The Hydra ~ Caro rears her head again

[jackcass]

No, it isn't semantics. There are people who had been appointed unlawfully to the Board, yet the unlawfulness of the appointment will never be considered (still less corrected) by the Members.

Who has been appointed unlawfully?

[Pies4shaw]

You can't be serious.

[jackcass]

Very serious.

[Pies4shaw]

God help us all, then.

Start in this thread at, eg, this post and read forward: viewtopic.php?t=88854&postdays=0&postor ... &start=102

I'm fairly confident I've explained this in excruciating detail for the deliberately-obtuse, previously.

[jackcass]

So cant explain then, that's fine.

Nobody it is.

[Pies4shaw]

I've pointed you quite precisely to the very post that first mentioned the ineligibility of one appointed Board member. Please let's not pretend that the woman was lawfully appointed - because that's demonstrably untrue.

[jackcass]

Her appointment was consistent with clause 25a, 25b, and clause 27 of the constitution. If she was retained on the board after failing to be ratified by members at the upcoming AGM then you might actually have a case. Alex Waislitz appointed in exactly the same way. Probably been others as well.

[WhyPhilWhy?]

I'd say not.

[jackcass]

LOL. Conveniently omit clause 25b which allows the 24 month membership requirement to be waived. How convenient.

[WhyPhilWhy?]

No it isn't.

The Board must seek permission at a General Meeting, not seek forgiveness - otherwise they could do whatever they liked on any matter and seek to have it verified afterwards.

[jackcass]

Rubbish. They must get members approval. The constitution makes no reference to the timing of appointments in relation to that. You're just adding your own interpretation where nothing is prescribed.

I reiterate my initial point. Nothing unlawful has occurred.

[Pies4shaw]

On 18 May 2021, the Club announced her appointment to the Board. The Club published a statement that "Waislitz’s resignation and O’Donnell’s appointment were made official at a meeting of the Collingwood board this afternoon ...." See https://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/news/9 ... -directors

Doubts about her qualification for appointment were raised promptly. On 19 May 2021, the Club announced that it had taken legal advice and that she would work without voting rights until the next election. The reason she could not vote, of course, was that she was ineligible for appointment to the Board. The Club does not appear to have published the pertinent statement on its web-site - but it is mentioned here: https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/ ... 49b90dec32

and here: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/cou ... 57t4x.html

Thus, on 18 May 2021, Collingwood purported to appoint an ineligible person to the Board.

It is simply not open to a light-sensitive collection of cells to pretend that "nothing unlawful occurred". Her appointment at all material times was and remains contrary to the Constitution.

[jackcass]

Again, more rubbish. Constitution allows for the casual filling of vacancies. It's happened frequently in the past. Those appointments to be ratified at the next AGM or EGM if one is called. Her eligibility or lack thereof would then be waived by the members.

That you don't like this one or how it transpired doesn't make it unlawful. Ditto Wilson's appointment.

[Pies4shaw]

I had that discussion with you many pages back, also. The eligibility requirements for membership apply expressly to casual vacancies. She was ineligible for appointment. That, of course, is why she came to be described by the Club as an "ex-officio" member.

I neither "like" nor "dislike" the decision. It was a gross failure of the basic requirements of good corporate governance - that's all.

Even the Club does not pretend that she was eligible for appointment to the Board as an actual member. It is remarkable that you cling to that peculiar view.

[jackcass]

O'Donnell and Wilson being ineligible is a long way shy of making them unlawful appointments which was your claim. Her ineligibility was managed and would have been formally addressed at the next AGM. Wilson's to as it transpired.

Happy for you to point me to the story in the media which confirms the boards actions to be unlawful. Clearly it'll be there somewhere as everything else about the saga is.