Representation: how does your club do it?

[peterk]

Perhaps the caving world should adopt the structure/organisation of BMC?  As I understand it clubs have no votes/views/powers - it's all in the hands of individual members (who vote for regional reps ) .  "Committees" are regulated from and report to the top.  But I assume that's not so hard with an an income of ?2.6m and wages of ?1m

But only "over a hundred" attended the AGM out of a 75k+ membership.

 

[kay]

(or, to be more fair, they often do not know how to act. When/where are these meetings? Who's the rep? etc)

http://www.cncc.org.uk/minutes/
Agenda for next meeting on 6th June is already up there

Who the rep is is a matter for the individual club, so you need to talk to your own club about this. Only the CNCC Committee can vote at Committee meetings (though anyone can attend) - list of CNCC Committe clubs here:
http://www.cncc.org.uk/about/committee.php

 

[kay]

One good example that springs to mind was at the CNCC AGM just over a year ago.  The AGM agenda stated that the Bradford Pothole Club (rep) had proposed a controversial motion and the Gritstone Club (rep) had seconded it and the meeting was being asked to vote on it.  When the two clubs attention was drawn to this they both made public statements withdrawing their support for the motion.  The Chairman of the BPC made a statement to that effect on this forum.  The club reps had certainly not represented the view of the clubs in this case.  A lesson was learnt and the clubs took steps to make sure it did not happen again. 

Don?t like going over old ground, Badlad, but your example gives the misleading impression that club reps put forward a motion in their club?s name without consulting their club. What actually happened was that motions were proposed by people acting in an individual capacity (the Constitution at the time  placed no restrictions on who could propose motions). The agenda for the AGM was prepared under some time pressure, and incorrectly the individuals? names were replaced by the names of their clubs, and to make things worse, by a clerical error, assigned to a different motion. So it?s a bit misleading to say "The club reps had certainly not represented the view of the clubs in this case? - the individuals concerned had never claimed to be representing their clubs on this matter.

The CNCC has taken steps to stop this type of misunderstanding happening again, by ensuring the new Constitution is clear about who can propose a motion. And at least one club is now taking a lot more interest in CNCC than previously!

 

[Badlad]

I was making a genuine point about the OP but, yes, it was a shameful time for the CNCC wasn't it?  I remember that proposal being put forward by the access officer and secretary of the time and it appeared on the AGM agenda just as I said in my post.  The individuals were listed as club reps so if they weren't representing their clubs it just goes to show the mess the CNCC were in at the time.  No doubt you will also remember the statement read out on behalf of the Association of Cave Instructors concerning that proposal which stated that the CNCC had acted in an underhand fashion and gone behind their backs whilst they were still negotiating with the landowner.  Still the CNCC have moved on so we shouldn't rake over old ground 

 

[Bob Mehew]

Cavers may wish to note that I have proposed the following motion to the BCA AGM on 14 June:

?That this General Meeting authorises Council where Council sees appropriate, to poll its membership using solely the means of electronic mail and the list of e-mail addresses of members that it holds, subject to such safeguards as adopted by Council, to obtain the view of its membership on the question or questions put in that poll.  And that Council is duly authorised to act on that view and if necessary implement such actions which are consequential to that view.  Save that any such view obtained by such a poll shall not bind a General Meeting.?

My hope is that if passed, Council will feel more able to consult with the 50% or so of members whose email addresses they currently hold to get an opinion from the grass roots. 

 

[NewStuff]

We have a facebook page. It's the easiest way to make sure it get's seen by *all* of the members, and if they want to five input, they can. The decision/feedback is based of what is said. That said, we don't have a combined age approaching the age of the earth itself, so our route does not cause any issues  :tease:

 

[droid]

Our 'Committee' has a facebook page too, and it's rather moribund.

Mind, the combined age of the club is about the same as an Oort Cloud object....

 

[NewStuff]

I dare say in the not so distant future, some new thing will come out, and it will work for some, but not others. The biggest criteria is "does it work for the majority of your members?"

If the majority insist on using the butler to inscribe stone tablets, so be it, as long as it works.