Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: 1. Agenda & Opening Comments of Chair

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,481

    Default

    As I wrote before I put my nomination for the NAC with a condition: if elected to the Ex., no NAC seat for me.
    .*-1

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    1,974
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
    As I wrote before I put my nomination for the NAC with a condition: if elected to the Ex., no NAC seat for me.
    Thanks for bringing that to our attention Egis; Vlad and Lyle will have to sort out what this means in terms of your replacement .... this isn't quite as simple as the Director at Large election.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    2,182
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Since we knew at the time of the election that Egidijus would not stand if he won a position on the board of directors and we did have an election I believe that we should move to the next candidate by vote tally which is Serge Archimbault. Even though the elections are simultaneous in theory they are serial events and so as soon as Egidijus won the vice presidency he withdrew from consideration from the NAC. Everyone running for this position was capable of serving. This is a committee which I hope will not have much work. I do not anticipate in the event that the committee does have work that we will see any appeals to the board of directors which resulted from the situation where the person appealing to the committee in 2017 was misled by a statement from our executive director that he should wait for the committee members to contact him.

    Proper procedures to follow in an appeal probably belong in the revised handbook to avoid such things in the future. My brother who lives in Dallas mentioned to my parents that this situation landed in the Dallas newspapers a few days ago with my name mentioned probably gleaned from quotes online since they did not talk to me.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    824

    Default

    It is not clear that it is proper to allow appeal to the Executive. FIDE already accept appeals from all the NAC of the World. If the event is not FIDE rated, the situation is different.

    According to Federal standards, there must be a way to appeal a decision of the Executive, not the other way around. http://www.crdsc-sdrcc.ca/eng/disput...ract-templates . Complying with that is a required for most Federal subsidies. It is certain that the NFP Act allow for that because everybody does it to receive Sports Canada money.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    2,182
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    The board is always the highest level of appeal within the CFC. We are the ones who are personally financially responsible for the CFC and its actions and as a result we get the final say. If someone does not like the decision of the executive, they can bring it to the voting members though the voting members cannot encroach on decisions that are clearly within the purview of the executive lest they incur the liability for that decision. This is not an abstract point as if it goes to court it can easily result in judgements for lawyers fees which can wipe out the accumulated assets of the CFC very quickly. The voting members can change the board of directors but they do have to trust them to do what is best for the CFC while they hold that office.

    At the moment we do not get any federal subsidies. I do not anticipate that changing any time soon.

    The case that resulted in appeal to the board of directors in 2017 was unique in that incorrect information was given to the person who appealed to the NAC by the Executive Director and as a result the person appealing the decision to the NAC felt that he had not been given the opportunity to fully state his case. I don't anticipate that unique set of circumstances to happen again and it is likely that there may not even be any appeals to the NAC. I don't anticipate the board of directors hearing any more appeals from NAC matters.
    Last edited by Vladimir Drkulec; 08-26-2018 at 03:30 PM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    1,974
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec View Post
    The case that resulted in appeal to the board of directors in 2017 was unique in that incorrect information was given to the person who appealed to the NAC by the Executive Director and as a result the person appealing the decision to the NAC felt that he had not been given the opportunity to fully state his case. I don't anticipate that unique set of circumstances to happen again and it is likely that there may not even be any appeals to the NAC. I don't anticipate the board of directors hearing any more appeals from NAC matters.
    At the risk of opening old wounds, I take full responsibility for Nikolay holding back all of the information, it was not Bob's doing. One has to understand that the existing CFC Handbook was written in the day where information passed by Canada Post. Here is the CFC Handbook

    "1248. The CFC Business Office will write to the players involved, the TD, and the members of the AC, providing them with the information provided by the appellant, and requesting them to confirm the facts and provide any additional facts or other relevant information.

    1249. When all the relevant information has been received the CFC Business Office will forward it to the members of the NAC, who will thereupon consider and rule on the appeal."

    Again, I think these instructions are a bit archaic, and with a timeline to name a player looming, I talked to Bob and instructed him to send the NAC members all of the e-mails of the players and officials, with the idea the NAC would contact who they wanted to speak to (and at the very least Nikolay). Either this was lost in translation or they decided they didn't need any information, and Nikolay was unable to give them his additional information. He was allowed to present it to the Executive for the Appeal of the NAC decision. My opinion was that the members of the Executive who were on the NAC should not be involved in the appeal to the Executive - as it turned out the vote was something like 4-1, without them.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •