12-01-2014, 09:20 PM
It's rather concerning that the President refused to disclose the information at the AGM when asked. Why should a CS director not answer a fairly standard question at an AGM? It obviously demonstrates that he does not recognise the AGM has any level of authority.
I offered my services to help with the Constitution to the President and the Executive Director 3 times over the past 16 months and not once did I receive the courtesy of an acknowledgment and tonight I got an email from the membership secretary telling me I was not selected for the sub-committee. I find it extremely rude that neither of them could go to the effort of personally emailing me and they tell someone else that I had been unsuccessful and ask him to email me. All very dismissive and why should someone else be told at my lack of success?
The President has shown a lack of understanding of the current constitution by acting unconstitutionally when he refused membership to 2 people incorrectly, setting policy without reference to Council and deciding to refuse to allow 2 motions at the AGM. I highlighted a number of other issues yesterday at Council where actions agreed at Council had been ignored by the Directors.
He also showed the level of importance he puts on this matter by taking over 4 months after the closing date for applications to advise people as to whether they would be on it. It leaves me wondering whether he is the most suitable person to serve on the sub-committee.
The Constitution should not be something that is just ignored when it is inconvenient to follow it. Let's hope that those who were successful put in place clauses that ensure that it is followed at all times.
I offered my services to help with the Constitution to the President and the Executive Director 3 times over the past 16 months and not once did I receive the courtesy of an acknowledgment and tonight I got an email from the membership secretary telling me I was not selected for the sub-committee. I find it extremely rude that neither of them could go to the effort of personally emailing me and they tell someone else that I had been unsuccessful and ask him to email me. All very dismissive and why should someone else be told at my lack of success?
The President has shown a lack of understanding of the current constitution by acting unconstitutionally when he refused membership to 2 people incorrectly, setting policy without reference to Council and deciding to refuse to allow 2 motions at the AGM. I highlighted a number of other issues yesterday at Council where actions agreed at Council had been ignored by the Directors.
He also showed the level of importance he puts on this matter by taking over 4 months after the closing date for applications to advise people as to whether they would be on it. It leaves me wondering whether he is the most suitable person to serve on the sub-committee.
The Constitution should not be something that is just ignored when it is inconvenient to follow it. Let's hope that those who were successful put in place clauses that ensure that it is followed at all times.