A long detailed 64 page document but to summarise and add my opinions:
Resolution 1 - Choose an Alpine Director (I am supporting Ian Linklater)
Special Resolution 1 is to accept minor changes to the Articles except those specifically identified in SR 2, 3, 4 and 5
Special Resolution 2 - Changes to Board Structure. They are proposing to eliminate the Discipline Director's positions on the main board and having a sub panel of discipline representatives. The members of each of the disciplines will vote a rep onto the panel. This panel will be headed by the Trainer's rep and you will no longer have an elected director representing your discipline on the board. I quote "The Disciplines Director will be the representative of the Panel of the Disciplines on the Board and shall ordinarily be the Trainer Representative..." VOTE NO and force a rethink if you are an L1, L2 L3 or Snowboard member!
Special Resolution 3 - Board Members to be paid - I personally have no problem with this and hopefully will encourage the board to spend more time working on behalf of members. The problem with this amendment is that "Directors and Representatives shall be entitled to such annual
remuneration as may be determined from time to time by a remuneration committee as composed from among the Board of Directors." SO they set their own pay rates. Why not have a non executive renumeration committee of volunteers. VOTE NO and force a rethink.
Special Resolution 4 - Board Members don't have to pay their subs. "Directors and Representatives shall be exempt from the payment
of any and all Membership and licence fees for the duration of the office held." Why should they be exempt from annual subs when the are being paid ? VOTE NO and force a rethink!
Special Resolution 5 - CEO gets a long term 3 year contract. Given that the last couple CEO's all left under dubious circumstances I can see the logic in this and I personally am in favour.
IT IS YOUR ASSOCIATION take the 5 minutes to vote.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sun 29-12-13 13:57; edited 1 time in total
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Agree : Already voted NO, NO, NO, YES.
For the simple reason that no explanation has been provided to the members.
The reason for big changes and proposals should be transparent.
Certainly board members should be paid for their time. But number 4 takes the pish.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
For the simple reason that no explanation has been provided to the members.
Agreed. As far as I can tell there has been little, if any, consultation with members about the restructuring of the board, and no explanation as to why the board think their proposals strengthen the governance of the association. I've voted against the special resolutions.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Haggis_Trap wrote:
For the simple reason that no explanation has been provided to the members.
The reason for big changes and proposals should be transparent.
Indeed.
I'd hoped that the email that came through today would contain some explanation but unfortunately not.
There is one ordinary resolution (to elect an Alpine Director) and 5 Special Resolutions. (SR's)
SR 1 is to accept all the changes to the Articles except those identified in SR 2, 3, 4 and 5 - which were identified by Skimottaret.
If you vote YES to SR 1 and then NO, NO, NO, NO, (or whatever) then you are voting in favour of everything except the SR 2, 3, 4, 5
I will vote: NO, NO, NO. NO and a fifth NO
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Bindingcheck,
Already voted No, No, No, No & No
After all it is free
After all it is free
I hope this is being cross posted to the various BASI Facebook pages?
Also to the Facebook pages of the various larger ski school companies?
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
rungsp, it's certainly on the BASI Members' FB page.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Bindingcheck, sorry in my rush to get this out I mixed up my specials and ordinaries... have edited the OP.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Still awaiting details of which company laws have changed so we need to alter the A of A.
But I am also awaiting a reply to an email from 3 weeks ago
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Voted.
In addition I've just noticed one of the FB posts (The video thread) which drew my attention to changes in the way the membership type is going to split, licenced v unlicensed.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
The question is 'what happens if all the proposals are voted against'?? Will that will be a vote of no confidence in the board
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
skimottaret,
Thanks for the update.
BUT I wouldn't describe the changes as being minor, there are only 6 of the current 80 Articles which are unchanged and if the proposals are passed then there will be 92 Articles. The Proposals are significantly changing the nature of BASI. Members should not vote in favour of the proposals unless they have read, fully understood and agree with the proposals.
I have taken a lot of time to read the proposals very thoroughly.
I will be voting against all of the Special Resolutions, the proposed Articles will turn BASI into a business rather than a members organisation. The proposals will change BASI members from being owners who can decide ...... into consumers of the business product which will be made available to them.
Article 25 - Identifies the new structure of the Board. To some extent it is highlighted by Special Resolution (SR) 2.
BUT – the changes are so radical that every member must read this entire Article taking care to identify which Directors will be elected by the membership. The proposals create 2 ‘strata’ of Directors:
a) Chair, Legal, Finance, Company Secretary and Ombudsman.
b) President, CEO, Discipline Director (trainer rep) and Appointed Members.
The a)’s are elected by the membership but 2 of them (Ombuds. and Comp Sec) do not get a vote.
The b)’s are nominated/appointed by the Board and then ratified at a GM, or in the case of the Discipline Director, chosen by the trainers, they all get a vote. That is to say none of the 'B' list are democratically elected but they will out number those on the Board who have been elected.
“Appointed Members” are nominated by the majority of Board, ie those who have a vote, and could serve for 6 years. There is no limit to the number of “Appointed Members”. AND...... “Appointed Members” do not have to be members of the Association.
Some members will wonder why ‘appointed members’ cannot become Board Directors through the normal democratic process.
The Legal Director becomes a ‘super director’ who automatically assumes the role of other directors if any of them become absent or incapacitated. Might this not be better done by the vice Chair?
In the current Articles the CEO & the President do not have a vote (but will have).
The current Articles have a secretary to the Board (very much a minute/note taking secretary), the new Articles change the title to Company Secretary. This is a very different role and is currently carried out by the CEO.
There is no requirement in the Companies Act to have a Legal Director, Financial Director or Company Secretary on the Board and I am not convinced that BASI need any of these positions, certainly not at the expense of Discipline expertise.
The proposed Articles are remarkably similar to typical Articles which are used by a mutual bank or the building society – but unlike a mutual building society, BASI members cannot just 'switch' their account.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
^ lets be honest : BASI becoming a business rather than "members association" is only of benefit to those who are employed by the "company".
the bull s--t bingo about "good governance" and "best practice" on the youtube video is 5 star.....
all fluff and no substance.
the whole thing is all a bit odd...
out of the blue (from most members perspective) comes a proposal with no obvious consultation to turn a members association into a business.
then an unknown L2, with a legal background, becomes interim CEO and the front for all these apparently radical changes.
there may be good reason behind all of this : however as an 11 year member of BASI I don't have a clue what is actually going on, or more importantly why. the information released to members, like the video above, has been total fluff and jargon. the obvious question has to be what the heck has been going on behind the scenes ?
as pointed out on facebook : once BASI becomes a company then they need customers, not members.
arguably it has been going that way for awhile : seemingly driven by those who want to make a career out of working for BASI....
the lack of commitment to running BASI courses in Scotland is one obvious example of "business interests" vs "members interests"
clear communication and prior warning could have resolved much of the distrust / confusion / questions.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
stewart woodward,
Correct about the Company Laws, ie. which ones have changed?
There have been changes but they are wording changes rather than intention changes, eg. the current Article 38 relates to vested / conflict of interest and to my mind the wording is quite clear and unambigious.The proposed Article 44 deals with Conflict, this proposed article is a ‘lift’ from the Companies Act 2006 (ammended 2009) and is therefore indecipherable to most mortals.
BUT roughly speaking.... It seems to state that in the event of a Conflict (of interest) the Board can authorise the non participation of the Director(s) with reference to that specific or related matters. Now that makes sense if we are dealing with a Bank, because the Directors of a Bank are obliged to be in attendance so this allows the Chair to 'absent' the Director. Not quite sure if it is all that relevant to our Association of Members
The Chairman stated (in his introduction to the proposals) that a main reason for the changes was compliance with the Mental Health Act, this has been done by the deletion of one small clause relating to the fitness of a Director to serve – proposed article 50.
Stephen Burke gives this allegation about changes being made to ensure compliance with the Companies Act considerable force in his dire video. Clearly the intention is to persuade (or scare) members into voting for something because it is a legal requirement not because it is for the benefit of the members.
Despite Mr Burke's protestation on Facebook that he is a 'level 2' he should be reminded that he was not elected to the position of Legal Director because he was a 'level 2', it was because he claimed to be a lawyer and provided an extensive CV to justify his worthiness. While there are many L4's, for example, who possess a Law Degree there are very few who are qualified and current as a lawyer.
2 questions:
While we can see that there are ... problems with the proposals are we doing enough to advise other 'normal' members of these problems and our concerns - if not what can we indivicually do to change this?
and
Would it be helpful if a simple 2 or 3 page 'de-nerdified' version of the Proposals was available?
Haggis_Trap,
To what extent might the locals (in Jockland and possibly southern Jockland, ie North of England) appreciate the non Board side of the debate being presented? In some local hostelry or at each resort/slope perhaps?
Everything I've read or heard to justify the changes is couched in vague, feelgood management-speak, which automatically raises my scepticism level. Well done to all who've gone through the proposals forensically.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
My daughter is eligible to vote. I doubt she's read anything at all. I'll have a word with her about it.
The whole debacle appears to show that the BASI Board of Management & Stephen Burke do not know what they are doing. I believe that they expected the proposals to be voted through 'on the nod' without any discussions and have been taken aback by the discussion on here and FB.
BASI appear to answer the questions they like and ignore all the other questions, no doubt hoping they will go away
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
[unfounded speculation & conspiracy theory]
I have a suspicion that these moves are part of a wider strategy at play which ties in with the upcoming vote for Scottish Independence.
The wording of a recent Press Release got me thinking and there are some interesting possibilities when you work things through. Some of the proposed changes would facilitate things quite nicely.
[/ unfounded speculation & conspiracy theory]
After all it is free
After all it is free
I have some sympathy with Stephen, there must be a lot of work piling up after our previous CEO had not been at his desk for so long. As interim manager I am sure he is trying to get things moving and as a lawyer may just be focussing on what he knows by tidying up the Articles but the proposed changes are very serious and were not explained at all to the membership prior to putting to a vote at the EGM. In some ways the explosion of interest may be a good thing as BASI seem to be playing catch up now and actually trying hard to communicate and explain their rationale. I still say vote NO and force a review. BUT YOU HAVE TO VOTE !!!!
If you are a BASI member please acknowledge that you have voted by stating on this thread that you have voted. This will help keep this thread active and hopefully other members will see it.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Voted! Mostly no. Having read some of Stephen's input, I'm now thinking that was maybe a little hasty, but I don't think slowing the process down is a bad thing at all. Seems a little rushed.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
I have voted.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
added my vote, doubt it will make much difference. But you have to use it to have any say at the end of the day.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Voted, a while ago.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
voted, mostly no.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
skir67, You would be surprised, I cant recall the numbers but something like 300 or 400 voted for secretary a while back and that was the biggest turnout in BASI history. If we can get a few dozen from here to vote could make the difference.
Personally I'm encouraged that they recognise that they are competing for members with other associations and hopefully this will result in more focus on the needs of the member ship and the core reasons why members continue with the organisation.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Voted a while ago
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
13 snowheads have voted from what I can see.. surely more BASI types are on this board. Get your voice heard and vote and keep this thread going to spread the word..
I voted a few weeks ago after the first video was released and the second video has not made me want to change my vote. Stephen Burke has still not fully answered questions asked by members and is becoming antagonistic. He appears to be a different person to who appeared on here, and other social sites, asking people to vote for him a couple of years ago.
His suggestion to members on facebook that they should leave 'if they are not happy' is outrageous! The CEO is suppose to carryout the wishes of the BOD not enter into heated discussions with members.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
stewart woodward, I see Wayne has deleted all his posts.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
If BASI had any common sense they would have sent voting forms (and a clear explanation) out in the post to all members.
At the very least an email could have been sent to members with a simple and readable document prior to the proposals being made.
Or even a short consultation period ?
BASI only have themselves to blame if members are suspicious, or asking questions, about what has been going on....
After all it is free
After all it is free
So 13 on here out of 125 votes cast so far!
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
voted
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
According to the documentation provided by BASI if you don't vote you vote 'no'.
So of the 4075 members eligible to vote, 125 members may or may not have voted yes/no. At the moment the vast majority by either voting or abstaining have voted 'no'. Is my understanding correct?
(I am surprised that BASI only have 4075 eligible voting members. I thought the number was nearer 6000).