Should the list of welcomed animals not be as per A2? It's not like I've
heard of an assistance ferret but you never know ;-D

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

How does one make a complaint to the Club Secretary if this said person
isn't at a show? Can one complain to another present C'ttee member?

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

The Auditor is selected by the Committee but shouldn't there be
something about the Membership ratifying the decision at the AGM in the
rules?

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

According to the above rule only the Membership Secretary and Club
Secretary have the names and addresses of the membership so how come 2-E
isn't posted in Newcastle or Rugby?

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Would it not be useful to the Membership (i.e. the nosy ones like me
;-D) to have the Minutes from the Committee meetings in a folder
available at shows, like the Archive files are?

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

If the Minutes from a Committee meeting are the property of the Club who
does one ask if they want to use something from the Minutes (assuming
they've got a copy by sending a SAE to the Cub Secretary)?

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

I agree with Sheila.

Also, it would mean added expense for a pet owner to have to either hire or
buy a standard tank. I think that would put people off. As it is I feel it
encourages people to take part, with the potential of some good variety
standard rats being recognised.

I can see your point about avoiding disagreements, but let's be honest; I've
had potential judges who admit they could very easily identify individual
rats anyway.

I'd accept that varieties require more formal standards, as in some cases
they could be a lot more riding on the results than a sense of pride in ones
vermin.

Personally, I dislike any rat being put in an unfamiliar environment, but
maybe it's the price of fame for a varieties rat.

Su

Sheila Wrote



> My objection was that if the Treasurer had to be one,

> if (s)he was carted off to hospital unconscious, no

> cheques could be signed, so better to have a pool of

> people (say four) any two of whom could sign cheques.



<SU> In my opinion this would certainly be a more flexible. Any cheques MUST
be signed by two of the four.



Sandra wrote



>As for the "running off to South America" scenario - well, there is a

>completely different set of rules for dealing with such situations, i.e.

>criminal law ;-)

>

>I also issue the committee with a scanned copy of each bank statement as

>further "bomb-proofing" of my role.





<SU> It could however be expensive and time consuming to pursue an
individual.



I have no doubts about your integrity or competence as a Treasurer, but have
had first hand experience of individuals of which the same could not be
said.



> Obviously this motion needs redrafting (NOT minor

> changes) to make it mean what it was intended to mean



> Perhaps we don't even need it to be a rule at all and continue to have it
> as club policy (based on good old-fashioned trust).



<SU> Perhaps. But on the other hand it is unfortunate that not all
individuals are trustworthy.



Su













________________________________________________________________________



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Given that it has been found that:-



Communication is:-

.     7% words

.     38% intonation

.     55% non-verbal



I would prefer to speak face to face as the written word can easily be
misinterpreted, but as one of the people who proposed the local committee
and the fixed term I feel obliged to contribute my piece.



LOCALITY

When I served as Publicity Officer, because of my location, I found it
extremely difficult to attend face-to-face meetings and I may not have been
the only one.



Although a large amount of business could be conducted over the internet or
via phone calls, there were some occasions when the written word was
misinterpreted. Even the spoken word without corresponding body language was
subject to misunderstandings. At best this caused confusion, and at worst
threats of resignation and what amounted to arguments becoming very
personal. Sorry if some of you guys think being part of a committee is all
sweetness and light. It aint.



This was not good for the club and on reflection I felt it might be wise to
try and facilitate more face-to-face meetings.



After further thought, I'm prepared to consider that maybe we could just
ensure that the committee met in person more regularly, but a second issue
was the signing of cheques. If one signatory lives in Scotland, and the
other in London, it would be hard to get cheques signed in an emergency.



Again, I might reconsider this proposal if a pool could be set up.



FIXED TERM POSTS

The Chair, Treasurer and Secretary have a lot of power and influence on a
club. Legally a club such as ours cannot exist without at least these three.



Whilst in theory anyone is welcome to stand for these positions, some may
feel that challenging a long term incumbent would cause hostility,
especially if the standing member was to interpret this personally. I've
been on a lot of committees and I've seen this exact scenario. It can cause
a real rift.



Secondly, the standing member(s) may be of very strong personality and in
effect intimidate potential candidates.



Thirdly, those considering standing might feel they cannot match up in
experience to someone who has been in the post a long time. However they may
have a lot to give, if they have support and encouragement.  I'm not saying
that ex-committee members should not be able to offer advice if requested.



I do say they should not serve for at least one term of office. Otherwise
you often end up with the same few individuals moving around the committee
posts, and it in effect stays the same.



New people bring new ideas, but often people are reluctant to consider a
change in the established routine. If we do not actively encourage new
blood, we risk becoming increasingly stale. We are also in danger of having
no-one capable or confident enough to take over these three key posts should
there be a need.



I'm a founding member of this club and anyone who knows me should be aware
that I would not wish it to come to harm. It took much time and
consideration before I decided these proposals were necessary. It is only
because I did not feel there were any alternatives to some of the concerns I
have, that I went down this route.



I'm quite prepared to be convinced otherwise, but in the meantime will
continue to argue my corner.  I've seen a number of good organisations fail
because of naivety and apathy allowing power hungry individuals to seize
control. This is amply illustrated in the world of politics. How many
dictators come to power because no-one is prepared to ensure checks are in
place to stop them gaining too much influence?



I'm sure those of us who remember the "Brian Hall Rat Club" will know
exactly what I mean, when I say there is danger in becoming complacent.



Due to other demands I unfortunately cannot devote a lot of time to writing
to this list, but will continue to monitor it and contribute when I can.
This may mean some of my post may refer to discussions that took place some
time ago.



Su Mitchell



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Since Jackie said she had used NFRS wording, I thought
it might be helpful to those on this list who are not
familiar with the NFRS AGM papers to explain that "we"
in that context meant proposer and seconder.
Sheila
--- Lisa Grove <halcyonlisa@...> wrote:
---------------------------------
No I do actually know the dictionary definition of
"we" and why Jackie put
"we"....

I was asking who the other "nominate" was...

Which was kindly answered ages ago by Alison. I did
actually ask "who" is
we?

Not "what" is we?

off to do a.....

L x

>From: Sheila Sowter <sas24@...>
>Reply-To: mrc_business@...
>To: mrc_business@...
>Subject: Re: [mrc_business] Who are "we"?
>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:59:00 +0000 (GMT)
>
>Point of information
>NFRS proposals require a seconder, so it is always
>"we"
>Sheila
>
>--- Buck House Crew Jackie <buckhousecrew@...>
>wrote:
> >
> > Hi Lisa
> >
> > > NB: who is *we*
> >
> > Sorry I forgot to answer this.
> >
> > IIRC (but it is almost half a year since the last
> > one) the NFRS AGM
> > paperwork actually states "We propose ..." on the
> > proposal submission
> > sheet so I put "we" because this is the way I've
> > always worded
> > proposals.
> > So I blame the NFRS ;-D
> >
> > Jackie
> >
> > Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary,
Rosette
> > Officer and List
> > Owner.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >     mrc_business-unsubscribe@...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

    To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/mrc_business/

    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
mrc_business-unsubscribe@...

    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.

Yeah it is, over 16 & a member for at least a year - I can remember at least
one "juvenile" member being (thankfully) refused the chance to stand for one
of our committee positions due to this...

L x



>From: "Buck House Crew Jackie" <buckhousecrew@...>
>Reply-To: mrc_business@...
>To: "**MRC_Business" <mrc_business@...>
>Subject: Re: [mrc_business] Re: committee positions
>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 01:25:26 -0000
>
>
> > I think there should be something in the rules that gives
> > very very basic guidelines like this. Like must be over 18 and been a
>member
> > at least 1 year. I'm not fussy :)
> >
> > If its not in the rules - then can it be considered in 2006? I can
>give my
> > reasons in depth on request LOL
>
>I agree Lisa.  There really should be something.
>Perhaps over 16 though, as over 16's are classed as Adults for
>membership purposes, and been a member for a minimum of 6 months, as
>someone joining just after an AGM would have to be a member for over 18
>months before they could stand.
>
>I'd be happy to be considered as your second.
>
>BTW is it a NFRS rule? If not....... ;-D
>
>Jackie
>
>Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
>Owner.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

No I do actually know the dictionary definition of "we" and why Jackie put
"we"....

I was asking who the other "nominate" was...

Which was kindly answered ages ago by Alison. I did actually ask "who" is
we?

Not "what" is we?

off to do a.....

L x

>From: Sheila Sowter <sas24@...>
>Reply-To: mrc_business@...
>To: mrc_business@...
>Subject: Re: [mrc_business] Who are "we"?
>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:59:00 +0000 (GMT)
>
>Point of information
>NFRS proposals require a seconder, so it is always
>"we"
>Sheila
>
>--- Buck House Crew Jackie <buckhousecrew@...>
>wrote:
> >
> > Hi Lisa
> >
> > > NB: who is *we*
> >
> > Sorry I forgot to answer this.
> >
> > IIRC (but it is almost half a year since the last
> > one) the NFRS AGM
> > paperwork actually states "We propose ..." on the
> > proposal submission
> > sheet so I put "we" because this is the way I've
> > always worded
> > proposals.
> > So I blame the NFRS ;-D
> >
> > Jackie
> >
> > Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette
> > Officer and List
> > Owner.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >     mrc_business-unsubscribe@...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

Point of information
NFRS proposals require a seconder, so it is always
"we"
Sheila

--- Buck House Crew Jackie <buckhousecrew@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Lisa
>
> > NB: who is *we*
>
> Sorry I forgot to answer this.
>
> IIRC (but it is almost half a year since the last
> one) the NFRS AGM
> paperwork actually states "We propose ..." on the
> proposal submission
> sheet so I put "we" because this is the way I've
> always worded
> proposals.
> So I blame the NFRS ;-D
>
> Jackie
>
> Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette
> Officer and List
> Owner.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>     mrc_business-unsubscribe@...
>
>
>
>
>
>

> Current club workers positions are
> Editor (Sandra)
> Webmaster (Annette)
> Rosettes (Alison)
> Rat sitting register (Deb)

TY Alison.

Ummm isn't the Sub-Editor also a Club Worker role?

What are the new ones? Just whisper lol

Ratty Hugs & Cavy Kisses

Jackie
Ably Hindered by The Buck House Crew.

"I never knew that.  Death of Gerbils, too? Amazing how you can catch up
with them on those treadmills---"
Soul Music, Terry Pratchett.

Hi Lisa

> you know that we have discussed many, many NFRS AGM proposals prior to
the
> AGM online before. Hmmn now let me think - erm the Dumbo debate??? If
that
> hadn't been discussed prior to the event, then do you think the many
would
> have rallied to the Dumbo's cause, do you think they would have all
come the
> AGM because they cared so much and do you think the Dumbo would be
where it > is now???

Ok you've got me on that ;-D

To clarify my position I have never heard of *all* AGM proposals being
discussed in an environment sanctioned by the governing body hosting the
AGM.
Like I said you don't surf along to
http://www.bggroup.co.uk/forum/AGM2005/ (another made-up url, I signed
my BG Group postal vote earlier) and enter into discussions.

Going back to "The Great Dumbo Debate!!" IIRC it was only the dumbo
issue that got discussed online, not every proposal submitted for the
NFRS AGM of that year (2000 wasn't it?) was discussed.

Hope this clarifies things.

Ratty Hugs & Cavy Kisses

Jackie
Ably Hindered by The Buck House Crew

"Multiple exclamation marks are a sure sign of a diseased mind."
Eric, Terry Pratchett.

> Do
> members feel this information would have more impact and be more
noticeable
> if it were on a separate flyer sent out with the magazine? If so we
could
> try that next year.

An A4 flyer in MRC Blue and Orange stating the entire C'ttee is standing
down at the 2006 AGM and all C'ttee positions are vacant would probably
attract more attention, even if it is panic-stricken msgs /calls to the
C'ttee asking what the hell is going on.  Good idea Alison.

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Hi Alison


> Since you
> are unhappy I will suggest that these two proposals are removed from
the
> list.

As an involved party I think it's rather too late for that now but thank
you for the offer.
Perhaps in the future the Committee will inform whomever before their
proposal (eligible for an AGM or not) is discussed online.

> I am not quite sure what you are going to do as you say you were
intending
> to give your point of view on the issues at the AGM, then later in
your mail
> that you were going to leave them until next year and you considered
them
> private.

I think what Su meant was that she was going to discuss / defend the
proposals at the AGM if they were accepted for inclusion in the 2005
AGM.
As the proposals were not eligible for 2005 (because they were late)
they were dead in the water to us unless we wanted to submit them for
the 2006 AGM when they would become live for discussion at the 2006 AGM.
I hope that makes sense as it reads rather badly.

> Surely a proposal stops being private when it is sent to the
> committee.

Private as in not for public consumption / discussion.  Really a
proposal stops being private the moment a proposor asks for a second ;-D

> We could have ignored them, given them no room for
> discussion, and then run out of time at the AGM and not had room for
any
> proper debate during AOB. We simply thought it was fairer to ensure
they had
> some 'air time'. Wrong again. :-(

Speaking for myself I assumed our proposals were dead and buried for the
2005 AGM and I, personally, would not have thought about mentioning them
in AOB.

> (Su) I now potentially have to take valuable time away from other
> commitments to defend my corner or risk people thinking I can't be
bothered.
>
> (Alison) No you don't... you simply need to say - I am busy and will
tell
> you what I think at the AGM. I am sure all present can understand that
and
> wouldn't interpret it as 'not being bothered'. Heck Su... you're
amongst
> friends...

But we were under the impression our proposals had failed inclusion for
the 2005 AGM and would not be mentioned this year.
I know I would have been extremely surprised, totally unprepared and
possibly speechless (I say possibly, don't expect it to happen though
;-D) if the proposals had reared their heads in AOB at the forthcoming
AGM.

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Hi Lisa

> NB: who is *we*

Sorry I forgot to answer this.

IIRC (but it is almost half a year since the last one) the NFRS AGM
paperwork actually states "We propose ..." on the proposal submission
sheet so I put "we" because this is the way I've always worded
proposals.
So I blame the NFRS ;-D

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Hi Sue [Lewis?], All

> Who cares where someone lives as long as they are doing the best
> possible job for the club.
> Who cares how long thay have been doing that job as long as they are
> still as enthusiatic as day one

As a founder member I care a great deal about Midlands Rat Club.
I bother about the direction the Club is going and I'm concerned about
the people responsible for direction the Club takes in the future.
I care when I overhear people at shows stating they are unhappy with the
people running the Club.
I worry when friends tell me they feel uncomfortable with the way the
Club is run and say they are not renewing their membership or are
considering not attending shows and thus leaving the Club.
I remember a C'ttee meeting when someone on the current C'ttee stated
(my memory isn't eidetic so I'll have to paraphrase) "Oh I'll give this
Committee gig three years then I'm off" so I panic when I hear people
have left the Committee because they haven't got the energy to go on.

> and what's the difference if a
> whole household hold committee jobs.

There is a *massive* difference and it really *does* matter.
We all joined the Midlands Rat Club not, for example, the Midlands Rand
Club or the Mobbs Rat Club.

Some of us know the things that happen when a Club is run by a dictator
and his wife.  It was called the Northern Rat Club by those who didn't
know what was happening and the Northern Brian Hall Club by those who
were affected by the dictatorship.
Some of the worst things that happened were members getting kicked out
of the Club for showing concern about shows being held during the Foot &
Mouth epidemic or for commenting on suspect show matters.
Members were pilloried in the Club magazine for the above, for
supporting their friends and for speaking out against the dictatorship.
The situation got so bad that one of the NRC judges (Sheila) led an
intervention at the June(?) show.  A group of other disconcerted members
(including Alison) also spoke up and this led to the formation of NERS.

> There's been some quite nasty comments made on here recently....and
> it seems to me that some people would moan if their backside were on
> fire.....you're ok Jackie no one requires your help with that...

Too much curry can be bad for you can't it ;-D I'm just sorry I can't be
of assistance lol

> I think some people should either put up or shut up.

I know Graham will say I'm dragging up ancient history but I did put up,
at formation I put up in spades!

I:
     was the second member to join and I paid over the odds to give the
club some much-needed funds
     travelled from my home over 70 miles (round trip) to various
Wilkinson shops in Sutton-In-Ashfield, Ilkeston and Ripley on the run up
to the Inaugural Show to make sure we had plenty of hire tanks
     paid for just about everything for the Inaugural Show - hall hire,
rosettes, judges gifts etc.
      gifted MRC t-shirts to the then Committee so people would be able
to recognise us at shows (I still have mine)
     ran people from and to Alfreton Railway Station when the shows where
at Swanwick so they wouldn't have to pay for taxis which might have
prohibited attendance.  Hell after one Swanwick Show I took Deb & Ed
home to Brum when British Rail screwed up their journey
     collected the rosettes from the manufacturer to save on postage
costs
     sponsored rosettes so the Club wouldn't have to fund unsponsored
classes

So please don't tell me to put up or shut up.

> If you're not
> willing to stand for the role yourself that don't be so negative
> when other people are.

I think everyone is aware why I'm not willing to stand for a C'ttee
position atm.

I also believe it is very rare in the Rat Fancy for ordinary members to
stand against an incumbent at an AGM.
Personally I don't remember any ordinary member joining a C'ttee against
the position holder and I've been a member of the Rat Fancy since April
1998.  If anyone knows differently please correct me.

> Just my opinion.

Back at ya ;-D

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

> I think there should be something in the rules that gives
> very very basic guidelines like this. Like must be over 18 and been a
member
> at least 1 year. I'm not fussy :)
>
> If its not in the rules - then can it be considered in 2006? I can
give my
> reasons in depth on request LOL

I agree Lisa.  There really should be something.
Perhaps over 16 though, as over 16's are classed as Adults for
membership purposes, and been a member for a minimum of 6 months, as
someone joining just after an AGM would have to be a member for over 18
months before they could stand.

I'd be happy to be considered as your second.

BTW is it a NFRS rule? If not....... ;-D

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

> In issue 23 I dedicated most of the committee news section to these
very
> points, highlighting the vacant positions but also labouring the point
that
> all posts were available to all adult members and encouranging members
to
> ask me for job descriptions if interested. The 'all roles being
available to
> all adult members' bit was re-iterated in Graham's Chair's piece.

It obviously needs writing in foot high letters ;-D
Perhaps next year it would be better to announce that the *entire*
Committee is standing down at the AGM (which is technically what
happens) and _all_ C'ttee positions are vacant.

> To send out a full set of job descriptions to all
> members as a matter of course, would be rather wasteful in extra
printing
> costs and postage.

Why not add something at the back of the Rule Book? It will be
re-printed after the AGM so wouldn't cost that much in terms of printing
and postage.

HTH

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Hi Annette

> I think I personally tend to view the lists as if I'm just
> chewing things over with friends, as if we're sitting around
> chatting. Is it really that different doing it online?

Having been stabbed in the back by certain "online" friends in the past
I now tend to read more lists than I write to simply because it leaves
me less open to the pain of discovering someone I trusted is shitting on
me and rubbing it in behind my back.

> I wouldn't have posted the late proposals, Jackie, except that I
> knew there was a request that we discuss them at the AGM, so I
> sort of counted them in with the others.

Could you tell me who made the request please?
I know I didn't and I'm pretty sure Su didn't either.  AFAIK we were
both under the impression that the proposals were dead and buried for
the 2005 AGM and would have to be re-submitted (in time ;-D) for the
2006 AGM if we wanted to pursue the
issues we wanted raising.

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Hi Alison

> Hi Jackie, I would be interested to hear your 'serious doubts', and
why you
> think it might be unethical? If members can thrash out their ideas
prior to
> filling out their postal vote then surely they may be helped by
hearing
> other members points of view, before coming to their own conclusions?

Ok I think it is very wrong for a select group (i.e. the people on this
list) to discuss the AGM Proposals when the members without email or the
inclination to join this list (I believe the majority of the membership)
can't / can't be bothered to join in.
Surely if there is to be discussion of the proposals before the AGM
every voting member should be involved e.g. if these discussions were
happening on the Forum I would not be involved as I don't read the
Forum.

> It also gives your proposals an airing even though they won't be voted
on at
> the AGM. Are you not keen to hear whether other members share your
views?

I assumed that as the proposals were deemed too late for inclusion they
were null and void and would have to be re-submitted for the 2006 AGM
when I would have found out if other members shared my POV.

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Matt wrote:
> perhaps every 3 years there is a
> mandatory vote for re-election, and if the majority vote not to
> re-elect then other candidates must be found.

Well said Matt.  I'll run with that.

For the 2006 AGM
I propose that every three years there is a mandatory vote for the
re-election of the three legally required Committee positions (Chairman,
Secretary and Treasurer).  If the majority of eligible members vote not
to re-elect another candidate must be found.

Anyone want to second me or do a bit of editing?

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Hi Alison

> (Alison) The MRC was set up by a 6 ratty people, 3 who did not live in
the
> Midlands,

I'll stop you there.  The MRC had 9 founder members - Clare
(W.Midlands), Graham & Sandra (Lincolnshire), Peter (N.Yorkshire), Su
(W.Yorkshire), Gill Thomas (W.Midlands), Sheila (Essex), Jackie [Me ;-D]
(Derbyshire) and X.
Sorry X I can't remember your name so obviously can't remember your home
county.

> I live in the North East of England, and
> since joining the committee have started a system that gives us more
face to
> face committee meetings that ever before (6 a year)on the request of
the
> rest of the committee who felt it would be beneficial to spend more
time
> together, face to face.

We used to hold C'ttee meetings after shows and with 6 shows per year
that was 6 face-to-face meetings.  We even held a meeting in the car
park
after NFRS Sledmere once until we got a bit spooked about being locked
in the grounds.
IMHO all you've done is revert to a previously used model but changed
the timing slightly

> I would prefer these decisions to be made on a case by
> case basis by the members, who I would trust to make good choices far
better
> than I trust a rule to.

So would I which is why I am planning asking the C'ttee to consider
individual election for each Committee role in Any Other Business.

Before anyone starts and says what would happen if someone ran for the
C'ttee and was rejected by the voting membership I'll draw your
attention
to the last sentence in Rule 1h "..The Committee may, if necessary,
recruit a member of the Club to carry out the duties of the vacant
position..."

> (Alison) All cheques are (and I think have always been) signed by one
> signatory only.

Oops.  Not exactly good business practice is it?

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Hi Matt

> If someone is unhappy with a committee member's attendance at
> meetings, then they have the option to vote for someone else who
> stands for the role at AGM.

True but how does the ordinary member find out about C'ttee attendance?
I know how to find out - send a SAE to the Club Secretary asking for
C'ttee Meeting Minutes - but who else does?

BTW Alison has anyone asked for Minutes during the last year or at any
time?

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

> A "worthy" motion does NOT have to wait a year. There
> is a provision in the rules for an Extraordinary
> General Meeting, so here's what might be done
> The AGM chews over the wording of the faulty motion(s)
> There should be enough members present to call an EGM
> after the next show

Exactly.  Well said Sheila.

People at last year's AGM couldn't have been all that concerned about
pregnant does or they would have asked for an EGM to get the situation
clarified.
Rule 3m clearly states "... an EGM may be called by two-thirds of the
Committee or a petition signed by at least 15 voting members..."

At the same EGM the kitten sale matter could have been sorted too rather
than waiting a year.

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Current club workers positions are
Editor (Sandra)
Webmaster (Annette)
Rosettes (Alison)
Rat sitting register (Deb)

There are another couple being considered by the committee at the moment.

The procedure with club workers are that they are appointed by the new
committee following the AGM. I took on rosettes in the short term and to get
them sorted out before passing on to someone else. That role will need to be
filled - plus possibly one or two new ones.

Love Alison
and the Shunamite rats
http://www.shunamiterats.co.uk

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Buck House Crew Jackie [mailto:buckhousecrew@...]

> What are the Club Worker positions, who are the current holders and
> which are now vacant?
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.0 - Release Date: 3/21/05

What are the Club Worker positions, who are the current holders and
which are now vacant?

Jackie

Founder Member, Former Membership Secretary, Rosette Officer and List
Owner.

Actually TBH I think 16 is fine, but it may have to be 18 for legal reasons
for posts like Treasurer, not sure, I may just be having a female
moment.....

L x



>From: RattyCorner <rattycorner@...>
>Reply-To: mrc_business@...
>To: mrc_business@...
>Subject: Re: [mrc_business] Re: committee positions
>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 22:34:58 +0000
>
>Hiya,
>The rules are online but not available to the casual reader.
>
>http://www.midlandsratclub.org/info/rules.pdf or
>http://www.midlandsratclub.org/info/rules.rtf
>
>If I'm right then one of our original committee was under 18, so
>that wouldn't have been written in then, lol.
>
>Annette
>
> >
> >I'm upset Alison - me me!!!
> >
> >Only cos I'm such a donkey - I cannot find my copy of MRC
>rules....they're
> >not on the website are they? I looked, but again I didn't spend ages
> >looking....
> >
> >So.....can I ask again. How long do you have to be a member for before
>you
> >can be considered for committee?? Sorry if this is an emotive question
>I'm
> >only asking cos I think there should be something in the rules that gives
> >very very basic guidelines like this. Like must be over 18 and been a
>member
> >at least 1 year. I'm not fussy :)
> >
> >If its not in the rules - then can it be considered in 2006? I can give
>my
> >reasons in depth on request LOL
> >
> >L x
> >
>