Presidential Debate: Apathetic CFC Governors

[Bob Armstrong]

Question for CFC Presidential Candidates:

The Cooperative Chess Coalition ( CCC ) believes CFC members are concerned about the governance of the CFC.

Barely 50 % ( 31/60 ) of the CFC Governors showed up for the 2011 Spring Governors' On-line Meeting. However 70% had shown for the 2010 Fall Meeting and the 2011 Winter Meeting.

1. Is there a problem here, and, if so, what is it?
2. Does the Executive have a role in encouraging apathetic governors to participate in governing? If so, what is that role and what would you do to try to change the current situation?

Bob, CCC Coordinator

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Serge & Pierre:

Just bumping this up in case Serge missed it in his last round of answering questions.

Bob, CCC Coordinator

[Pierre Dénommée]

There will always be Governors and only the Governors can decide how many of them is best for the CFC and what to do with inactive Governors. According to Quebec Laws, apart from a very small number of exceptions, the power to nominate implies the power to destitute. So, it should be the Provincial Association responsibility to remove what they consider is deadwood.

I will make an analogy with the Canadian Forces. In order to punish someone or to give an order to someone, you must have a higher rank then the person receiving the order. Since nobody is higher then the Assembly of Governors, almost nobody can punish them. They can punish themselves and they are subject to the CFC Code of Ethics.

In general, you cannot give an order to a volunteer because if he gets angry, he will leave. Contrary to a job, there is no direct consequence to being fired or to a voluntary departure. Is is our job to retains our volunteers.

Before reducing the number of Governors, we should remember that they represent 50 members. Contrary to our MP, the CFC members do not know who represent them and individual Governors never receive a list of the 50 members that they represent. This should be improved. Officially, the Governors represent their Provincial Association, but since there is one per 50 members, they also implicitly represent the members.

Some absent Governors may have very good reasons. We are not in position to judge them and we should not until we have a participation rule in our Constitution.

A volunteer should read the Constitutions of Canada Basketball, Hockey, Volleyball, Baseball, Football... and not only check for an activity rule but to use them as an inspiration for a future CFC Constitution.

It is my my belief that any attempt from the President to impose a solution would be fiercely resisted by the Governors. The solution has to be moved and seconded by the Governors.

[roger patterson]

There will always be Governors and only the Governors can decide how many of them is best for the CFC and what to do with inactive Governors. According to Quebec Laws, apart from a very small number of exceptions, the power to nominate implies the power to destitute. So, it should be the Provincial Association responsibility to remove what they consider is deadwood.

.

there was some noise a year or so ago by Bob Armstrong about how the Governors, although allocated by province, were in fact elected by CFC members of that province, not appointed by the provincial body. So, it is not clear to me that the provincial body has the ability, power, or responsibility to remove deadwood governors from power. Particularly as my understanding is that the governors are independent agents and cannot be directed by the provincial body.

Having said that, I was prepared to leave some BC spots vacant this year rather than leave deadwood in but somewhat unusually for us we happened to get enough plausible candidates (a change in rules regarding governors who become executive members not freeing up spots helped keep the number of governor vacancies down). Not sure that the provincial body can refuse to fill a spot if someone wants it though.

[Pierre Dénommée]

Governors in provinces with no affiliated Provincial Association are not elected by the players but by the other Governors. This is odd. The FQE web site uses a system that enable every members to vote irrespective of the fact that its region is not represented by a League.

The CFC Constitution is quite clear: Every Ordinary or Life Member has a right to vote on the appointment or election of the Governor or Governors who will represent his Provincial Organization.

Officially, a Governor represent a Provincial Organization. This is odd because, as you correctly pointed out, a Governor is free to vote as he please.

Giving an equal representation to every members of all provinces is an important issue.

That would means that CFC members have the right to dismiss their Governor. According to the Act, there must exist a destitution procedure. The Corporation Act has changed and we must ensure that the CFC Constitution still complies with the Act.

there was some noise a year or so ago by Bob Armstrong about how the Governors, although allocated by province, were in fact elected by CFC members of that province, not appointed by the provincial body. So, it is not clear to me that the provincial body has the ability, power, or responsibility to remove deadwood governors from power. Particularly as my understanding is that the governors are independent agents and cannot be directed by the provincial body.

Having said that, I was prepared to leave some BC spots vacant this year rather than leave deadwood in but somewhat unusually for us we happened to get enough plausible candidates (a change in rules regarding governors who become executive members not freeing up spots helped keep the number of governor vacancies down). Not sure that the provincial body can refuse to fill a spot if someone wants it though.

[roger patterson]

The CFC Constitution is quite clear: Every Ordinary or Life Member has a right to vote on the appointment or election of the Governor or Governors who will represent his Provincial Organization.

Officially, a Governor represent a Provincial Organization. This is odd because, as you correctly pointed out, a Governor is free to vote as he please.

.

Another odd thing, there is an implicit assumption that a) every member of the provincial organization is a member of the CFC and b) every member of the CFC is a member of their provincial organization.

a) is certainly not true - at least in BC.

b) is not true either. As an example, there has been historically an issue with CFC life members not paying provincial dues. [one of the reasons BC went to a dues per tournament per player format].

[Fred McKim]

Another odd thing, there is an implicit assumption that a) every member of the provincial organization is a member of the CFC and b) every member of the CFC is a member of their provincial organization.

a) is certainly not true - at least in BC.

b) is not true either. As an example, there has been historically an issue with CFC life members not paying provincial dues. [one of the reasons BC went to a dues per tournament per player format].

So what is the fee structure in BC now ?

[roger patterson]

So what is the fee structure in BC now ?

basically $4 per person per tournament. (for multi-day events. For 1 day events it is $2) Play in one event, and you are a member for a year. The tournament does not have to be CFC rated. There are exemptions for charity events and for all junior events.

In addition, anyone who organizes or TDs a BCCF event is a member.

http://www.chess.bc.ca/FeeReorganizationNov08.pdf

[Fred McKim]

basically $4 per person per tournament. (for multi-day events. For 1 day events it is $2) Play in one event, and you are a member for a year. The tournament does not have to be CFC rated. There are exemptions for charity events and for all junior events.

In addition, anyone who organizes or TDs a BCCF event is a member.

http://www.chess.bc.ca/FeeReorganizationNov08.pdf

Under CFC By-Law Discussion 4c - members of the the provincial association must also be a CFC members. So your method of doing business is a what I would consider a "minor" infraction of the rules (ie I don't think anybody at the CFC is going to complain).

[Ken Craft]

Minor? Seems to run contrary to the whole idea of a federation of provincial associations.