Club1872 proposed changes

[BEARGER 1,829]

 

POLL: Club 1872 Election Process Elections for the Club 1872 boards will take place in the coming weeks. In preparation for this the organisation has undertaken a review of our current election process and the criteria for standing for election. We have reviewed feedback from members and working group volunteers, and looked closely at best practice at a number of other supporter organisations across the UK and beyond. Club 1872 is an organisation in its infancy and as we evolve, we strive to improve and strengthen our foundations. In its first two years Club 1872 made significant share purchases, becoming the second largest shareholder in RIFC when we purchased shares from MASH Holdings. More recently we invested £1m directly into RIFC through a share issue. An organisation with such a significant shareholding and the potential to participate in decision-making at Rangers should be secure and protected from instability and disruption. It is with this in mind that the Club 1872 board has approached discussions about how future boards should be elected and the length of term they should serve. We previously wrote to you to indicate that we would poll members on extending the term for future Club 1872 board members. The current one year term is an issue that has been raised by a number of members over the past year. It is also something that was discussed in a meeting with RIFC Chairman, Dave King in connection with an RIFC board place. The current one year term creates challenges in progressing long term plans, and the annual election process causes a significant period of upheaval each year which disrupts crucial work in taking the organisation forward. Please note: any members’ authorisation to change the length of directors’ terms will only be implemented from the next election and/or affirmation process. Current directors’ terms cannot be extended without either election or affirmation.  The Club 1872 board has also discussed a number of other ideas that could potentially protect and increase the stability of the organisation. In line with our constitution, it is for members to decide whether those changes should be implemented through the adoption of a new Election Schedule. We would ask you to vote by clicking the link below and logging in to your account - you will then be automatically redirected to the poll. The poll will close at midnight on Sunday 14th October: VOTE HERE Club 1872

[Bluedell 5,329]

1. All Donating Members shall be entitled to vote in the election of the Directors of the Club 1872 Companies.

 

2. All Donating Members who have been Donating Members for a continuous period of 6 months before the date on which elections to the Board of Directors of the Club 1872 Directors are announced shall be eligible to stand as Directors.

 

3. Candidates to stand as Director must be nominated by 15 donating members. Nominating members must satisfy the eligibility criteria referred to at paragraph 2 of this Schedule.

 

4. Candidates will be vetted by an independent third party adjudicator before they are permitted to stand.

 

5. The election period will be a minimum of 14 days and candidates will be given the opportunity to present to members during the election process. Candidates must also agree to answer questions put forward by donating members during the election process.

 

6. Voting will open with an email to members providing details of how to vote and will stay open till midnight on the 6th day following the date on which voting is opened.

 

7. Candidates will be required to sign a certificate acknowledging their understanding of the roles and responsibilities of Directors before standing and will be asked to sign an undertaking that they will campaign for election in a positive and inclusive manner that reflects the desire to grow and expand the membership of the Club 1872 Companies.

 

8. All candidates for election must disclose all social media accounts operated by them. In the event that during the election period any racist, sectarian, obscene or abusive posts are found to have been published on these or any other accounts by a candidate, at any time, that candidate may, at the discretion of the independent adjudicator, be removed from the elections.

 

9. All candidates for election must disclose all connections they have with Rangers Football Club whether as an officer, employee, supplier or commercial partner.

[Bluedell 5,329]

The proposal refers to "donating members". No definition given. Is this an attempt to disenfranchise the likes of Gersnet who have a life membership?

 

"Candidates to stand as Director must be nominated by 15 donating members." - that seems excessive. Seems like an attempt to make it into an old pals club. Candidates should be based on ability and not just those who know loads of "donating members". How would anyone know who donating members are? I'm a life member and have no idea.

 

I'm voting against based on these points.

[Bluedell 5,329]

To amend directors’ terms to a period of three years?

 

Seems reasonable.

[Bluedell 5,329]

To amend the number of directors to serve on the Club 1872 boards to a maximum of five?

 

Sounds like a power grab. No explanation as to why the number of directors should be reduced. Why not have more people with ability and to share the workload?

 

I'm voting against.

[plgsarmy 111]

57 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

The proposal refers to "donating members". No definition given. Is this an attempt to disenfranchise the likes of Gersnet who have a life membership?

 

"Candidates to stand as Director must be nominated by 15 donating members." - that seems excessive. Seems like an attempt to make it into an old pals club. Candidates should be based on ability and not just those who know loads of "donating members". How would anyone know who donating members are? I'm a life member and have no idea.

 

I'm voting against based on these points.

Excessive, it’s absolutely ridiculous. I’m also assuming that if you are a life member you can’t stand unless you are also contributing monthly.

[plgsarmy 111]

1 hour ago, Bluedell said:

To amend directors’ terms to a period of three years?

 

Seems reasonable.

It seems reasonable on a rotating basis but not if there are only going to be elections every three years. Maybe one day there will be an AGM?

[Bluedell 5,329]

53 minutes ago, plgsarmy said:

Excessive, it’s absolutely ridiculous. I’m also assuming that if you are a life member you can’t stand unless you are also contributing monthly.

It seems so. The whole thing smacks of a coup, one in which the sheep will blindly vote in favour of.

 

The RST agreed to amalgamate on the basis that life members would still be life members. They are now attempting to disenfranchise them,

 

It seems that we were lied to.

[Bill 13,717]

Isn't it traditional to stage a coup this far into the life of a supporters' organisation? Or has this just come little sooner than expected?

 

BTW this is an entirely flippant comment. I've really no idea whether Club1872 is in any way like the malign RST. ?

Edited October 8, 2018 by Bill

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

I don’t really know who exactly club 1872 are and they have no relevance to me. I don’t think they communicate with the fans well at all.