CFC Governors - A Problem?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CFC Governors - A Problem?

    The CFC is run by Governors. There are 61 of them: 23 Governors-at-Large ( including 10 past presidents, some of whom are life governors ) and 38 provincial representative governors. An article written by me was recently published on the Chess Canada Webzine, entitled: " The Important Role of the Governor in the CFC ". Below is a part of it:

    " But Is There a “ Governor Problem ” ?

    I think the governor structure the CFC currently has gives rise to 2 distinct problems.

    The first is " administrative ". There are 61 governors for about 1400 adult members. This works out to about a governor for every 23 adult members. Where do you get these kinds of representation figures in real life organizations?? This is bureaucratic overkill. And it makes decision-making difficult when there are so many voters to communicate with and get to vote. Getting quorums becomes a problem with such a large body of deciders. Today’s business models tend to be lean and mean – smaller groups that can make decisions quickly – our system is cumbersome to say the least. Surely the system needs at least to be streamlined – perhaps the number of governors reduced.

    The second problem is “ qualitative “. What type of governors do we actually have? When one looks at the Governors’ Letters, there is cause for concern, perhaps somewhat more in past years than in 2008-9. But even this year in some votes, few Governors voted, or even commented. For example, on Motion 2009-06, only 15 Governors sent in their e-mail vote – out of 61 ! This is a vote percentage of only 25 % ! There does seem to be an issue of apathy of some Governors ( many? most ? ). "


    Do you agree that there is a " governor-problem " ?

    If so, what do you think should be done about it? How can we solve these problems?

    Bob

    For the full article, go to the CFC Webzine:http://members.chess.ca/index.php?op...191&Itemid=130

  • #2
    Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

    Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    The first is " administrative ". There are 61 governors for about 1400 adult members. This works out to about a governor for every 23 adult members. Where do you get these kinds of representation figures in real life organizations?? This is bureaucratic overkill. And it makes decision-making difficult when there are so many voters to communicate with and get to vote. Getting quorums becomes a problem with such a large body of deciders. Today’s business models tend to be lean and mean – smaller groups that can make decisions quickly – our system is cumbersome to say the least. Surely the system needs at least to be streamlined – perhaps the number of governors reduced.
    The 2008/09 first motions (office, magazine, etc) had no issues with quorum. Only the constitutional amendments require 2/3, all other are simply majority. Thus, I don't see quorum problem.

    Last three motions had ~28 voters (see in the new GLs#5)
    http://www.chess.ca/governorsletters.htm

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

      Less than 50% participation rate...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

        Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
        The second problem is “ qualitative “. What type of governors do we actually have? When one looks at the Governors’ Letters, there is cause for concern, perhaps somewhat more in past years than in 2008-9. But even this year in some votes, few Governors voted, or even commented. For example, on Motion 2009-06, only 15 Governors sent in their e-mail vote – out of 61 ! This is a vote percentage of only 25 % ! There does seem to be an issue of apathy of some Governors ( many? most ? ). "


        Do you agree that there is a " governor-problem " ?
        I thought the governors who attended the annual meeting passed a bunch of motions. Since then many of the decisions have been changed, for whatever reason.

        What's the point in showing up and voting if passed motions are changed so quickly? The organization is going in a different direction from what the annual meeting wanted, if their decisions have been changed.

        I would think there is a problem with the structure of the organization and the bylaws rather than simply a "governor problem".
        Gary Ruben
        CC - IA and SIM

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

          The real problem was the AGM not following the rules. Such as, 30 days notice of any motions to be voted on. Proxy abuse. Etc etc.
          Christopher Mallon
          FIDE Arbiter

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

            Originally posted by Christopher Mallon View Post
            The real problem was the AGM not following the rules. Such as, 30 days notice of any motions to be voted on. Proxy abuse. Etc etc.
            Yeah. It's always someone elses fault.

            Is what you are saying that they held an annual meeting and the executive were not competent enough to conduct it in a proper manner? I don't really understand how it could be the fault of the governors who attended. Your (Etc. etc.) without any examples translates to "yada, yada". Two days of meetings dismissed in such a fashion.

            Is the paid membership up or down this year?
            Gary Ruben
            CC - IA and SIM

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

              It's up.

              And I etc, etc it because I a) have no time right now to dig it all up and b) have previously written all about it on here and elsewhere. But yes I would agree that there were some competence issues with how the chairperson ran the meeting, contravening several rules.
              Christopher Mallon
              FIDE Arbiter

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

                Originally posted by Christopher Mallon View Post

                And I etc, etc it because I a) have no time right now to dig it all up and b) have previously written all about it on here and elsewhere. But yes I would agree that there were some competence issues with how the chairperson ran the meeting, contravening several rules.
                That's really strange and doesn't appear to be in harmony with the minutes of the AGM.

                In the minutes, right after Lavin was acclaimed the President it says:

                "Mr. Smith offers the chair to Mr. Lavin who requests that Mr. Smith continues as chair."

                This indicates Mr. Smith was running the meeting in a very competent manner. It's in GL 1.

                At one point the minutes state Mr. Smith gave Mr. Lavin the chair so he could make a motion.

                "Maurice Smith asked David Lavin to take the Chair so he could make a motion. This occurs.

                Maurice Smith moves that the CFC terminate the paper magazine, get rid of books through a sale,
                keep the software and equipment business, clean up one level of the CFC condo and rent one
                level to someone. Seconded by Les Bunning.
                There was considerable discussion regarding an on-line magazine.
                It is agreed that this motion should be broken into smaller motions. It is withdrawn.

                Maurice Smith moved that the following go to G/L # 1. Seconded by Les Bunning.
                Lease ½ the building. Approved.
                Get out of the book business. Approved.
                Terminate the paper magazine. Approved.

                David Lavin suggested that we could vote on leasing half the building at this time. Moved by
                Maurice Smith and seconded by Les Bunning. Approved unanimously.

                The Chair is handed back to Maurice Smith."


                I didn't notice in the minutes of the meeting where you objected to any of the rulings. Did all these things come to you at a later date? Did the minutes leave out your objections?

                So whose chairing of the meeting left competency issues with you? Smith or Lavin?
                Gary Ruben
                CC - IA and SIM

                Comment


                • #9
                  To: Christopher Mallon

                  I would like you to back up that statement about "abuse of proxies" please. Either back it up or withdraw it as it impugns the chair's handling of the meetings and others at the meetings. As I recall, you were not present. Do the minutes support your statement? I eagerly await your response.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Too Many Governors??

                    Help ! Help !

                    My thread has been hijacked into a debate about the July 2008 AGM !

                    What about the current & future " Governor Problem ! " ??

                    Bob

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

                      I don't think it's thread drift. Problems at AGMs are linked to the Gubernatorial structure. We need a CFC Parliamentarian to depoliticize things. We could do much worse than Hugh Brodie

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

                        Originally posted by Gary Ruben View Post
                        Is the paid membership up or down this year?
                        Other forum has an entry by Bob Gillanders:
                        "May 1, 2007 = 1,763
                        May 1, 2008 = 1,811
                        May 1, 2009 = 1,856 + ??"
                        http://chesscanada.info/forum/showthread.php?t=406


                        Originally posted by Ken Craft
                        We could do much worse than Hugh Brodie
                        more details?
                        Last edited by Egidijus Zeromskis; Tuesday, 7th April, 2009, 10:18 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

                          Details re. What?

                          We need someone independent to make procedural decisions not the office of the President, regardless of who occupies it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: CFC Governors - A Problem?

                            Originally posted by Ken Craft View Post
                            Details re. What?

                            We need someone independent to make procedural decisions not the office of the President, regardless of who occupies it.
                            I think the query was in regard to the obtuse statement about Hugh... How much worse can we get? How bad is Hugh? I think you meant that Hugh was an example of a fine person for the job, but perhaps that was not clear...

                            I agree by the way with the premise of the thread: there are too many Governors (by at least a factor of 2). A large number of governors do not vote unless it is a motion that is of immense importance (for example: not printing a magazine or selling the office). The current setup has been dysfunctional for some time and needs drastic overhaul. I don't think the CFC has the capability to accomplish that change.
                            ...Mike Pence: the Lord of the fly.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Too Many Governors??

                              Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
                              Help ! Help !

                              My thread has been hijacked into a debate about the July 2008 AGM !

                              What about the current & future " Governor Problem ! " ??

                              Bob
                              I don't think it's off topic. We're exploring what happened to the decisions of the governors the one time of the year they had a live meeting. How can one comment on the future without commenting on the past?

                              Personally, if I were a governor such changes would result in no further input from me.

                              You could try paying the governors. $100. for the year but if they miss voting on any motions and don't attend or send a proxy to the annual meeting they lose the money. It it seems like a lot of money in total to pay the governors then it's an indication there are too many of them.

                              Being a governor of a registered charity looks good on a job resume. It's not like people have to say they don't bother participating in the decision making.
                              Gary Ruben
                              CC - IA and SIM

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X