This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
This is a Collingwood Bulletin Board - use this forum for general, Pies-related topics. For other footy topics, use Nick's Other AFL forum, and for non-footy sporting topics please use Nick's Sports Bar. For non-sporting topics please use the Victoria Park Tavern.
Pies4shaw wrote:Well, they might - just to take an extreme example - have actually selected a female candidate who was able to meet the minimal requirements for appointment to the Board.
Why does a 24 month qualification period matter when it can easily be waived as we have done in the past?
It can't be "easily waived" - it requires the passage of an ordinary resolution in general meeting.
The Articles of Association provide for a general prohibition upon a member qualifying for election to the Board "unless he or she has been an Ordinary Member for at least twenty four (24) months immediately prior to his or her nomination." That general prohibition is subject to a proviso that "The Club in general meeting may pass an ordinary resolution waiving compliance with paragraph (a) in respect of a particular Ordinary Member." The Club has not waived that requirement - and the Board never had power to do so.
Pies4shaw wrote:It can't be "easily waived" - it requires the passage of an ordinary resolution in general meeting.
The Articles of Association provide for a general prohibition upon a member qualifying for election to the Board "unless he or she has been an Ordinary Member for at least twenty four (24) months immediately prior to his or her nomination." That general prohibition is subject to a proviso that "The Club in general meeting may pass an ordinary resolution waiving compliance with paragraph (a) in respect of a particular Ordinary Member."
And exactly when was the last AGM where these types of motions haven't easily passed? Motion put, all those in favour, the affirmative has the numbers, motion carried. The very definition of "easily waived".
And isn't the AGM decision making process the appropriate course to resolve it rather than the petty lynch mob mentality over social media posts that seems to have pervaded the discussion.
Pies4shaw wrote:The Club has not waived that requirement - and the Board never had power to do so.
Happy for you to point me to where I've suggested otherwise.
Pies4shaw wrote:It can't be "easily waived" - it requires the passage of an ordinary resolution in general meeting.
The Articles of Association provide for a general prohibition upon a member qualifying for election to the Board "unless he or she has been an Ordinary Member for at least twenty four (24) months immediately prior to his or her nomination." That general prohibition is subject to a proviso that "The Club in general meeting may pass an ordinary resolution waiving compliance with paragraph (a) in respect of a particular Ordinary Member."
And exactly when was the last AGM where these types of motions haven't easily passed? Motion put, all those in favour, the affirmative has the numbers, motion carried. The very definition of "easily waived".
And isn't the AGM decision making process the appropriate course to resolve it rather than the petty lynch mob mentality over social media posts that seems to have pervaded the discussion.
Pies4shaw wrote:The Club has not waived that requirement - and the Board never had power to do so.
Happy for you to point me to where I've suggested otherwise.
The power to waive is expressed to be exercisable only by General Meeting and prospectively. It wasn't.
Pies4shaw wrote:The power to waive is expressed to be exercisable only by General Meeting and prospectively. It wasn't.
While a moot point now it had long been scheduled for the next AGM. As is Neil Wilson now. It's what happens with casual vacancies that arise between AGMs.
^ Casual vacancies are expressly subject to the election qualification requirements (see clause 27(b) of the Articles). That, of course, is why she was described as an "ex-officio" Board member (that is, never an actual Board member at all).
Pies4shaw wrote:^ Casual vacancies are expressly subject to the election qualification requirements (see clause 27(b) of the Articles). That, of course, is why she was described as an "ex-officio" Board member (that is, never an actual Board member at all).
^^ Yep, 27b as I've highlighted elsewhere. Any person so appointed must satisfy the qualification for Board membership as required by Article 25
Article 25b The Club in general meeting may pass an ordinary resolution waiving compliance with paragraph (a) [24 month requirement]
It's all there in B&W.
I'm now not even sure which side of the discussion you're supporting given you're now quoting the same stuff I am.
Don't confuse your current path with your final destination. Just because it's dark and stormy now doesn't meant that you aren't headed for glorious sunshine!
