Irish Chess Union AGM 2013

eclipsechaser

This live-blogging is excellent!

Sparks

Gerry Graham elected as tournament director. Una O'Boyle returned as PRO.

Sparks

Eamon Keogh elected as FIDE delegate. Gearoidin Ui Laighleis returned as Women's officer.

hewhowatches

Sparks wrote: »

Bernard voted as membership officer (the feck?! Blunder!). Gary O'Grady returned as development officer. Darko Polimac returned as junior officer. Voting on tournament director now.

Is this language appropriate? referring to our new membership officer in such derogatory terms?

let me be the first to say...

Congradulations Bernard!

Sparks

Motion to adjourn defeated, on to the motions...

Sparks

hewhowatches wrote: »

Is this language appropriate? referring to our new membership officer in such derogatory terms?

let me be the first to say...

Congradulations Bernard!

It's more polite than what that gombeen's been saying in here. The man's behaviour has been a disgrace.

Sparks

1,14,26 being discussed.

eclipsechaser

hewhowatches wrote: »

Is this language appropriate? referring to our new membership officer in such derogatory terms?

let me be the first to say...

Congradulations Bernard!

See the Irish Chess group on FB to get some background why Sparks might feel that way. Bernard certainly doesn't seem to have a problem addressing other officers in derogatory terms himself so I doubt he'll be too upset about it.

phnompenhchess

eclipsechaser wrote: »

See the Irish Chess group on FB to get some background why Sparks might feel that way. Bernard certainly doesn't seem to have a problem addressing other officers in derogatory terms himself so I doubt he'll be too upset about it.

Agreed, I think Bernard can handle the abuse. His election is no surprise as the members historically do not trust double jobbing. If the executive had wished to prevent the position from going to the only applicant they should have put forward somebody other than their existing Treasurer.

eclipsechaser

phnompenhchess wrote: »

Agreed, I think Bernard can handle the abuse. His election is no surprise as the members historically do not trust double jobbing. If the executive had wished to prevent the position from going to the only applicant they should have put forward somebody other than their existing Treasurer.

Yes, it would be unusual to hold two positions unless there's a very good reason. Sparks, can you outline the FIDE delegate vote? Two well known names were up for that one.

Sparks

Advisory body to be set up to consider cheating, code of conduct and behaviour issues and report back in 2 months.

Sparks

eclipsechaser wrote: »

Yes, it would be unusual to hold two positions unless there's a very good reason. Sparks, can you outline the FIDE delegate vote? Two well known names were up for that one.

Did above, Eamon Keogh won...

eclipsechaser

Sparks wrote: »

Did above, Eamon Keogh won...

Sorry, I meant just a quick summary of how the vote went: i.e. what did Eamon and Kevin say they would do with the position and was it was a close vote?

Sparks

4 being discussed. Well. Discussed is too civilised a word really.

Sparks

eclipsechaser wrote: »

Sorry, I meant just a quick summary of how the vote went: i.e. what did Eamon and Kevin say they would do with the position and was it was a close vote?

On my phone here Shane, I 'll say more later but the official report is down to Kevin. Voting on 4 now.

hewhowatches

do we still have a secretary and chairman? I assume if motion 4 is passed i.e no confidence in the secretary and chairman that they will both have the good grace to stand down and replacements will be elected rom the floor.
updates?

EnPassant

Motion 4 failed

Sparks

Failed decisively 25-10 if I remember the numbers right. I left at that point (way too late on a Sunday night).

eclipsechaser

Thanks Sparks. Any more updates on motions EnPassant?

EnPassant

Cheating motions - a subcomittee to draw up proposals and finish by 1 Dec, membership to comment until Jan 7, with an EGM to be held subsequently.

Irish Championship motion withdrawn, committee to seek suggestions.

cdeb

eclipsechaser wrote: »

Sorry, I meant just a quick summary of how the vote went: i.e. what did Eamon and Kevin say they would do with the position and was it was a close vote?

Kevin wasn't present; he's in Tallinn at the moment.

I think it was a decent enough margin for Eamon.

Nothing major after all those hours. All the motions of no confidence were defeated. The main factor seemed to be the Cork tournament controller saying that the Chairman had acted in accordance with Gardaí instructions.

The motions about the Chairman's term - which would have meant his election being rescinded - were all defeated. Many of the other motions were actually withdrawn; some just for time reasons when it was reasonably clear they weren't going to get passed.

Sparks

Report on the AGM up on the Benildus website:

ICU AGM report

The net result after a record-long AGM – almost 6½ hours – was…well, not much change at all really.

The elections were mainly uncontested. Pete Morriss takes over from the ousted Colm Daly as Vice-Chairman, Bernard Palmer defeated the absent Noel Keating for Membership Officer, while Colm Daly and Gerry Graham both went for the vacant Tournament Controller role, with Gerry Graham getting the nod. Éamon Keogh replaces the absent Kevin O’Connell as FIDE delegate. Jonathan O’Connor (Chairman), Kevin O’Flaherty (secretary), Úna O’Boyle (PRO), Mark Orr (ratings officer), Darko Polimac (Junior Officer) and Noel Keating (treasurer) were all elected unopposed.

The officer reports caused little (relevant!) comment. The absence of a Treasurer’s Report and the absence of audited accounts was noted, and it was proposed to hold an EGM as soon as possible to rectify this omission.

With the meeting continually being dragged off on tangents and descending into some seemingly scurrilous accusations, it was 6:30pm when we got onto the first of the 29 motions.
...continues

Sparks

And Ballynafeigh Chess has a hilarious report up on the AGM, easily making the AGM a damn sight more fun to read about than attend:

Jonathan O’Connor delivered a crushing defeat on the Hyenas of Irish Chess who thought they smelt blood and moved in en mass for a frenzied attack on the ICU chairman. Motion after ridiculous motion was directed at the ICU board in general, but it was Jonathan O’Connor whom their wrath was aimed at in particular. An unholy alliance of reactionary individual’s uncouth bruisers and a perpetual agitator was forged and an ill conceived plot masquerading as directional concern for Irish chess was hatched.
...continues, and you will laugh your head off reading it...

I'm not going to quote it all because their site deserves the eyeballs, but this quote from the middle deserves to be nailed to the wall and read by all:

To lambaste Jonathan O’Connor for following instruction that was strongly advised by attending Garda to the incident is preposterous. As chairman of the ICU he is duty bound to protect the ICU and its membership from all and any possible legal action to the best of his ability.

It was a point made in the AGM as well, but lost on some of the hyenas. An AGM is not a court of law and trying to make the ICU AGM into one was a damn silly idea...

Sparks

Probably the strongest valid criticism on the night of the AGM was the unavailable Treasurers report - that elicited enormous amounts of vitriol from the shouty brigade as well as justified annoyance from the more reasonable people in the room.

That report is now up on the ICU website.

It definitely should have been there on the night, but the level of overreaction was insane. To borrow a phrase, it was a delayed report, not someone ****ing a dead baby...

cdeb

And yet, even then, there was uproar that there were also no accounts - even though there were (albeit not audited accounts, and not entirely complete accounts). I think they arrived shortly before the meeting, and no-one had been briefed to talk through them.

phnompenhchess

cdeb wrote: »

And yet, even then, there was uproar that there were also no accounts - even though there were (albeit not audited accounts, and not entirely complete accounts). I think they arrived shortly before the meeting, and no-one had been briefed to talk through them.

The ICU doesn't get its accounts audited on the basis of prohibitive cost although our Constitution does stipulate it. I agree with this approach but that the aspiration should be maintained of having the accounts audited once funding increases.

As regards no accounts at the AGM I believe this to be an integral part of the meeting and it is very unfortunate they were not ready. Having prepared them myself for the previous two years I can say that any criticism of the Treasurer should be tempered by the fact that it is a chunk of work that an unpaid volunteer does whilst also living his own life.

cdeb

They get some manner of check done on them; the appointment of an auditor was on the agenda last night, and the constitution clearly calls for accounts to be audited.

The LCU I think used to get them done for a couple of hundred quid; nothing prohibitive there at all.

phnompenhchess

cdeb wrote: »

They get some manner of check done on them;

Not this year (2013) to my knowledge nor for the previous two years (2012, 2011) when I prepared them, nor in 2010.

cdeb wrote: »

the appointment of an auditor was on the agenda last night,

It comes up every year. The reality is that this would cost up to 10% of the Unions resources annually.

cdeb wrote: »

constitution clearly calls for accounts to be audited.

Yes it does. It is a conscious decision for the committee not to follow this and personally I agree on grounds of prohibitive cost.

cdeb wrote: »

The LCU I think used to get them done for a couple of hundred quid; nothing prohibitive there at all.

No they didn't unless someone was doing them a favour. Over the past two years, both I and the Chairman made advances to members who are involved with audit firms, no such favour was forthcoming.

In 2010 the then Treasurer Eamon Keogh outsourced just the basic bookkeeping for the ICU to an accountancy firm. This could in no way be construed as a 'check' or any form of verification of the numbers. It in itself cost EUR 300 and was deemed to have been done at mates rates.

Basically professional accounting services cost money. There is a lot of work involved in an audit of accounts and many steps which must be followed by the practitioner to comply with audit standards, insurance requirements etc. I am well placed to know this as I am a Chartered Management Accountant.

cdeb

phnompenhchess wrote: »

It comes up every year. The reality is that this would cost up to 10% of the Unions resources annually.

If the LCU can get it done, the ICU can get it done without spending 10% of the union's resources (E3k or so).

phnompenhchess wrote: »

No they didn't unless someone was doing them a favour.

Someone was doing them a favour. But you don't ask firms for a favour; you ask chess players for a favour. So if ye were going to firms, you're doing it the wrong way around.

Outsourcing the bookkeeping is obviously unnecessary.

As far as I know, the ICU isn't legally required to have an audit; it's just constitutionally required. So all we're really looking for is an independent cross-check of the figures, not a full audit with audit report and completed audit programmes. That should be well within the scope of the ICU's budget (at "mate's rates")

phnompenhchess wrote: »

I am well placed to know this as I am a Chartered Management Accountant.

You're not the only person in the world that's an accountant, Shane...

phnompenhchess

cdeb wrote: »

If the LCU can get it done, the ICU can get it done without spending 10% of the union's resources (E3k or so).

Closer to 2k actually (22k in member subs, remaining money in is earmarked) and that is probably not too far off. A basic company which has no trading will cost about 1,000 plus vat to audit.

cdeb wrote: »

Someone was doing them a favour. But you don't ask firms for a favour; you ask chess players for a favour. So if ye were going to firms, you're doing it the wrong way around.

We asked chess players who work for accounting firms that have audit functions. As I said above "we made advances to members...".

cdeb wrote: »

Outsourcing the bookkeeping is obviously unnecessary.

Based on the current year I'd say it is more necessary than you think. It takes time to do and I don't see queues of volunteers for the task.

cdeb wrote: »

As far as I know, the ICU isn't legally required to have an audit; it's just constitutionally required. So all we're really looking for is an independent cross-check of the figures, not a full audit with audit report and completed audit programmes. That should be well within the scope of the ICU's budget (at "mate's rates")

Then it's not an audit it's somebody having a quick (?) look. That's very different.

cdeb wrote: »

You're not the only person in the world that's an accountant, Shane...

Why do you say this? I am giving you my opinion which should hold some weight given that I am an accounting professional.

Oh and thanks for knowing my name, I have no idea who you are.

cdeb

phnompenhchess wrote: »

Then it's not an audit it's somebody having a quick (?) look. That's very different.

I know. Which is why I drew the distinction between a legally-required audit and a constitutionally-required audit. And which is why I said we don't require a full, expensive audit, but it could be quite useful to have an external, independent person run their eye over the accounts, particularly given that the treasurer isn't necessarily a professional accountant. It would have taken a good 40 minutes off Sunday's AGM, for example.

phnompenhchess wrote: »

Why do you say this? I am giving you my opinion which should hold some weight given that I am an accounting professional.

Because I'm pointing out that I'm giving you my opinion which should hold some weight given that I am an accounting professional.

phnompenhchess wrote: »

Oh and thanks for knowing my name, I have no idea who you are.

Have you forgotten this post already?

phnompenhchess

cdeb wrote: »

Because I'm pointing out that I'm giving you my opinion which should hold some weight given that I am an accounting professional.

Excellent and you are on the ground. I appreciate that you work in industry but can you volunteer to independently check the accounts and give a qualified assurance to the members? I have already offered the Chairman any assistance I can in compiling them for this year.

cdeb wrote: »

Have you forgotten this post already?

I had, sorry Kevin.

cdeb

That wouldn't be an independent check though. That'd be a second treasurer.

I had considered going for treasurer at the AGM when I saw the criticisms of the current one, but (a) I'm already a treasurer of three organisations, including internal auditor for the St John Ambulance and its (approx) 30 divisions, so I'm starting from a point of considerable time taken up on treasurerships, (b) I wasn't eligible to stand at the AGM as there was already a nomination (this was clarified) and (c) the ICU committee still seems to have one or two people who'll make the whole thing hell. Unfortunately, while these people are involved in the ICU admin, it'll dissuade others from going for committee positions.

phnompenhchess

I think it would be independent enough if you were not on the committee, not in receipt of any benefit and nowhere near the cash. Maybe you will consider it a bit further down the line if things free up. It would be far less work then Treasurer although it would still take some time.

Two years of people causing chaos on the ICU committee was enough for me. You'd work hard and make some progress and then a couple of individuals would scupper things as best they could in as vindictive a way as possible. It's like a game to them. Then there's the ones who are in it for themselves trying to squeeze whatever they can personally from the Union. The secret is in the Chairman making sure all bases are covered with decent, well intentioned individuals standing for all posts. Sense usually prevails in AGM nomination votes so that should see them all elected. Then there's just the provincial delegates to worry about and there's nothing can be done about those.

Sparks

cdeb wrote: »

As far as I know, the ICU isn't legally required to have an audit; it's just constitutionally required.

It definitely isn't; no unincorporated association is. But it'd be a major obstacle to sports council recognition if people wanted that, amongst other disadvantages it puts you at.

phnompenhchess

Sparks wrote: »

It definitely isn't; no unincorporated association is. But it'd be a major obstacle to sports council recognition if people wanted that, amongst other disadvantages it puts you at.

Yes, the only argument that I have heard that would sway me to spending money on an audit is in terms of either accessing grant funds or recognition.

cdeb

Sparks wrote: »

It definitely isn't; no unincorporated association is. But it'd be a major obstacle to sports council recognition if people wanted that, amongst other disadvantages it puts you at.

Kind of moot anyway seeing as we're not recognised as a sport.

I'm sure if the sports council were to give us money, we could find a way to get audited.

Agree the membership officer role seems somewhat redundant. The job description on ICU.ie hasn't been updated since 1997, when membership was only by post. Is there a way of voting that position out, or merging the requirement in with treasurer? Is that something the exec can undertake, or would it have to be voted at the AGM?

Sparks

cdeb wrote: »

Kind of moot anyway seeing as we're not recognised as a sport.
I'm sure if the sports council were to give us money, we could find a way to get audited.

It's a bit of a catch-22 alright. A chunk of the grant the NTSA got every year went on auditing the accounts, so in that sense you weren't enormously out of pocket, but you have to be audited before you can be recognised so you'd have to invest the costs of auditing for a year or two depending on how fast the process went. You'd be better off in the long term, but it's a large enough bill in the short term unless you can find an appropriately qualified person who'd agree to do the job for a reduced or nominal fee...

reunion

Sparks wrote: »

It's a bit of a catch-22 alright. A chunk of the grant the NTSA got every year went on auditing the accounts, so in that sense you weren't enormously out of pocket, but you have to be audited before you can be recognised so you'd have to invest the costs of auditing for a year or two depending on how fast the process went. You'd be better off in the long term, but it's a large enough bill in the short term unless you can find an appropriately qualified person who'd agree to do the job for a reduced or nominal fee...

As no one currently is handing out free or subsidized auditing; the next bet would be with college chess players who could be potential future auditers.



The AGM should be a clear highlight to everyone in Irish chess; some of those running the scene are amateurs. We are not a sporting organisation; nor should we even be in a position to call ourselves one for the next 3 years; until we run properly as a Union.

Members are still going for an executive position because they want power; not for the good of Irish chess. I still can't believe Colm Daly stated he was going for the position for the power, yet he managed to get more than 1 vote!

reunion

cdeb wrote: »

Agree the membership officer role seems somewhat redundant. The job description on ICU.ie hasn't been updated since 1997, when membership was only by post. Is there a way of voting that position out, or merging the requirement in with treasurer? Is that something the exec can undertake, or would it have to be voted at the AGM?

Yeap and that was the reasoning behind the treasurer going for the membership officer role. Unfortunately a rather tipsy (later drunk and even more abusive) individual was given time to talk; with many members expressing immediate regret for the candidate they voted for.



The membership officer can only be removed either by missing 2 meetings without apologies or by an EGM vote calling for his resignation. The executive can not and should not have the power to remove a member voted in by a general meeting

Ballynafeigh Chess

I find it hard to believe that no one in the ICU has a calculator and a folder for keeping receipts in, membership fees in running costs out ... am i missing something

reunion

Ballynafeigh Chess wrote: »

I find it hard to believe that no one in the ICU has a calculator and a folder for keeping receipts in, membership fees in running costs out ... am i missing something

Ballynafeigh Chess Club for ICU treasurer next year?

Ballynafeigh Chess

Would i have the authority to sign a cheque for an anger management course for a few ICU members?

reunion

Ballynafeigh Chess wrote: »

Would i have the authority to sign a cheque for an anger management course for a few ICU members?

I wish the treasurer had the authority to issue cheques for that; a couple of AA meetings wouldn't hurt either for a few ICU members

Lecale

Sorry for joining the board just to say this. :P I am fairly sure that the Code of Conduct allows the eventual removal of any executive officer. Below are at least 3 points you can have a go with in this instance.

"3. Verbal abuse
Verbal abuse of officials is a serious offence against the rules of Chess. Verbally abusing other players or deliberately distracting or provoking an opponent is also not acceptable. Loss of temper is not only unpleasant for other participants in the game, it can also distract you and have an adverse effect on your concentration and effectiveness at the board It will also similarly distract other players nearby."

"6. Respect the rights, dignity and worth of every person
Regardless of their gender, ability, cultural background, religion or other factor irrelevant to the game, all persons connected with Chess are entitled to equal treatment and respect. Avoid any remarks that could be construed as offensive or discriminatory. Sometimes even a joke may give offence."

"9. Be mindful of the public image of Chess
All members of the ICU need to realise that it is extremely important to maintain the public image of Chess in Ireland. Any member who publicly jeopardises this may be subject to disciplinary action by the executive committee of the ICU."

reunion

The constitution doesn't require anyone to be a member while IN office (it has no requirements while in office); but they do require to be a member while STANDING for office (eligible to stand for election).

As a result; banning someone from the ICU wouldn't actually remove them from their executive position on the committee; though "any other suitable penalty" might be enough to allow the executive (article 13) or the disciplinary committee (point 7 procedures) to remove someone from office.

brilliantboy

I think the best way to get rid of the malcontents and loonjobs is to convince them it's a good idea to remove themselves and set up a rival chess association.
Shouldn't be too difficult :pac:

phnompenhchess

Ballynafeigh Chess wrote: »

I find it hard to believe that no one in the ICU has a calculator and a folder for keeping receipts in, membership fees in running costs out ... am i missing something

I appreciate your humour but the work involved in being an effective Treasurer of the ICU should not be underestimated particularly when considering the office holder has a life.

Money in includes subs through Paypal for which monthly reconciliations need to be performed against the ICU backend, club membership cheques which invariably arrive with countless whacky instructions (Jimmy overpaid last year, Johnny died and we accidentally paid for him so I'm netting that against Jacks payment etc) and disparate non referenced payments in from parents for Junior events across the globe.

Money out involves the inconvenience of getting every cheque countersigned by a co-signatory as the Union has difficulty in securing online banking due to its status (the current Treasurer claims to nearly have this sorted but he claimed the same last year). International payments are even more inconvenient involving two signatories to actually attend an AIB branch, during working hours, together.

Add to that attendance at ICU meetings, assisting ICU Officers in structuring their work so that the financials are well kept, tasks assigned by the Chairman to help in his work, late night calls from irate parents demanding urgent payments to all and sundry and well as putting together the bookkepping and full sets of accounts for the Union. Finish that off with getting a load of abuse from (frequently drunk) members at the AGM (I have to say this didn't happen to me thankfully) and you arrive at the conclusion that you need more than just a calculator and a folder.

Chess_Coach

The membership voted in favor of providing all accounts for the EGM. One should know that this is required for the AGM.

cdeb

Again, that's not what the vote was on...