Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
ULSU EGM
Options
Comments
-
-
Suggestions from an interested third party...
A few years back I went for the Sec Gen position and attended a second round interview. I wasn’t offered the job (Tomás got it) and don’t know whether I’d have accepted it if I had. When the GM role came up recently I briefly considered it, but my career had moved on too far and I didn’t apply – just as well, as it looks like a very experienced person got the gig.
There was one weakness in the corporate governance as I saw it at the time I applied for the Sec Gen position, but it probably wouldn’t have affected my decision to take on the role at the time. However, I’m not so sure now.
The Sec Gen (now the GM and FA) reports to the President who has the final say.
So, on the one hand you’ve a person that’s possibly been a student all their life learning about practical business issues on the fly, dictating to a possibly seasoned business professional. That’s fine, and as it should be for the most part.
However, you’re left with a scenario where you have the most popular, ambitious person getting elected to, effectively, the CEO position of a Million euro + business each year. Any particular president may be fantastic, but because of the law of averages and the replacement speed it may not take too long before a less than competent president is in charge.
With this in mind I would suggest a corporate governance change. The annual budget should be agreed by the budget committee, chaired by the president, at the start of the year. Once agreed this becomes the General Manager’s responsibility to be met. This should reduce the temptation of short-termism that has to be inherent in the President’s role.
Also, the build up of debt may also be (though not necessarily) the result of short-termism, which may harm the future day to day running of UL services – is there a covenant within the SU constitution that only allows debt as a certain percentage of annual capitation? If there’s such a limit it may need to be reviewed, as the current debt level seems too high. Provision should be built in to allow for drops in capitation in any particular year following a year where the debt limit is higher. It shouldn’t be incumbent to immediately reduce debt to the agreed percentage, but extra debt should not be allowed to be incurred until below the current allowed percentage.
Other funding threat...
My understanding is that the spar shop has contributed to the SU services cost for some time, however the setting up of Aldi so close to UL must be affecting takings. I imagine the Spar shop will only be used for convenience now, with weekly shopping taking place in Aldi. I’m not sure if there’s a solution to this, but it needs to be factored-in in future cash flows.
If the above were put in place, with the expectation that similar mistakes would be less likely going forward, it may make the temporary reallocation from C&S more palatable. Or maybe not
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement