Resignation fromCommittee

[brett]

Actually, I don't feel too well

(or death which ever is sooner)

[Hazy]

Actually, I don't feel too well

there's nowt wrong with your fettle, man up

[Derby Tup]

Robert and David, thanks for your input into this here forum. Your contribution will be missed I'm sure

[Feet in the Cowclaps]

Cheers. There's only so much thread locking, post deletion and cowardly anonymous posting by committee members (at least three) you can put up with. A forum should be a place to exchange views, not an outlet for the ones in power to gag those who disagree with them. As long as the forum is a mouthpiece for the committee bullies, I am having nothing to do with it.

[Dave_Mole]

so 20 people turning up to an FRA meeting because they're worried about safety and the new iteration of the Rules is considered more of an irritation than a cause for concern. Now the Committee are keeping the venue of the next meeting a secret unless told in advance that members wish to attend! There's also some manipulation of the Constitution in the statement "If any members would like to attend as observers ......": members are free to attend and to speak at meetings, given they observe protocol.

[Derby Tup]

Sad and ironic thing is for years the forum policed itself and very little moderation in it's true sense was needed

[alwaysinjured]

From the FRA site front page:
"The next meeting of the FRA Executive Committee is on Sunday 9th February 2014 starting at 11am in Skipton. If any members would like to attend as observers, they should let the Secretary know by 2nd February 2014 - [email protected] or 07956344174. He will then let you have details of the venue."

We can only attend as observers. If you want to contribute to a meeting you'll have to attend the next AGM or call your own EGM. As I understand it that takes a minimum of 5% of the membership to sign the call for an EGM. If we have 7000 members that means 350 signatures - I doubt that can ever be achieved.

And if you really want to change things you'll then have to force changes to the committee as far as I can see. To do that you'll have to find people willing to replace those forced out, & they'll have to be capable of doing the job.

I'll just make it clear I'm not advocating trying to do this, & not saying it shouldn't be done either. I'm just saying what the FRA articles set out (as I understand it) as the mechanisms for making changes if you're not on the Executive Committee.

To correct a little on that,
Members have greater powers

They have the indisputable right not just to observe but to speak under article 47 ( "may" gives the choice that is the "power not the obligation") and indisputable right to have what they say minuted , as part of "minute ALL proceedings" under article 43A, although Preston and Kendal demonstrates that the secretary fails in his duties in that regard, minuting what is deemed by the executive as expedient instead.

Such rights to attend clearly require the publishing of Agenda and related documents in advance, so membership can determine whether there are issues they wish to hear or contribute, but I would not hold your breath waiting for that.

Good luck to any that try. In general terms anything you say will be minuted and acted seemingly only provided it lines up with executive policy: if the clear wishes of a committee member to have a motion heard and voted , supported by scores of others in advance is not enough to persuade the chair to do what should be done anyway! And who has no constitutional power to prevent such vote, regardless of support, But saw fit to prevent it regardless of powers, there is little point in going.

Anyone that does go ask why the implications of article 39A in respect of safety policy are not acted on.

Wonder if the minutes of the meeting have been written yet - might as well just write them and be done, Save all involved a journey, since no power on earth can influence what they will ultimately say!

[MargC]

Cheers. There's only so much thread locking, post deletion and cowardly anonymous posting by committee members (at least three) you can put up with. A forum should be a place to exchange views, not an outlet for the ones in power to gag those who disagree with them. As long as the forum is a mouthpiece for the committee bullies, I am having nothing to do with it.

Very well said!!

[Graeme78]

Looking like I won't be renewing my membership next year, I may not be missed by the committee, but I suspect there are a few more people of the same mind. How do I join SHR again?

[Alan]

so 20 people turning up to an FRA meeting because they're worried about safety and the new iteration of the Rules is considered more of an irritation than a cause for concern. Now the Committee are keeping the venue of the next meeting a secret unless told in advance that members wish to attend! There's also some manipulation of the Constitution in the statement "If any members would like to attend as observers ......": members are free to attend and to speak at meetings, given they observe protocol.

Let us at least be truthful here.


Ten (not twenty or "scores of") members turned up at the Kendal meeting, and all were allowed to speak, and their views were listened to.


The fact that the committee traditionally prefer to discuss business, rather than start with a motion (which would be more appropriate at a general meeting) was explained - and the business was discussed. And a very useful discussion I thought it was too.


Obviously some people don't agree with the work that the committee is doing in response to last year's inquest, but I think that you'll find that picking up a telephone and actually discussing issues is much more effective than continuing to "bash" the committee on the forum.