EBS Building Society ... Please use your Vote !

garrettod

Hi

(Hope this is the right forum)

Not sure how many of you this may be of interest to, but anyone who is a member of the EBS Building Society will have recently received, or is about to receive, voting papers for this year's AGM

While anyone wishing to attend can do so, per the information in the documents that arrive, anyone who is not going might please try and ensure they do the following:

* Use Your Vote: - it's as simple as putting an "X" in a few boxes and posting it back to the EBS, or giving it to a proxy if you rather

While I'm not here to tell anyone how to vote, for what its worth my votes are;
- For Eithne Tinney (a director the EBS appears to be trying to ditch),

- Against the Renumeration (why support a payrise for people when you don't know what they do, don't see positive results from their actions etc)

- For the appointment of the current auditors. (why not, they have done nothing wrong that we know of ?


* Senator Shane Ross: Amongst others, Shane Ross is campaigning aginst some of the bad practices at the EBS. While the EBS claims to be a mutual, acting for the good of it's members, it's poor savings & mortgage rates suggest otherwise.

Check out Mr. Ross's website - EBS has made it onto his homepage, for all the wrong reasons !!!

http://www.shane-ross.ie/

For anyone wanting to contact him, send him their proxy vote etc, here are his contact details:

Senator Shane Ross
Seanad Eireann
Leinster House
Kildare St
Dublin 2.
Tel: +353 1 618 3014
Home: +353 1 211 6692
Fax: + 353 1 618 4192
Email: shane.ross@oireachtas.ie


If your not already a member of the EBS, consider becoming one. To become a society member, is easy ... just put €130 into a membership, demand savings accout & leave it there. The interest rates are poor,but you then qualify for a vote & will be entitled to a share of any future payout, should the society convert from a mutual company and pay Windfalls (your vote may influence this at some point in the future btw).


* AskAboutMoney.com
Many of you may already be familar with this website. However, for those of you who are not, there is significant discussion on the EBS (alongside other issues of financial interest) to be found on it.
Here's the link for anyone interested: http://www.askaboutmoney.com/forumdisplay.php?f=38

Sonnenblumen

I think members should think long and hard as why they should not to support the Board of EBS.

The recent moaning (but he is so tedious) of Shane Ross would encourage me to do the exact opposite to what he suggests. He is nothing more than a crusader for lost causes and a lap dog editor of perhaps the worst piece of 'gossip sniping' print masquerading as Business news.

His arguments remind me of the local mongrel who scutters about pissing on this and that pole. Most don't take notice and pretty soon his markings are soon forgotten.

garrettod

Sonnenblumen wrote:

I think members should think long and hard as why they should not to support the Board of EBS.

The recent moaning (but he is so tedious) of Shane Ross would encourage me to do the exact opposite to what he suggests. He is nothing more than a crusader for lost causes and a lap dog editor of perhaps the worst piece of 'gossip sniping' print masquerading as Business news.

His arguments remind me of the local mongrel who scutters about pissing on this and that pole. Most don't take notice and pretty soon his markings are soon forgotten.

Hi

While I respect your views on Shane Ross and everyone is entitled to their personal opinion, I can't say I agree.

What specifically do you feel you disagree with, as a matter of interest, from the original post ? ... you've indicated your tempted to vote in favour the EBS Board I think, but not really why ?

Thanks

redspider

Hi Garretrod,

Thanks for that link. I've read up on some of the threads on AAM about this EBS 'saga'.

The whole episode throws up a number of issues. For one, with a mutual society setup such as EBS, how are they actually ran and how are the Directors of the Company actually appointed? I presume the appointment process is defined in the Society's rules but it would seem to me that they are in many instances 'self-appointed' or 'peer-appointed', which cant be ideal in a member-owned stucture. Should it not be the case that in a 'democratic' members society such as EBS, that members vote for the 'officers' that are up for election each year? Or is that deemed to be too impractical?

Secondly, the appraisal process used seems very bogus. As pointed out elsewhere, it is clearly open to classical 'group-think', especially where a Chairman and some other executives have an 'iron grip' and influence whether directly or indirectly what they want. The well-known 'Yes-men' problem. It is also very subjective, but its objectivity which is a key aspect in any fair appraisal system worth its salt, the more objectivity the better, and any HR consultancy will tell them that.

Thirdly, the 'cosy' situation that many Boardrooms create and generate is a difficult situation to avoid. So-called best practice with sub-committees, etc, is really a deflection and distraction from the overall Board Room process and does not produce best practice results. I myself have found that company management teams and board rooms work better when they are smaller, and number around 5 rather than the unwieldy 12's etc. Its important that at least 2 if not 3 full-time executives are on the board, usually the CEO, COO and CFO/CMO/CTO. So, for the EBS a board of 6 perhaps with 3 voted on by Members each year, including the Chairman. The EBS is also big enough that they should warrant a full-time salary and job, in my opinion, and not be part-time NED's.

Of course Board Rooms are a black art. Members do not know what goes on at them. We have not seen any minutes of any of the board room meetings, we do not know who attends which ones, or who has said what. Granted, as a profit-making, commercial and large society, there are many things both at governance/board level and company executive/management level that needs to remain 'secret' and should be so as they are operationally sensitive, but you would think nonetheless that some information would be forthcoming.

Overall, its impossible for anyone that wasnt on the board and seen and heard everything that Ethna Tinney and other Board members did, inside and outside of the meetings, to know exactly what went on, and even then it would be very subjective.

Whether the EBS Members vote back in Ethna Tinney or not, I think they should aim to get more control over their society as the current situation is to say the least bizarre.

Just some thoughts ....

Redspider

garrettod

Hi Redspider

I'd tend to agree with much of what you say & I think, in summary your spot on my friend .... the members should have more control over how their company is run (thats right everyone, every member is a part owner of the EBS - so it is our company !)

Given the above, step 1 must be to encourage as many people as possible, who have a vote at the EBS to start using it ... and also, to think about how they want their company run in the future and start letting their thoughts be known

redspider

garrettod wrote:

Step 1 must be to encourage as many people as possible, who have a vote at the EBS to start using it ... and also, to think about how they want their company run in the future and start letting their thoughts be known

Yes, I agree. I think the Members of EBS need to self-organise. They need some sort of forum to do that and perhaps a web-supported one would be an ideal place to start. Is AskAboutMoney the place to host that forum or should some Members volunteer to set something up elsewhere, even on a hosted boards.ie ? Members could be encouraged to join, via the media and perhaps via Ethna Tinney. Members could let their opinions be known.

Another thing I noticed is that membership of the Society is based on having at least Euro 125 in an account. That to me seems to be a very low threshold as EBS could only gain very little income if much at all from administrating such an account.

Is it time for a Members 'Revolution'? Maybe. Well, at least self-organisation at any rate.

Redspider

garrettod

redspider wrote:

Yes, I agree. I think the Members of EBS need to self-organise. They need some sort of forum to do that and perhaps a web-supported one would be an ideal place to start. Is AskAboutMoney the place to host that forum or should some Members volunteer to set something up elsewhere, even on a hosted boards.ie ? Members could be encouraged to join, via the media and perhaps via Ethna Tinney. Members could let their opinions be known.

Another thing I noticed is that membership of the Society is based on having at least Euro 125 in an account. That to me seems to be a very low threshold as EBS could only gain very little income if much at all from administrating such an account.

Is it time for a Members 'Revolution'? Maybe. Well, at least self-organisation at any rate.

Redspider

Hi Redspider

At the moment, AskAboutMoney.com appears to be where many of the EBS members are posting - mind you, I and a few others have spend a number of years trying to get the AAM owner and some of the moderators to look more closely at the EBS & have only recently, seen significant progress.

An independent forum / website for discussion would be excellent and I suspect, following Monday's AGM there may well be an effort to set this up ... perhaps as the first step towards members trying to put things right again at the EBS, start a campaign to get certain Board members removed, or perhaps even work towards demutualisation of the society etc.

There are numerous reports of EBS branches now trying to talk old ladies into signing over blank proxy votes or vote under guidance from the branch (in favour of the board) which is downright shameful.

No doubt Monday's going to be interesting to say the least mate

Sonnenblumen

garrettod wrote:

Hi Redspider

At the moment, AskAboutMoney.com appears to be where many of the EBS members are posting - mind you, I and a few others have spend a number of years trying to get the AAM owner and some of the moderators to look more closely at the EBS & have only recently, seen significant progress.

An independent forum / website for discussion would be excellent and I suspect, following Monday's AGM there may well be an effort to set this up ... perhaps as the first step towards members trying to put things right again at the EBS, start a campaign to get certain Board members removed, or perhaps even work towards demutualisation of the society etc.

There are numerous reports of EBS branches now trying to talk old ladies into signing over blank proxy votes or vote under guidance from the branch (in favour of the board) which is downright shameful.

No doubt Monday's going to be interesting to say the least mate

If as reported in today's media are true less than 10,000 of the 280,000 actually take part in the annual voting, I would have thought a whistle stop canvass of Nursing Homes might be more helpful. Anyways whats independent about someone campaigning against the board or worse still demutualisation. Sounds like a Jekyll & Hyde approach to putting members first.

What puzzles me is why anyone would want to work in a company where it is patently obvious her views are not shared and worse still colleague support has been withdrawn. The EBS is hardly a major fin corp and whether it sneezes or farts who (Shane Ross et al) will notice or even care.

Tinney should probably find another cause.

redspider

garrettod wrote:

At the moment, AskAboutMoney.com appears to be where many of the EBS members are posting - mind you, I and a few others have spend a number of years trying to get the AAM owner and some of the moderators to look more closely at the EBS & have only recently, seen significant progress.

An independent forum / website for discussion would be excellent and I suspect, following Monday's AGM there may well be an effort to set this up ... perhaps as the first step towards members trying to put things right again at the EBS, start a campaign to get certain Board members removed, or perhaps even work towards demutualisation of the society etc.

There are numerous reports of EBS branches now trying to talk old ladies into signing over blank proxy votes or vote under guidance from the branch (in favour of the board) which is downright shameful.

Yes, I think that this episode, if nothing else, proves that the Members of the Society need to get control of their company and self-organise.

Branch staff trying to influence votes MUST be against the Society's own rules and if directed by Executives/Management or from the Board, this to me should be a matter for the ODCE surely, and could end up in prosecutions and debarrment's, etc. Looks like the EBS situation is not going to dissappear quitely after the AGM.

I've read your posts on AAM, they were good. Also, here is one form punter which I agree with:

punter wrote:

Neither of the letters dated 29th March particular impressed me and I have to say I sat in the fence, holding mixed views, somewhat similar to the ones Brendan expressed. Frankly, it was just like overhearing the neighbours while they were having a bit of "a domestic" about something trivial.

However yesterday's revelations in the IT stink, and suggest that all is definitely not right at Board level in the EBS. While I abhor the leaks themselves as a means of achieving anything - the extent to which the Board is dysfunctional is a serious concern. When somebody with Cathal Magee's background puts in writing a claim that he had been the subject of "corporate bullying" it really is time to sit up and take notice. I'm not arguing the rights and wrongs of the situation, simply the level of dysfunctionality that this indicates. It is difficult to believe that the Board could have been properly, competently and efficiently discharging its duties in such a hostile atmosphere.

I have managed to get 10 vote forms completed in favour of Ms Tinney. While I know nothing about her, electing her at this point will certainly highlight the the level of concern that these shenanigans give rise to, and hopefully lead to a clearing of the air and proper resolution. At the very least, the Chairman needs to issue a very full, factual and honest statement outlining all aspects of the affair. And in reality, it may well be necessary for him to step aside. This is particularly the case if Ms Tinney is elected, as the Chairman and Board have very very stupidly allowed Tinney, Ross et al to turn a Board Election into a de facto vote of no confidence in the Board and the Chairman in particular..

The real concern now is not the rights and wrongs of past disagreements, but rather the potential damage being caused by ongoing hostilities and the distracting effect that they must be having on the Board and Senior Management.

Enjoy the AGM pn Monday. I'm sure we'll hear a lot about it as it must be the most watched AGM at the EBS in decades.

Redspider

redspider

Oh by the way, someone mentioned that Customers for Life Ltd was ran out of someones house in Shankhill. I just checked the CRO and the status of the company is Dissolved, as and from 24th November last (2006).

curioser and curioser ..... although I know nothing about the company and they may have acted completely bona fide in their duties/services, etc.

Redspider

man1

Who is the politician below???

garrettod wrote:

Not sure how many of you this may be of interest to, but anyone who is a member of the EBS Building Society will have recently received, or is about to receive, voting papers for this year's AGM

- Against the Renumeration (why support a payrise for people when you don't know what they do, don't see positive results from their actions etc)

We dont see negative results either????!!!!

- For the appointment of the current auditors. (why not, they have done nothing wrong that we know of ?

They have done nothing right that we know of either!!!!

Give us better reasons to vote for your choices and not politician garb!!!!

redspider

I think EBS and indeed all companies should change their Auditor every now and again. This is good corprate governance practice as it brings in a fresh viewpoint (if all things are 'kosher' they will also be with the new auditors) and it can also drive down costs if put out to tender. Keeping the same auditor year in year out leds to staleness on both sides.

I think in EBS's case, a change of Auditor may be a wise choice as Ernst & Young (it is them, isn't it?) have been the auditor for a very long time I understand.

Redspider

garrettod

man1 wrote:

Who is the politician below???

We dont see negative results either????!!!!


They have done nothing right that we know of either!!!!

Give us better reasons to vote for your choices and not politician garb!!!!

Hi

Sorry not entirely sure I follow the comment about the politician below (in your opening sentence) ?

With regards to the negative results, let me give a few examples off the top of my head:

- as a mutual society, established for the good of it's members it has poor lending rates for people borrowing to buy homes & poor savings rates for those with oridinary, demand based savings accounts.

- as a mutual society, it does not share the profits (excess of income over expenditure as it's often recorded in accounts for societies / clubs etc) with the members, who are the owners of the business (instead retaining unnecessary earnings, which could help the members aka owners of the society)

- as a mutual society, it clearly has not been behaving in the best interst of it's members, based upon evidence presented / leaked to the national press

-as a mutual society, it has failed to deliver preferential service to it's members, with closure of branches etc

- as a mutual society, established and run for the good of it's members, the EBS fails to show any sort of social consideration for those applying for loans and assess lending for example, on a purely commercial basis. If you look at a credit union for example (also run for the good of it's members etc), you will see they operate on an entirely different & far more appropriate manner, for a mutual

I hope the helps clarify the first of your questions





With regards the comment on the auditors, their job is to audit the business in a clear fashion and report accordingly, in line with accountancy standards such as the FRS' etc. As long as they do this, prove to be reasonable value for money (in comparison to similar size & experienced businesses), then I've no objection to them staying on as auditors - particularly when some other large accountancy practices may have appeared in newspapers over recent years with some negative commentry etc. That was my view.

I don't have a strong view on this point though and to be honest, there is equal merrit in redspider's comments to be fair here


Hope this helps answer your questions

Cheers

redspider

So, the meeting was a vibrant one according to RTE:
www.rte.ie/business/2007/0416/EBS.html

And the result: Eithne/a Tinney just missed out by a slim margin, 9417 votes were cast in her favour, while 10,252 were voted against.

That's not a resounding victory for the board given the fact that they were against this motion, plus they have used arguably nefarious and perhaps even illegal means (against the Society's own rules?) in encouraging against votes at branch offices, and given that the total voting size is 280,000, there are a lot of unknown opinions in the Membership and perhaps more support for her lurking silently there.

No doubt we'll hear more about it tomorrow (Tue). What would be interesting from a Members point of view is does Tinney now want to remain a representative for Members interests and work to self-organise them and give them a more direct voice. She still has that opportunity if she wants and if she is bouyed by the support of 9,417.

Redspider

redspider

There's some more feedback being posted on AAM:

PS One positive thing did happen today. A woman who spoke from the floor explained the procedure about how to bring forward a motion to nominate someone to the board (as I learned recently by reading the rules). It became clear how ignorant most normal people are about proposing members to the board; of course this allows those 'who know' to run rings around "the ignorant" who are far from stupid but not tuned in. Anyhow, because she spoke so well she subseqently became known and was referred to as "the lady in red" by the top table occupied by the board. This lady has collected more than the required 20 EBS members and will be submitting herself for election to the board at next year's AGM. I sought her out at the interval and gave her my name as well as two others I had recruited. She's a very personable Solicitor and I wish her well. However, one person can't beat the system so I am not overly expectant of what she may achieve against the odds. That's just how it is.

Garrettrod, if she does have contact details, and if I dont spot them on AAM, its probably worth it to put them up here, if there are any stray EBS members lurking.

From a neutral point of view the situation at EBS is interesting, as with the INBS there was/is a saga, and I think the one at EBS is only begining.

The AGM may be over and this spat 'put down', but I expect we will be hearing a lot more about the EBS in the new few years.

Redspider

garrettod

Hi mate

Sorry, dont know who that lady was, though fingers crossed the newspapers etc will soon find her name & if she is willing (which I'd imagine she will be), give us some info - given as she will be looking for our votes at the next AGM.

At a guess, I'd imagine the dust will settle a little following the AGM on Monday, but one thing is for sure - we've now seen evidence that there are a lot of unhappy members at the EBS & one way or another, they need to take some sort of action to put things wright at their company !

A fair point has been made elsewhere, with regards to the fact that there is believed to be circa 280,000 members - of which it appears less than 10% took the trouble to vote & this, is a shame because those with a vote should always use it (same can be said for political elections etc).

However, what was really silly was the EBS indicating they had a clear mandate or whatever, having beanten Ms. Tinney by a slim c1,000 votes after all their "dirty" tactics (such as getting their staff to lobby customers, some pretty bad handling of the initial attempts to get Ms. Tinney off the Board etc). It will indeed be interesting to see if Ms. Tinney takes any further public action against the EBS _ such as perhaps lobbying members for next years AGM etc.

Mr.Tuttlinghorn

When I received 'the letters' from EBS my initial reaction was in support of the director who seemed to be pushing for better governance, but as I thought about it and read some postings here I came to the conclusion that if the EBS board are so demonstrably unable to handle basic performance management and grievance management, then not only am I not interested in any of their sides of the story, or trying to pick apart the half truths, I really dont care what the outcome is.

These guys dont have my confidence and I'm off to an institution that will charge me less, and hopefully not run their business like a creche ('he called me names', 'she put sand in my eye' etc etc.)

redspider

Sonnenblumen wrote:

I think members should think long and hard as why they should not to support the Board of EBS. The recent moaning (but he is so tedious) of Shane Ross would encourage me to do the exact opposite to what he suggests. He is nothing more than a crusader for lost causes

What are your thoughts now given the vote was so close? Misguided voters ('following' Shane Ross) or is the company being misguided/managed?

Whilst many people would not be afficiando's of Shane Ross, it doesnt mean that any 'cause' bandwagon he jumps on does not have some merit.

Mr.Tuttlinghorn wrote:

When I received 'the letters' from EBS my initial reaction was in support of the director who seemed to be pushing for better governance, but as I thought about it and read some postings here I came to the conclusion that if the EBS board are so demonstrably unable to handle basic performance management and grievance management, then not only am I not interested in any of their sides of the story, or trying to pick apart the half truths, I really dont care what the outcome is.

These guys dont have my confidence and I'm off to an institution that will charge me less

Whilst leaving is one course of action, for many members leaving perhaps will cost more than they will gain. If these 'shenanigans' are a potential spark for change, then perhaps it is in every members interest to stay on and try and change things rather than cutting and running. Clearly there is probably room for improvement at the EBS, although to get those changes through will require a lot of fight and determination from a combined group of Members most likely.

Redspider

Sonnenblumen

redspider wrote:

What are your thoughts now given the vote was so close? Misguided voters ('following' Shane Ross) or is the company being misguided/managed?

Whilst many people would not be afficiando's of Shane Ross, it doesnt mean that any 'cause' bandwagon he jumps on does not have some merit.


Redspider

Well regarding the vote approx 10% of members took part, which kind of suggests they have better things to do than become entangled in the lost cause which I'm glad is over.

I left EBS over 2 years ago and haven't look back once!

Hope there's a rainbow's end in there somewhere for you Redspider, only time will tell.

redspider

Sonnenblumen wrote:

Well regarding the vote approx 10% of members took part, which kind of suggests they have better things to do than become entangled in the lost cause which I'm glad is over.

Well, that's an incorrect conclusion if ever there was one. The number of votes cast (about 20,000) was double the normal amount of votes cast for these AGM's, so the turnout in fact strongly suggests the opposite of what you are concluding. Members were in fact activated to participate. Additionally, the vote was a mere 2% swing away from being lost by the board. If 52-48% is a 'lost cause' in a low turnout, then you have a very strange view of the world.

Given your other comments on Rabobank in other threads etc and the warnings you have recieved there from moderators I think many here can conclude that your opinions do not hold much weight, if any.

sunflowers indeed !

Redspider

Sonnenblumen

redspider wrote:

Well, that's an incorrect conclusion if ever there was one. The number of votes cast (about 20,000) was double the normal amount of votes cast for these AGM's, so the turnout in fact strongly suggests the opposite of what you are concluding. Members were in fact activated to participate. Additionally, the vote was a mere 2% swing away from being lost by the board. If 52-48% is a 'lost cause' in a low turnout, then you have a very strange view of the world.

Given your other comments on Rabobank in other threads etc and the warnings you have recieved there from moderators I think many here can conclude that your opinions do not hold much weight, if any.

sunflowers indeed !

Redspider

First of all I made no comments on any specific bank, in fact, I was referring to elements of banks offering miserly rates to entice little depositors to make enough extra interset to pay for an admission ticket to Dublin Zoo. It is beyond common sense how anyone believes there are making a real return when in fact the rates earned are less than inflation. So if people cannot do the maths well, I wouldn't be too concerned about some remote Mod threatening bans. Do I give a notion if someone else cannot read? NO!!

As for EBS, if you stand up on your feet and did a simple caluculation: what % of total EBS membership actually took part in the vote ? Even including Proxies it was < 20%. So you can go elsewhere with your belief a new movement is afoot. Chances are 20 % of the blue rinse brigade will be dead come this time next year.

I seriously question how much grey matter is in circulation on these boards! If it ain't teens well its the other end. Who cares!

BuffyBot

I would suggest that you both keep it civil, and vaguely on topic. The thread is about EBS, not other institutions or personalities.

Sonnenblumen

BuffyBot wrote:

I would suggest that you both keep it civil, and vaguely on topic. The thread is about EBS, not other institutions or personalities.

Why not point out the errors and bring reasoning to the fore?

Why are blatant errors tolerated??

Am I right or am I right??

Peter Collins

redspider wrote:

Well, that's an incorrect conclusion if ever there was one. The number of votes cast (about 20,000) was double the normal amount of votes cast for these AGM's, so the turnout in fact strongly suggests the opposite of what you are concluding. Members were in fact activated to participate. Additionally, the vote was a mere 2% swing away from being lost by the board. If 52-48% is a 'lost cause' in a low turnout, then you have a very strange view of the world.

Given your other comments on Rabobank in other threads etc and the warnings you have recieved there from moderators I think many here can conclude that your opinions do not hold much weight, if any.

sunflowers indeed !

Redspider

Bit bitter there Redspider? Ha! Just because she got turfed out!

Wait a minute...that's not you Eithne, is it?

redspider

Peter Collins wrote:

Bit bitter there Redspider? Ha! Just because she got turfed out! Wait a minute...that's not you Eithne, is it?

No, I'm neither Eithne, nor Mark!
I'm not bitter at all, as I have no vested interest. But Sonnenblumen's conclusions over the vote are not logical even after the logic has been pointed out.

Sonnenblumen wrote:

Am I right or am I right??

In terms of EBS, no, you are making no logical sense. I'll leave it up to BuffyBot and others to draw their own conclusions.

Redspider