Report: ECF Board meeting @ Hinckley Island 16th January

[Alex Holowczak]

as destructive as Teddy Boys are often perceived to be.

Well, Showaddywaddy seem pretty harmless.

[E Michael White]

If your view were correct then the person selected as Speaker of the House of Commons last year should have been the one with the greatest experience in government, and/or the greatest knowledge and understanding of the legislation proposed by both the government and, should they win the next election, the opposition. I heard none of the many candidates, nor any commentators, suggest that that should be the criteria on which the selection should be made.

I dont think an analogy with the Speaker is helpful to you or anyone else. Incidentally the Speaker remains neutral and does not vote except when the voting is tied, something you didnt like the sound of when I suggested it a few posts back.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Isn't the Speaker meant to cast their vote in favour of the status quo in the event of a tie, though?

[Peter Rhodes]

Hi,

I had taken leave of this discussion as I had made my points and felt I should make space for some more opinions - I just want to come back to a few general points if I may :


The first point refers to the experience and suitability of those on the ECF board.

I humbly suggest that when chessplayers are prepared to pay the going rate for the skills you seek then you might have a point - but unless and until that happens you are probably p*****g in the wind.

I don't think this is true at all. From what I have seen, talented people are more likely to donate their time to good-causes that those who are not. I want to point out that I am not suggesting that ECF board members need to have masters degrees coming out of their ears, or head up multi-national organisations. I am simply pointing out that they should have a well-rounded set of soft-skills and perhaps some skills specific to their role.
I am talking of things such as conflict-resolution, effective time management, good communication and delegation skills, project management skills, etc. I don't want to sound elitist, but these are not the kind of skills that one picks up driving a bus, but they are skills that almost anyone can learn and become acomplished at.

As an interim solution, I would suggest that each board member with a specific portfolio should draw up what he thinks are the necessary skills and aptitudes for his role, and that should serve as a reference for future decisions. I would suggest it be published somewhere on the ECF website to give chess players an idea of what kind of people the ECF is looking for to lead it forwards, and also to give chess players confidence.

I want to further make the point that I am not pointing the finger at anyone currently on the board. The reason I make this point is because with the recent failures within the ECF and the complete mess it has made of alot of things, there must have been some real jokers around in the past and I ask myself if the body (the council) that appoints these people has got a clue what kind of people it needs to lead a national organisation.

With respect to the current board - I think there are good appointments such as Adam and CJ. In answer to one of Adams recent posts in which he described his job as not particularly special, I don't think one has to have an incredible sounding job title - just a record in which one has aquired the skills I mentioned above.


The second point - is relating to the analogy that was used with the House of Commons speaker. Someone, I think it was John, made the point that not many people put themselves forward for the position.

This brings me to another urban myth that I have seen peddled many times :

"When there are elections in voluntary bodies, the shortage of candidates is a sign of the lack of interest in the position". This statement is false and I will explain why.

Because a failed candidacy can be a big hit on someone self-esteem, it is usually the case that prospective candidates will make a point of guaging the interest of other prospective candidates. If there is competition that is well-known to be popular, skilled candidates will often not put themselves forwards for the position in question.

I have been involved in voluntary organisations before, and this can be a big problem, especially so if a incompetent yet popular candidate decides to put himself forwards. This can often put off talented individuals and is a loss to the organisation.

[Ben Purton]

Thanks for support Alan, I couldnt understand why Andy seemed to think I didnt know what I was talking about but o well

[E Michael White]

Isn't the Speaker meant to cast their vote in favour of the status quo in the event of a tie, though?

That depends on what meaning is attached to “Status quo” in this situation. I am not an expert but I believe the Speaker’s rules are that during a tie they will not vote in a way which produces a result which cannot be reviewed by the House later. In practice this means voting with the government for important bills at least because if these are defeated the government should resign making later review impossible.

As I've said previously, I don't intend to use the casting vote to change the status quo. I demonstrated that on Saturday, when on one issue I used the casting vote in the opposite direction to the way I had cast my own vote. Essentially it's a safeguard to make sure that the Board can't put something new into effect unless a majority is in favour.

Unfortunately following this line means that beneficial changes will not necessarily take place when the majority of the board apart from John accepts them on the first vote.

Separately perhaps John Philpott could answer this one. Is John Paines actually the Chess for Schools Director now ? It seems to me the board can only fill a casual vacancy as defined by the articles when a Director ceases to act. Andrew Martin resigned his Directorship but that could not remove the Director position of CfS, there being a difference between Directorship and a Director. Until the board make the relevant change of responsibility bye laws is JP still the Director of CFs ? How does the Board change the Director title which was agreed by council ?

[Roger de Coverly]

Until the board make the relevant change of responsibility bye laws is JP still the Director of CFs ? How does the Board change the Director title which was agreed by council ?

I think you will find they changed the bye laws last August to downgrade the CfS post and to create the possibility of a third non-exec director.

[John Philpott]

E. Michael White wrote

Separately perhaps John Philpott could answer this one. Is John Paines actually the Chess for Schools Director now ? It seems to me the board can only fill a casual vacancy as defined by the articles when a Director ceases to act. Andrew Martin resigned his Directorship but that could not remove the Director position of CfS, there being a difference between Directorship and a Director. Until the board make the relevant change of responsibility bye laws is JP still the Director of CFs ? How does the Board change the Director title which was agreed by council ?

No, John is not. Apart from the prescribed positions of President, Chief Executive and Director of Finance, the Articles specify a minimum of two Non-Executive Directors and "a maximum of five other Directors whose titles and responsibilities shall be in accordance with the Directors and Officers Responsibilities Regulations". The particular Executive Directors to be elected can therefore change from year to year. AGM agenda item C11.8 provided a hyperlink to the revised set of Regulations adopted by the Board in August 2009: the supporting paper drew attention to the principal changes to the Regulations, including the deletion of the post of Director of Chess for Schools, and was noted by the meeting.

[Simon Spivack]

as destructive as Teddy Boys are often perceived to be.

Well, Showaddywaddy seem pretty harmless.

It doesn't look as though John Paines is going to fall for this one.

Alex, you may want to read up on the Notting Hill riots. Although, to keep you happy, I shall henceforth refer to the Teddy Bears as the Teds.