RULE 24 COUNCIL UNDEMOCRATIC
Who cares about rules? Does it really matter?
Well my view is that if you ignore rules, whatever your reason, it is the first step on the slippery slow into anarchy. The Council has shown it is undemocratic by breaching this rule and failing to hold a vote of the members within a reasonable time.
THERE IS NO NEED TO HAVE A REFERENDUM ON THIS ISSUE.....THE COST IS BEING BROUGHT ABOUT TOTALLY AT THE BEHEST OF THE COUNCIL.
The rules provide for this rule to be considered and changed by members at a members' meeting......a less expensive option which would provide a better opportunity for members to take part in discussion compared with a referendum.
PLEASE REMEMBER OUR RULES DO NOT REQUIRE A REFERENDUM ON THIS ISSUE.
Why a referendum? Why in December?
Is it because polls held over the winter - Xmas time usually result in a very low vote?
Is it because at a meeting of members the chances of the Council losing the vote would be greater?
WILL THE MEMBERSHIP SLEEP WALK INTO ANARCHY?
WILL YOU ALLOW IT?
The Equity Council have, in my opinion, displayed that their ideas - in a Blair-like fashion - are paramount and all other members' views are to be disregarded. No compromise. No middle ground. The Council majority also seem to believe that an "unelected" Senior Management Team comprising of members of staff should be given greater credence than the professional views of members. The Council, in my opinion, are abdicating their responsibilities on behalf of our members.
This is the real issue behind my concerns about Rule 24.
If you believe Equity should be demonstrably democratic and answerable to our membership the you MUST VOTE AGAINST the proposed changes to Rule 24.
THE ONLY REASON FOR THE RULE CHANGE IS BECAUSE THE COUNCIL WANT TO HAVE THREE ASSISTANT GENERAL SECRETARIES.
When Equity had over 43,000+ members we only had ONE Assistant General Secretary. Why with some 10,000 less members do we need THREE Assistant General Secretaries? The greater majority of organisations have ONE BOSS and ONE ASSISTANT BOSS....this is a proven management structure that has stood the test of time. We all want to know who is in charge of Equity when the General Secretary isn't available. We do not need a committee of Three Assistant General Secretaries or the additional salary and pension costs....look at our finances and membership income...we cannot justify the costs.
IF THE CHANGES TO RULE 24 ARE PASSED THEN THE COUNCIL CAN HAVE AS MANY ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT GENERAL SECRETARIES....AND THE ADDITIONAL SALARY IMPLICATIONS WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION AND WITHOUT CONSULTING YOU ! ! !
IN ALL OF EQUIITY'S HISTORY THE COUNCIL HAVE NEVER HAD THIS POWER. WHY NOW?
No doubt you agree that Equity currently has too many chiefs in Guild House and not enough soldiers in the field. If you vote against the changes to Rule 24 you ensure a better management structure, a Council who will remain on this issue, as they have been for years, directly answerable to YOU....no changes without YOUR permission....a better use of Equity's money and hopefully as a result MORE SOLDIERS in the field and less centralisation in Guild House.
PUT OUR PROFESSIONAL INTERESTS FIRST...VOTE AGAINST THE CHANGES TO RULE 24
and for the record.....AFTER HIS LONG SERVICE TO EQUITY AND GIVEN THE ELECTION RESULTS FOR THE GENERAL SECRETARY.....one must ask....WHY ISN'T ANDY PRODGER
THE ONE AND ONLY ASSISTANT GENERAL SECRETARY....?????
Well my view is that if you ignore rules, whatever your reason, it is the first step on the slippery slow into anarchy. The Council has shown it is undemocratic by breaching this rule and failing to hold a vote of the members within a reasonable time.
THERE IS NO NEED TO HAVE A REFERENDUM ON THIS ISSUE.....THE COST IS BEING BROUGHT ABOUT TOTALLY AT THE BEHEST OF THE COUNCIL.
The rules provide for this rule to be considered and changed by members at a members' meeting......a less expensive option which would provide a better opportunity for members to take part in discussion compared with a referendum.
PLEASE REMEMBER OUR RULES DO NOT REQUIRE A REFERENDUM ON THIS ISSUE.
Why a referendum? Why in December?
Is it because polls held over the winter - Xmas time usually result in a very low vote?
Is it because at a meeting of members the chances of the Council losing the vote would be greater?
WILL THE MEMBERSHIP SLEEP WALK INTO ANARCHY?
WILL YOU ALLOW IT?
The Equity Council have, in my opinion, displayed that their ideas - in a Blair-like fashion - are paramount and all other members' views are to be disregarded. No compromise. No middle ground. The Council majority also seem to believe that an "unelected" Senior Management Team comprising of members of staff should be given greater credence than the professional views of members. The Council, in my opinion, are abdicating their responsibilities on behalf of our members.
This is the real issue behind my concerns about Rule 24.
If you believe Equity should be demonstrably democratic and answerable to our membership the you MUST VOTE AGAINST the proposed changes to Rule 24.
THE ONLY REASON FOR THE RULE CHANGE IS BECAUSE THE COUNCIL WANT TO HAVE THREE ASSISTANT GENERAL SECRETARIES.
When Equity had over 43,000+ members we only had ONE Assistant General Secretary. Why with some 10,000 less members do we need THREE Assistant General Secretaries? The greater majority of organisations have ONE BOSS and ONE ASSISTANT BOSS....this is a proven management structure that has stood the test of time. We all want to know who is in charge of Equity when the General Secretary isn't available. We do not need a committee of Three Assistant General Secretaries or the additional salary and pension costs....look at our finances and membership income...we cannot justify the costs.
IF THE CHANGES TO RULE 24 ARE PASSED THEN THE COUNCIL CAN HAVE AS MANY ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT GENERAL SECRETARIES....AND THE ADDITIONAL SALARY IMPLICATIONS WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION AND WITHOUT CONSULTING YOU ! ! !
IN ALL OF EQUIITY'S HISTORY THE COUNCIL HAVE NEVER HAD THIS POWER. WHY NOW?
No doubt you agree that Equity currently has too many chiefs in Guild House and not enough soldiers in the field. If you vote against the changes to Rule 24 you ensure a better management structure, a Council who will remain on this issue, as they have been for years, directly answerable to YOU....no changes without YOUR permission....a better use of Equity's money and hopefully as a result MORE SOLDIERS in the field and less centralisation in Guild House.
PUT OUR PROFESSIONAL INTERESTS FIRST...VOTE AGAINST THE CHANGES TO RULE 24
and for the record.....AFTER HIS LONG SERVICE TO EQUITY AND GIVEN THE ELECTION RESULTS FOR THE GENERAL SECRETARY.....one must ask....WHY ISN'T ANDY PRODGER
THE ONE AND ONLY ASSISTANT GENERAL SECRETARY....?????
posted by Dave Eager at 12:51 PM
3 Comments:
Typical - they just want to do their own thing regardless. It is only fair and common sense that Andy Prodger should be THE Assistant General Secretary. Why does Equity need three? Is Payne trying to protect herself and split the power base?
Since no one else seems interested in the result of the Referndum about Rule 24, please allow me to let you know the result.
Of the ballot papers that were issued 2,711 were returned.
Of these 48 were disallowed.
Of the remainder, 1,603 (60.2%) voted YES to change Rule 24 and 1,060 (39.8%) voted No.
Therefore in the Referndum the membership have shown a wish to change Rule 24.
John Webb
Audio Councillor
Of course that should read; REFERENDUM (and not Referndum). My apologies.
John Webb
Post a Comment
<< Home