ClubTread Community - View Single Post - MEC ballot criticized as undemocratic

View Single Post
post #75 of (permalink) Old 04-26-2013, 11:20 AM
sgRant
Summit Master
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver, , .
Posts: 2,674
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Summit Wind

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by burnabyhiker

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Summit Wind

Special Resolution #1 passed at 91%

Special Resolution #2 failed at 54ish%

Special Resolution #3 fail at 33ish%
Absolutely no surprise. I bet 91% of those who voted for Resolution #1 have no idea what's in it.
I personally know 2 people, who aren't idiots, who voted YES on Special Resolution #1. They read what MEC said about it, but they said they couldn't find exactly what Special Resolution #1 is about.

When they found out EXACTLY what they voted for, they were horrified, as many things in that omnibus bill were completely against their values and ideals.

A Mark Latham stood up and spoke. He asked Bill Gibson, the MEC Board Chair, if he thought that the 91% of members who voted knew what they were looking for. Bill Gibson's reply was (paraphrased), "I don't not know, as I haven't polled each and every single one of them. I do have faith in the intelligence of our members to make the right decision."
Yes, I remember him saying that. Given that the board offers the members only information SUPPORTING the board's resolutions, and only information AGAINST resolutions put forward by members and which the board opposes, then Bill's position is that members are smart enough to figure out that there are no valid reasons to oppose the board's resolutions or valid reasons to support the other resolutions. That is outrageous bullshit. The membership approval on all the board's resolutions for the last few years is invalid on this basis.

For instance, this Harperesque omibus Resolution #1 contained about 100 material changes. I went through it, word for word, comparing the old and new versions. Some changes concern officers of the coop and others concern MEC notices to members being binding after being posted in MEC's website for 2 days. I don't even know what the former means, and as for the latter, what member is going to go through the entire MEC website every two days to see if any fast ones are being pulled?

Or, a few years ago, the board proposed a resolution to suspend, on a one-time basis, the rule preventing directors and employees to move between the board and the staff within 3 years. The board went on at great lengths as to why this suspension of the rule was a good idea. They said nothing about why it might not be a good idea. If the rule was such a good idea to begin with as to be a rule, then why would it not make sense to also mention why it might not be a good idea to suspend it at all? Like, for instance, will directors do a good job of controlling management when they might hope to land a plum job in MEC's management?

But I suppose Bill thinks the members are intelligent enough to know all that. What an incredibly arrogant way to dismiss criticism. At the same time, 91% membership approval of the resolution hardly supports the conclusion that MEC members are terribly smart. As I said before, MEC's members are much the same public who elected the Harper government.

You know what this is? It's good old-fashioned bullying. And the vast majority of MEC's members don't have a clue they're being manipulated.
sgRant is offline  
 
 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome