to comprise "conduct or character likely to bring the Club or sport into disrepute". The more nouveau riche the membership. the fussier the dress code in my experience!
NickC
Well-Known Member
Response to xxx Sailing Club Committee from Nick regarding expulsion from xxx.
Your accusations are all extremely vague and contain no supporting evidence whatsoever, this contradicts RYA document ‘Expulsion of Members’ which requires the precise nature and details of the complaint be given to the member threatened with expulsion. These accusations are based on nothing more than vindictiveness and personal victimisation.
You accusation states:
You accusation states:
Your accusation states:
Your accusation states:
If certain members simply do not like the outrage expressed by and indignation of the sailing community in general they only need look to their own selfish behaviour for the reason. Specifically the two members who, without the permission of the other two owners, fitted a wholly inappropriately outboard engine with impractical mounting arrangement to a yacht shared by four xxx members without recourse to other shareholders rendering the vessel both un-sailable and uninsurable. They then further proceeded to instruct the remaining shareholders they must not touch this engine, precluding them from being able to sail their own boat.
Until recently I had intended to attend the Committee meeting to discuss these issues, albeit briefly. However, further to the latest communication I have received from any member of this Committee, {personY}’s email attached, it is obvious that there was no intention whatsoever of providing an appropriate full, fair and unbiased hearing to these matters. Especially not considering this Committee’s cynical attempt to change Club rules in an attempt to prevent members being afforded the opportunity of voting on this matter.
I am not an unreasonable person but I will neither tolerate being lied to, nor deliberate deceit and deception. To date I have received no apology from those responsible for causing these issues. If this committee wishes to genuinely investigate matters relating to the moorings then it may wish to start with the following questions which have been evaded and require answer:
As our Club is affiliated to the RYA please refer to RYA document – ‘EXPULSION OF MEMBERS’.
The behaviour complained of should merit expulsion:
…
The committee must consider whether the conduct complained of actually amounts to an "offence" at all. The fact that a certain committee member does not like criticism, or is involved in a private altercation with a club member, does not of itself give him the right to initiate expulsion proceedings.
…
The decision makers must be unprejudiced:
This means that any committee member who is either one of the complainants, or has previously been involved in disciplinary action against the member, should take no part whatsoever in the proceedings, and should refrain from trying to influence other committee members in private conversation.
The Respondent should have a full and fair hearing:
In practice this means that he should:
In this case due to the quantity of correspondence along with the deliberate obfuscation I suggest this could take around four hours to examine comprehensively. Half an hour during a Committee meeting will not suffice and will not provide any meaningful understanding of events leading to these disputes. It would have been more appropriate for a sub-committee of independent & unbiased members to examine these issues in detail.
Rule 3.3 states:
Rule 3.3 also states:
As a long term member of xxx I am very disappointed in the seemingly dishonest and underhand behaviour of our current Committee, particularly their attempt to fraudulently alter the Club rules in a cynical attempt to prevent members hearing details of and appeal against this expulsion. Section 3 paragraph 3 of the original printed version which both I and many other members have reads:
The version provided to me by this Committee, see attached email, reads:
Rule 15.1 (Priority of key rules for CASC status) states:
From: {personY}
To: Nick
Subject: Club Rules
Your accusations are all extremely vague and contain no supporting evidence whatsoever, this contradicts RYA document ‘Expulsion of Members’ which requires the precise nature and details of the complaint be given to the member threatened with expulsion. These accusations are based on nothing more than vindictiveness and personal victimisation.
You accusation states:
“It has been bought to the attention of club members and the committee that over a protracted period of time (some 2 to 3 years) you have used the xxx Club name and standing”
You have not provided any specific evidence of this for me to answer.You accusation states:
“along with giving the impression of representing the club for your own personal grievance with individuals”
Again you have not provided any specific evidence to justify this accusation.Your accusation states:
“This has been done via E-mails (Re the private mooring off of xxx Sailing Club)”
Precisely as you describe, a ‘Private’ mooring – which is a personal arrangement between each mooring holder and the landowner, nothing whatsoever to do with xxx Sailing Club. However, as a long standing member of the club and in the best interests of the other boat owners, mooring owners and the sailing community in general I feel it is quite right and proper that any wrong-doing regarding the mooring chain be uncovered.Your accusation states:
“and Open Forums (Re Individual grievances aired with regard to certain members of xxx Sailing Club)”
Again no specific examples have been provided. These matters have been discussed with my friends on various different sailing forums. Please provide specific examples and links to any threads/messages where it is believed the member has lied in any way or given the impression of representing the club on these forums.If certain members simply do not like the outrage expressed by and indignation of the sailing community in general they only need look to their own selfish behaviour for the reason. Specifically the two members who, without the permission of the other two owners, fitted a wholly inappropriately outboard engine with impractical mounting arrangement to a yacht shared by four xxx members without recourse to other shareholders rendering the vessel both un-sailable and uninsurable. They then further proceeded to instruct the remaining shareholders they must not touch this engine, precluding them from being able to sail their own boat.
Until recently I had intended to attend the Committee meeting to discuss these issues, albeit briefly. However, further to the latest communication I have received from any member of this Committee, {personY}’s email attached, it is obvious that there was no intention whatsoever of providing an appropriate full, fair and unbiased hearing to these matters. Especially not considering this Committee’s cynical attempt to change Club rules in an attempt to prevent members being afforded the opportunity of voting on this matter.
I am not an unreasonable person but I will neither tolerate being lied to, nor deliberate deceit and deception. To date I have received no apology from those responsible for causing these issues. If this committee wishes to genuinely investigate matters relating to the moorings then it may wish to start with the following questions which have been evaded and require answer:
- How much did {personZ} pay to {boatyard1} for the addition of the new xxx mooring, was it the £370 he was given by the xxx owners or £150 as {boatyard1} apparently received?
- Why did {boatyard1} not supply the 90ft of brand new 22mm chain, not only as was ordered and paid for but as they even confirmed they had supplied.
- Why did our current Commodore ({personX}) write to {boatyard1} claiming that the moorings were related to the club, that this Committee had discussed the issue and that it had delegated {personZ} to arrange maintenance of the trot on their behalf? When in fact the only person who had actually been asked to arrange the maintenance was myself.
As our Club is affiliated to the RYA please refer to RYA document – ‘EXPULSION OF MEMBERS’.
The behaviour complained of should merit expulsion:
…
The committee must consider whether the conduct complained of actually amounts to an "offence" at all. The fact that a certain committee member does not like criticism, or is involved in a private altercation with a club member, does not of itself give him the right to initiate expulsion proceedings.
…
The decision makers must be unprejudiced:
This means that any committee member who is either one of the complainants, or has previously been involved in disciplinary action against the member, should take no part whatsoever in the proceedings, and should refrain from trying to influence other committee members in private conversation.
The Respondent should have a full and fair hearing:
In practice this means that he should:
- be told well in advance the precise nature and details of the complaint against him;
- be given well in advance any written statements made by witnesses;
- …
- be entitled to cross examine any witnesses, produce his own witnesses, give evidence himself, and make a closing statement;
- not be subject to unreasonable time restraints in any of the above. For example, he should be given all the relevant documents at least 3 weeks before the hearing, and the committee should be prepared at the very least for a 2-hour hearing; in many cases it will take longer.
Rule 3.3 states:
“The Club Committee may refuse membership, or remove it, only for good cause such as conduct or character likely to bring the Club or sport into disrepute”
On what grounds do you base your allegation of ‘bringing the Club or sport into disrepute’? Can this be substantiated or are the accusations based solely on personal idealism & opinion? Is there anything more than personal victimisation behind these accusations?Rule 3.3 also states:
“Appeal against refusal or removal may be made to members.”
Therefore please instigate the process of putting the question of expulsion of a member before the full membership.As a long term member of xxx I am very disappointed in the seemingly dishonest and underhand behaviour of our current Committee, particularly their attempt to fraudulently alter the Club rules in a cynical attempt to prevent members hearing details of and appeal against this expulsion. Section 3 paragraph 3 of the original printed version which both I and many other members have reads:
The Club Committee may refuse membership, or remove it, only for good cause such as conduct or character likely to bring the Club or sport into disrepute. Appeal against refusal or removal may be made by members.
Note the small but very meaningful change of the second from last word from ‘to’ to ‘by’.Rule 15.1 (Priority of key rules for CASC status) states:
“Where there is any conflict between any of the Key Rules (Rules 2, 3, 12 & 14) for CASC Status and any other rule or rules the Key Rules will take priority.”
Therefore the provisions of rule 3 override any provision which may be provided within rule 4.From: {personY}
To: Nick
Subject: Club Rules
Nick,
Attached is a set of the current club rules you are currently seeking and I hope you find what you need.
Firstly in you email to individuals recently you are asking why {personZ} has not been expelled from the club.
This leads me to believe you seem to have failed comprehensively to understand the situation you find yourself in and why you find yourself in it.
Firstly no one particularly cares about your ever burgeoning list of grievance's with the world. They are a matter for you and you alone. No one cares about the chain, your obsession with the mooring, the boat or the many things you seem to find objectionable. It is you and you alone that has put the clubs business on the internet for all to see and it is crystal clear you did little, if anything, to hide the clubs name or the identity of those involved. The content of the posts contains little in factual reality but is borne of your obstinacy. You showed the club in a negative way and that is the thrust of your problems. FYI there is more than one complaint from members about this and in no way involves {personZ}. So the mooring, the chain, your dispute with {boatyard1} regarding charges, your athletes foot, the club lawnmower have no place in the argument you seem to have. It is you internet postings and them alone along with e mails to those both inside and outside the club that have been detrimental to the club, local people and a wider field. {personZ}, nor anyone else for that mater, has not not posted them you did. Regarding the so called "xxxxxxxx Tax". I have been in possession of the evidence to show you regarding your misinterpretation of the facts for some time but as you have failed to take up any offer to meet personally this goes on being unresolved seemingly to suite your cause.
Secondly legitimate questions of you need answering around requests you made of {boatyard1} regarding club minutes. Read the e mails you sent as the thrust of them is you misrepresented your position to gain information you were not entitled to and making a general nuisance of yourself which reflected badly on the club and you. You have also caused some reputational damage for no good reason. I just wish Nick you understood the quite needless aggravation this has caused to others over a protracted period of time
It is these maters which you are being asked to explain and you will be asked some searching questions you may not like. Nick ordinary members are annoyed with you and want some answers regarding the postings. You have been offered numerous ways out of the situation which I have documented, you have been given good council by numerous individuals we have asked to try and moderate and guide you all to no avail.
I would also like to point out that the proceedings have been brought as a very last resort following legal advice, advice from the RYA and having sought interpretation from one of the clubs founding members who has experience of the club rules when they were originally drafted.
Nick evan at this late hour you have a potential resolution to your mess. However with your history of stringing things out over years and years, needlessly involving many other people from within and outside of the club ts is in my opinion, preventing you from being the bigger man and allowing things to be resolved.
I m also sending to others so it cannot be altered or misquoted.
Regards
{personY}
Attached is a set of the current club rules you are currently seeking and I hope you find what you need.
Firstly in you email to individuals recently you are asking why {personZ} has not been expelled from the club.
This leads me to believe you seem to have failed comprehensively to understand the situation you find yourself in and why you find yourself in it.
Firstly no one particularly cares about your ever burgeoning list of grievance's with the world. They are a matter for you and you alone. No one cares about the chain, your obsession with the mooring, the boat or the many things you seem to find objectionable. It is you and you alone that has put the clubs business on the internet for all to see and it is crystal clear you did little, if anything, to hide the clubs name or the identity of those involved. The content of the posts contains little in factual reality but is borne of your obstinacy. You showed the club in a negative way and that is the thrust of your problems. FYI there is more than one complaint from members about this and in no way involves {personZ}. So the mooring, the chain, your dispute with {boatyard1} regarding charges, your athletes foot, the club lawnmower have no place in the argument you seem to have. It is you internet postings and them alone along with e mails to those both inside and outside the club that have been detrimental to the club, local people and a wider field. {personZ}, nor anyone else for that mater, has not not posted them you did. Regarding the so called "xxxxxxxx Tax". I have been in possession of the evidence to show you regarding your misinterpretation of the facts for some time but as you have failed to take up any offer to meet personally this goes on being unresolved seemingly to suite your cause.
Secondly legitimate questions of you need answering around requests you made of {boatyard1} regarding club minutes. Read the e mails you sent as the thrust of them is you misrepresented your position to gain information you were not entitled to and making a general nuisance of yourself which reflected badly on the club and you. You have also caused some reputational damage for no good reason. I just wish Nick you understood the quite needless aggravation this has caused to others over a protracted period of time
It is these maters which you are being asked to explain and you will be asked some searching questions you may not like. Nick ordinary members are annoyed with you and want some answers regarding the postings. You have been offered numerous ways out of the situation which I have documented, you have been given good council by numerous individuals we have asked to try and moderate and guide you all to no avail.
I would also like to point out that the proceedings have been brought as a very last resort following legal advice, advice from the RYA and having sought interpretation from one of the clubs founding members who has experience of the club rules when they were originally drafted.
Nick evan at this late hour you have a potential resolution to your mess. However with your history of stringing things out over years and years, needlessly involving many other people from within and outside of the club ts is in my opinion, preventing you from being the bigger man and allowing things to be resolved.
I m also sending to others so it cannot be altered or misquoted.
Regards
{personY}
Last edited:
- Status