PDA

View Full Version : 8. 2012-L CFC Governors Ethics and Code of Conduct Motion



Lyle Craver
03-31-2012, 11:17 PM
Moved Pierre Dénommée, Seconded Michael Barron

(This is a re-submission of the original motion, with a controversial clause removed - ed.)

That the CFC Assembly of Governors adopt the attached Code of Conduct

CFC Governor’s and Executive Member’s Code of Conduct


Part I: decision making process

The Assembly of Governors is committed to effective decision-making and, once a decision has been made, speaking with one voice. Towards this end the Governors will:

• Speak from broad member and community interests
• Speak for themselves (“my own thinking on this is that…”) rather for than a group of members.
• Express additional or alternative points of view and invite others to do so too.
• Refrain from “lobbying” other Governors outside of board meetings that might have the effect of creating factions and limiting free and open discussion.
• On important issues, be balanced in one’s effort to understand others and to make oneself understood.
• Once made, support, indeed defend, Assembly of Governors decisions, even if one’s own view is a minority one.
• Respect the confidentiality of information on sensitive issues, especially in personnel matters.
• Refrain from speaking for the organization unless authorized to do so.
• Disclose one’s involvement with other organizations, businesses or individuals where such a relationship might be viewed as a conflict of interest. Involvement in chess clubs Leagues and Provincial Association, whether affiliated or not, does not constitute a conflict of interest.
• Refrain from giving direction, as an individual Governor, to the Executive Director or any member of staff.
• Do not publicly comment on the performance of any arbiter or organiser. Direct complaints against arbiters or organisers to the relevant CFC Committee: NAC for rules of the game, Ethics for matters set out in the CFC Code of Ethics or TDOCP, for failure to pay guaranteed prices.
• Do no supports any third party involved in a dispute when a case is pending at the NAC, the Ethics Committee or the TDOCP.

Part II: Duties and Ethics

Goal: To establish a set of principles and practices of the CFC Assembly of Governors that will set parameters and provide guidance and direction for board conduct and decision-making.

Code: Members of the Assembly of Governors of the CFC are committed to observing and promoting the highest standards of ethical conduct in the performance of their responsibilities on the Assembly of Governors of CFC. Assembly members pledge to accept this code as a minimum guideline for ethical conduct and shall abide by it.

Scope: This Code also applies to all Governors, to the members of the CFC Executive and to the members of all CFC Committees event if they are not a Governor.

Accountability

1. Faithfully abide by the Articles of Incorporation, by-laws and policies of the CFC
2. Exercise reasonable care, good faith and due diligence in organizational affairs.
3. Fully disclose, at the earliest opportunity, in formation that may result in a perceived for actual conflict of interest.
4. Fully disclose, at the earliest opportunity, information of fact that would have significance in board decision-making.
5. Remain accountable for prudent fiscal management to association members, the board, and non-profit sector, and where applicable, to government and funding bodies.

Professional Excellence

6. Maintain a professional level of courtesy, respect, and objectivity in all CFC activities

7. Strive to uphold those practices and assist other CFC members of the board in upholding the highest standards of conduct

Personal Gain

8. Exercise the powers invested for the good of all members of the CFC rather than for his or her personal benefit, or that of the province they represent.

Equal Opportunity

9. Ensure the right of all association members to appropriate and effective services without discrimination on the basis of geography, political, religious, or socio-economical characteristics of the province or region represented.

10. Ensure the right of all association members to appropriate and effective services without discrimination on the basis of the organization’s volunteer or staff make-up in respect to gender, sexual orientation, national origin, race, religion, age, political affiliation or disability, in accordance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements.

Confidential Information

11. Respect the confidentiality of sensitive information known due to board service.

Collaboration and Cooperation

12. Respect the diversity of opinions as expressed or acted upon by the CFC Assembly of Governors, committees and membership, and formally register dissent as appropriate.

13. Promote collaboration, cooperation, and partnership among association members.

Allegation of violation of this code shall be investigated by the Assembly of Governors.

Les Bunning
04-03-2012, 11:46 PM
Although some of this is motherhood and apple pie it goes to far in many respects. For example Why shouldnt a governor support a member by making a submission to the NAC or ethics committee when he believes that the meber is correct or has an appropriate point of view.

Les Bunning

Bob Armstrong
04-03-2012, 11:53 PM
I fear parts of this code inhibit member/governor alliances in unpopular causes ( unpopular to the governors ), and could be used to stifle governor dissent ( against the CFC ).

Bob A

Christopher Mallon
04-04-2012, 05:57 AM
What exactly is this trying to fix? What "controversial clause" was removed?

Anything in there that's actually worth having is already no doubt part of the non-profit corporation law.

Rob Clark
04-04-2012, 07:05 AM
I would be interested in knowing more about "Refrain from “lobbying” other Governors outside of board meetings". I talk to governors in private about motions all the time. This sounds far more sinister than I mean it to be, but a lot of my talks with other governors regarding chess has been grabbing a pint and talking. If during said pint another governor brings up a prospective motion and makes a convincing argument, and then converts me to his way of thinking, would that be considered wrong under this? I fully agree that something to this effect should be in place though.

Also I agree with Les. I understand that it is pending before whatever committee, but if I feel there is something that needs some extra weight thrown behind it why shouldn't I throw mine? To be honest I would feel morally obligated to do so.

Ken Craft
04-04-2012, 07:19 AM
I'll be voting "no". Some of the problems with this idea have been stated above.

Bob Gillanders
04-04-2012, 09:32 AM
It appears to me this document was pulled "off the shelf" from somewhere, with no effort to make it appropriate for our needs, consequently, it is not.
If by some miracle it was passed, it would be ignored anyway. So what would be the point. I will be voting No.

Gordon Ritchie
04-04-2012, 11:00 AM
I fail to see the need for this incredibly elaborate screed.

Pierre Dénommée
04-04-2012, 02:36 PM
The one limiting the freedom of speech of the Governors in the opinion of the majority.

Not disclose or discuss differences of opinion in the Assembly of Governors outside of Assembly meetings, especially with staff, volunteers or clients. Assembly meeting includes in person meetings and the CFC private discussion boards for Governors. Chesstalk is outside of Assembly meetings and disclosing there shall be treated with more severity.

This was the most criticized part of the motion, so it is now gone.


What exactly is this trying to fix? What "controversial clause" was removed?

Anything in there that's actually worth having is already no doubt part of the non-profit corporation law.

Pierre Dénommée
04-04-2012, 02:38 PM
I do not believe that elsewhere has a NAC or an Assembly of Governors.


It appears to me this document was pulled "off the shelf" from somewhere, with no effort to make it appropriate for our needs, consequently, it is not.
If by some miracle it was passed, it would be ignored anyway. So what would be the point. I will be voting No.

Lyle Craver
04-04-2012, 08:03 PM
I'm going to be politically incorrect in saying so but isn't this motion really about providing tools to allow hammering of Governors who say indiscreet things on ChessTalk? (Not just there but that's the most egregious)

Frankly some of the things that have been posted shouldn't have been leaked and there are other ways to 'hammer' when it's called for.

I'm uncomfortable with this proposal - for one thing I talk to Governors all the time on various subjects but tend to be fairly discreet what I put on public forums - but no question we need a better consensus on what is and is not acceptable behaviour.

Michael Barron
04-04-2012, 10:24 PM
I'm going to be politically incorrect in saying so but isn't this motion really about providing tools to allow hammering of Governors who say indiscreet things on ChessTalk? (Not just there but that's the most egregious)

Frankly some of the things that have been posted shouldn't have been leaked and there are other ways to 'hammer' when it's called for.

I'm uncomfortable with this proposal - for one thing I talk to Governors all the time on various subjects but tend to be fairly discreet what I put on public forums - but no question we need a better consensus on what is and is not acceptable behaviour.

Thank you, Lyle!

This is exactly why we need this Motion - to find a better consensus on what is and is not acceptable behaviour.

Thanks to everybody who has commented on the Motion - your opinions will help us to reach our goal.

Now I would like to suggest to postpone voting on this Motion until AGM, and meantime Pierre and I could work on amending the Motion to make it acceptable for everybody.

Again, the goal is - to find a better consensus on what is and is not acceptable behaviour.

Ken Craft
04-05-2012, 08:08 AM
I'd rather vote on the motion at this meeting. Fewer governors participate directly in the AGM with many only being present by proxy.

Bob Armstrong
04-05-2012, 08:18 AM
I believe under Roberts Rules of Order, a mover does not have a unilateral right to withdraw a motion once it has been filed with the Assembly of Governors. Any decision to take the motion off the table requires a vote of the governors to allow such.

I want such a vote on this question of withdrawal re the " Code " motion 2012-L , since the mover has indicated he would prefer to have it taken off the agenda.

The reason is that I want the motion NOT withdrawn. I will be voting against the withdrawal. I want the motion voted on as originally submitted and planned.

That way the motion can be defeated, and then it cannot be brought back in front of us again for a certain length of time ( I'm not sure what that is though ) - the idea is that the Assembly not be harassed by continuous bringing of unacceptable motions. Also, it forces movers to make sure their motions are in acceptable shape before taking the significant step of filing them before the governors, not a trivial step.

Bob A

Pierre Dénommée
04-05-2012, 11:30 PM
This has been a very fast withdrawal. The poll has been closed in less the 24 h thus preventing me from voting against it. I know it would not have made any difference.