Munster Chess Union AGM.

Tychoo

The Annual AGM of the MCU is to take place on Sunday the 6th of September at the Charleville Park Hotel. Start time 8pm

Proposed motions can be viewed on the MCU website.

I think Dungarvan’s motion regarding changing play from a Saturday to a Sunday is fair and I hope it’s considered by the other members.

reunion

MCU site wrote:

At our committee meeting (3rd Sept 2015) the MCU Committee unanimously agreed to propose the following motion to the MCU AGM.

“The Munster Chess Union has no confidence in the current ICU Executive”.

The background to this motion is that the MCU Delegate, Gerry Graham, travelled to Dublin to attend an ICU Executive meeting at 6:30pm on 27th August.

The Chairman tabled a vote of no confidence in the MCU Delegate based on allegations which he made and when the vote was passed asked Gerry to leave.

This item was not on the Agenda circulated in advance and the Chairman had not contacted the MCU even though the allegations refer to events several months old.

It is the view of the MCU committee that the ICU is not entitled to unilaterally remove its delegate. The allegations do not relate to Gerry’s record as MCU Delegate.

At its meeting the MCU Committee having considered the allegations have reaffirmed their unanimous confidence in Gerry as MCU Delegate. The committee have also proposed a motion of no confidence in the current ICU Executive in view of the lack of any due process in the way in which this vote of no confidence in our delegate was handled.

Looks like the MCU didn't take too kindly to the chairperson's attempt at kicking their delegate out without consultation or proof.

Tychoo

The ICU have been taking a leaf out Kim joung-un book on dispensing law

Tychoo

reunion wrote: »

Looks like the MCU didn't take too kindly to the chairperson's attempt at kicking their delegate out without consultation or proof.

Wouldn't you?

ovinelover

The MCU's treatment of a previous delegate to the ICU was pretty autocratic and in flagrant violation of it's own constitution. Any attempt to point this out was met with a load of flannel and guff.

rob51

ovinelover wrote: »

The MCU's treatment of a previous delegate to the ICU was pretty autocratic and in flagrant violation of it's own constitution. Any attempt to point this out was met with a load of flannel and guff.

Interesting example. In that case the ICU Chairman contacted the MCU Chairman about issues with the delegates behaviour on the Executive. I understand tried to resolve the issue amicably but the delegate refused to change. Ultimately he was removed as delegate by a unanimous vote of the other MCU Committee members in accordance with the constitution.

Funnily enough he was also voted off the Munster Junior Chess Committee a year or two later and he also refuses to accept that.

ovinelover

rob51 wrote: »

Interesting example. In that case the ICU Chairman contacted the MCU Chairman about issues with the delegates behaviour on the Executive. I understand tried to resolve the issue amicably but the delegate refused to change. Ultimately he was removed as delegate by a unanimous vote of the other MCU Committee members in accordance with the constitution.

Funnily enough he was also voted off the Munster Junior Chess Committee a year or two later and he also refuses to accept that.

The trouble with that was that the constitution did not confer that power on anybody. My objection was based on a reading of the constitution, not on the rights or wrongs of the matter. As I've prepared many documents that have satisfied the High Court of Justiciary in Scotland I feel better qualified than most to parse a quasi-legal document such as the MCU's constitution.
This is only one example and it was perhaps the least offensive to reason.
Possibly the MCU did the right thing but it's constitution was silent on the matter.
Previous ICU execs have had a habit of making it up as they went along with not even a nod to fair procedure or natural justice and rammed things through.
As I've said elsewhere it's a bit like The Lord of the Flies.

Sparks

Is the MCU actually incorporated?

reunion

Rumour has it that John Alfred is at the current munster AGM.

The meeting is on hold until he leaves. The Garda have been called. Repeat of last year.

Maybe Pat wants a new member for his committee?

Sparks

reunion wrote: »

The Garda have been called.

reunion

And John has been asked to leave by the gardai and has complied.

The meeting will be resuming shortly.

Tychoo

Were off

Sparks

reunion wrote: »

And John has been asked to leave by the gardai and has complied.

I would pay cash money to see someone publish the uncensored opinion of those Gardai on the state of Irish Chess.

Lecale

Really now, with tales like this, why would you want to be involved in Irish Chess?

cdeb

Hey, with tales like this, why wouldn't you want to be involved in Irish chess?

Is John Alfred just not a member of the MCU? I know he was at the ICU AGM a couple of years back; tried to take the floor a couple of times, but it was pointed out he wasn't a member and wasn't entitled to a view. Presume something similar here?

Also, was the AGM held up almost an hour by this? Seems that way from the post times here.

reunion

So the meeting finished at 23:05. So the meeting took 3 hours with a 1 hour recess after starting.

Summary of what was passed:

League Rule Motions:

We at Dungarvan Chess Club wish to propose that Munster League games be played on a Sunday instead of Saturday as due to work commitments some players are finding it hard to get time off to play.

Passed

All players used by a team must be added to the team panel on the MCU Website before playing in any on the day of the match. If they are not on the current ICU membership list the player’s name may be added to the panel until their membership is completed.

Any game by a player not on the team panel will be treated as a walkover.

Passed with amendment

Update article 16 of the MCU League Rules to:

All team captains will report results of matches within 48 hours of the completion of the match – please use the MCU website (http://www.munsterchessunion.org/login.php ) to report the results.

Passed

A team captain may nominate another MCU member to act as their reporter in updating their results on the MCU website. The team captain shall send the reporter’s name and email address to the League Controller with the request to add them as the team reporter.


Passed

That the time control used for Division 2 be the same as Division 1 i.e. 90 minutes for all moves plus 30 seconds per move from move 1.

Passed

Guest players may not play on the top two boards of a team.


Passed - proposed amendment to change two to five was rejected.

Constitutional Motions:

Article 3.5 of the Constitution was passed for one year by the 2014 AGM. I would like to propose that this article be made permanent.

3.5 The Committee will also appoint an individual member of the MCU to act as its delegate to the ICU, and such person will be subject to instruction from the committee in respect of the views to be expressed on its behalf to the ICU.

Passed

That paragraph 3.5 in the Constitution be changed to allow the MCU Delegate to the ICU to be voted in at the MCU AGM, as follows...

3.5 The MCU Delegate to the ICU shall be elected at the MCU AGM and will have equal voting rights on the MCU Committee along with the other Officers. The delegate will be advised by the MCU on its position with regard to various MCU matters. The Delegate must attend at least 4 ICU meetings and submit a summary to the MCU Committee within 2 weeks of each ICU meeting.


Motion not considered as the other motion was passed

General Motions:

That the MCU consider adopting a "Corporate Logo or Coat of Arms" that can be used by the MCU for promotion of chess in Munster.


Passed

Emergency Motion

The Munster Chess Union has no confidence in the current ICU Executive.

Passed with an amendment (see below). The below isn't worded as how it passed but it is the spirit of the amendment

The members of the MCU request the chairperson to demand/request an apology from the ICU over the unconstitutional removal of their delegate at the last ICU executive meeting.

Nominations:

Chairman:

Alan Salsac. Elected

Secretary:

Ray O'Brien. Elected

Treasurer:

Simon Lawrence. Elected

League Controller:

Frank Noonan. Elected

ICU Rep:

This position may be filled by Committee nomination if Article 3.5 is adopted by the AGM. If the motion fails nominations for the post are required.
Article 3.5 passed so the incoming committee will elect this individual.

Chess_Coach

I understand that letter send by ICU Chairman with reasons of expelling the MCU delegate from ICU Executive was printed out to all MCU members at the AGM? The letter was send in discretion to MCU Chairman few days before the meeting .
I hope that members could hear both sides .

Sparks

Chess_Coach wrote: »

I understand that letter send by ICU Chairman with reasons of expelling the MCU delegate from ICU Executive was printed out to all MCU members at the AGM? The letter was send in discretion to MCU Chairman few days before the meeting .
I hope that members could hear both sides .

If you understood that all members had seen or read such a letter, and they all voted to pass a no-confidence motion and demand an apology from the ICU after that; then I think you could say they'd heard both sides and made a decision.

Chess_Coach

Not sure that letter was given to all members . Just asking reunion as he seems to be there .Were you there? I hope that they didn't hide the letter from members

Sparks

Chess_Coach wrote: »

Not sure that letter was given to all members . Just asking reunion as he seems to be there .Were you there? I hope that they didn't hide the letter from members

I wasn't there. From what you're saying, you weren't either. So you know about this letter... how?
Because it sounds like you're posting as a member of the ICU committee here.
And to be clear - that's permitted (hell, I think most ICU members would welcome it). But you need to ping the mods and verify you are who you say you are if you want to post on behalf of the ICU given how contentious all of this is.

Lecale

Chess_Coach wrote: »

Not sure that letter was given to all members . Just asking reunion as he seems to be there .Were you there? I hope that they didn't hide the letter from members

How could the letter be printed out to all members, but not given to them?
Could you try saying that again?

reunion

Sparks wrote: »

I wasn't there. From what you're saying, you weren't either. So you know about this letter... how?
Because it sounds like you're posting as a member of the ICU committee here.
And to be clear - that's permitted (hell, I think most ICU members would welcome it). But you need to ping the mods and verify you are who you say you are if you want to post on behalf of the ICU given how contentious all of this is.

Just to note (as a mod) - Chess_coach is Darko Polimac, the development officer of the ICU. He is posting in a personal capacity and not as the development officer of the ICU unless he states otherwise. He has identified himself previously in different threads.

pawntof4

Chess_Coach wrote: »

Not sure that letter was given to all members . Just asking reunion as he seems to be there .Were you there? I hope that they didn't hide the letter from members

Are you able to supply us with the letter?

Lecale

pawntof4 wrote: »

Are you able to supply us with the letter?

Is that the hidden letter, the printed letter, or just the plain letter?

reunion

Chess_Coach wrote: »

I understand that letter send by ICU Chairman with reasons of expelling the MCU delegate from ICU Executive was printed out to all MCU members at the AGM? The letter was send in discretion to MCU Chairman few days before the meeting .
I hope that members could hear both sides .

The letter made no difference to the motion or the removal of the officer and was not available to members as it was slander.

The simple truths that were discussed

1. The MCU had a delegate on the ICU executive.
2. The ICU voted to remove the MCU delegate without notice or warning to the MCU.
3. The ICU were told (by the MCU rep and then the MCU chair) that only the MCU can remove their delegate, not the ICU. That if they wished to discipline a member, they are welcome to do so under their rules. However, they have no right to remove the MCU delegate. That would be unconstitutional but they did so anyway.
4. The ICU told the MCU to send a different delegate. Effectively meaning any delegate needs ICU approval first.
5. When the chair of the MCU asked why they weren't notified, Pat (ICU chair) said they were going to do it in the July meeting but the delegate wasn't there (note: not mentioned in the minutes published on the icu site).
6. The chess players of Munster view this as an insult to their organisation. They are affiliated to the ICU and have a sole delegate to express Munster's views on the ICU committee and weren't given any warning or representation at an ICU meeting as a result.

The question is: can the ICU remove provincial delegates without consultation or notice to the province in question?

The answer: No.

2 years ago the MCU delegate was causing hassle and disrupting meetings, the then executive notified the MCU of the individuals behaviour and the MCU decided to replace the individual.


What makes this worse is, with the Ulster Chess Union now outside the ICU and Connaught not having a chess union, the MCU is the only province outside of Leinster that have a chess union affiliated to the ICU. The ICU, by removing the delegate is making the ICU a Leinster only union.


Regarding the letter, 2 out of 3 points were disproven immediately but the letter had nothing to do with the fact that the MCU were not given a voice at an ICU meeting and the executive refuse to permit the MCU to choose their delegate unless approved by the current ICU executive. The capacity of the current MCU rep is not the conversation topic as the MCU has reaffirmed that their delegate was satisfactory.

reunion

pawntof4 wrote: »

Are you able to supply us with the letter?

Unless the ICU start disciplinary proceedings (and a new thread started) - this letter is not up for discussion or publication in this thread. The letter was not handed out at the meeting nor was its contents discussed. It's contents had no impact on the decision of the Munster Chess Union to demand an apology or to state that they have no confidence in the current executive.

The fact a letter was received was discussed, however the MCU executive stated that no points related to the delegate's function in the ICU executive as the MCU delegate and 2 of the 3 points it raised were disproved instantly with little inspection.

The MCU welcome the ICU to use their own disciplinary procedures to discipline members, however their rep met the requirements to be an executive member as per the ICU constitution. So they had no right to remove the MCU rep.

Tim Harding

I am losing count of the number of supposed unconstitutional or unreasonable actions taken by the current ICU EC. Is the ejection of Gerry Graham (following the Mark Orr issue and the Galway rapid issue) the third, fourth or even higher number?

Can somebody please post a definitive list of the alleged or proven crimes of the Fitzsimons team so that impartial voters are clear on what exactly are the issues?

pawntof4

Tim Harding wrote: »

I am losing count of the number of supposed unconstitutional or unreasonable actions taken by the current ICU EC. Is the ejection of Gerry Graham (following the Mark Orr issue and the Galway rapid issue) the third, fourth or even higher number?

Can somebody please post a definitive list of the alleged or proven crimes of the Fitzsimons team so that impartial voters are clear on what exactly are the issues?

This probably deserves it's own thread!

reunion

pawntof4 wrote: »

This probably deserves it's own thread forum!

fixed that for you :P




Start a new thread, don't discuss previous wrongdoings of the current ICU executive here. Lets try to keep it to discussions about the MCU AGM, the decisions at the meeting and the fallout.

It is rather important that MCU members are aware of these new rules (4 big items). These rule changes can easily get lost due to the emergency motions - not to mention including a conversation about the ICU executive's wrongdoings!

4 big items that aren't the emergency motions:
1. Munster league games are played on Sundays this year
2. Guest players can't play on the top 2 boards of any team
3. Players must be updated on the panel on the same day as the match. Any later and the player is invalid.
4. Games need to be submitted within 48 hours otherwise it risks not being FIDE rated.

Tim Harding

Okay, sorry. New thread started. Leaving this one to Munster.

mikhail

reunion wrote: »

2. Guest players can't play on the top 2 boards of any team

How do they define a guest player?

rob51

mikhail wrote: »

How do they define a guest player?

Essentially any player not living in Munster or Connaught. The allowance for Connaught was made because they have no club league and some players have played with Munster clubs for years. The rules are on the MCU website (http://www.munsterchessunion.org/leaguerules_1.php.
It has been a thorny issue over the years.

Chess_Coach

reunion wrote: »

The letter made no difference to the motion or the removal of the officer and was not available to members as it was slander.

The simple truths that were discussed

1. The MCU had a delegate on the ICU executive.
2. The ICU voted to remove the MCU delegate without notice or warning to the MCU.
3. The ICU were told (by the MCU rep and then the MCU chair) that only the MCU can remove their delegate, not the ICU. That if they wished to discipline a member, they are welcome to do so under their rules. However, they have no right to remove the MCU delegate. That would be unconstitutional but they did so anyway.
4. The ICU told the MCU to send a different delegate. Effectively meaning any delegate needs ICU approval first.
5. When the chair of the MCU asked why they weren't notified, Pat (ICU chair) said they were going to do it in the July meeting but the delegate wasn't there (note: not mentioned in the minutes published on the icu site).
6. The chess players of Munster view this as an insult to their organisation. They are affiliated to the ICU and have a sole delegate to express Munster's views on the ICU committee and weren't given any warning or representation at an ICU meeting as a result.

The question is: can the ICU remove provincial delegates without consultation or notice to the province in question?

The answer: No.

2 years ago the MCU delegate was causing hassle and disrupting meetings, the then executive notified the MCU of the individuals behaviour and the MCU decided to replace the individual.


What makes this worse is, with the Ulster Chess Union now outside the ICU and Connaught not having a chess union, the MCU is the only province outside of Leinster that have a chess union affiliated to the ICU. The ICU, by removing the delegate is making the ICU a Leinster only union.


Regarding the letter, 2 out of 3 points were disproven immediately but the letter had nothing to do with the fact that the MCU were not given a voice at an ICU meeting and the executive refuse to permit the MCU to choose their delegate unless approved by the current ICU executive. The capacity of the current MCU rep is not the conversation topic as the MCU has reaffirmed that their delegate was satisfactory.

So the MCU AGM attendees did not see the letter sent to MCU Chairman . Why ? There are the reasons why MCU delegate was expelled from ICU Executive <snip> I just think that MCU members should read the ICU Chairman letter at least for fairness and transparency . Why not ? Why the MCU Chairman would hide this letter from the members? I do hope that this letter will be printed for ICU AGM .

Mod edit - irrelevant personal stuff snipped

Chess_Coach

And yes I do not want hide anything it is me ICU development officer . The one who secured 5000 e for ICU and saved 12 000 e from Junior budget in the past 4 years. The one who promised that all minutes will be published at ICU website and that all accounts have to be strictly controlled . I am as well the one who proposed that no member of he Executive can apply from any HOD or Team Captain position . I wanted as well that members of the Executive should not vote in case that they can some financial gain . For example tournament organizer not to vote for his tournament support .I have started project Junior coaching for the first time ever . When I started project and organized it all then Treasurer did not want to collect money from Parents ??? He said it was not his job . Only one who helped me was Kevin O Flaherty who actually did set the payment on The ICU website . One of the ex Chairman's did not publish the thank to Hotel which gave us free room for junior coaching . Reunion can witness my constant urge for sponsors and development of Irish Chess . I could add that I was the member of the Executive who was present at more then 95% of the meetings . Remember Reunion ?

Sparks

Darco, are you posting on behalf of the ICU?

Chess_Coach

No just in my personal capacity and it is Darko if you dont mind

Sparks

Chess_Coach wrote: »

No just in my personal capacity and it is Darko if you dont mind

Sorry about that, honest mistake.

reunion

Chess_Coach wrote: »

And yes I do not want hide anything it is me ICU development officer . The one who secured 5000 e for ICU and saved 12 000 e from Junior budget in the past 4 years. The one who promised that all minutes will be published at ICU website and that all accounts have to be strictly controlled . I am as well the one who proposed that no member of he Executive can apply from any HOD or Team Captain position . I wanted as well that members of the Executive should not vote in case that they can some financial gain . For example tournament organizer not to vote for his tournament support .I have started project Junior coaching for the first time ever . When I started project and organized it all then Treasurer did not want to collect money from Parents ??? He said it was not his job . Only one who helped me was Kevin O Flaherty who actually did set the payment on The ICU website . One of the ex Chairman's did not publish the thank to Hotel which gave us free room for junior coaching . Reunion can witness my constant urge for sponsors and development of Irish Chess . I could add that I was the member of the Executive who was present at more then 95% of the meetings . Remember Reunion ?

Mod note: Keep your post relevant to the MCU. See my last mod note.

rob51

Chess_Coach wrote: »

And yes I do not want hide anything it is me ICU development officer . The one who secured 5000 e for ICU and saved 12 000 e from Junior budget in the past 4 years. The one who promised that all minutes will be published at ICU website and that all accounts have to be strictly controlled . I am as well the one who proposed that no member of he Executive can apply from any HOD or Team Captain position . I wanted as well that members of the Executive should not vote in case that they can some financial gain . For example tournament organizer not to vote for his tournament support .I have started project Junior coaching for the first time ever . When I started project and organized it all then Treasurer did not want to collect money from Parents ??? He said it was not his job . Only one who helped me was Kevin O Flaherty who actually did set the payment on The ICU website . One of the ex Chairman's did not publish the thank to Hotel which gave us free room for junior coaching . Reunion can witness my constant urge for sponsors and development of Irish Chess . I could add that I was the member of the Executive who was present at more then 95% of the meetings . Remember Reunion ?

Do I hear an election coming? I certainly don't see any relevance to the topic.

rob51

Chess_Coach wrote: »

So the MCU AGM attendees did not see the letter sent to MCU Chairman . Why ? There are the reasons why MCU delegate was expelled from ICU Executive <snip> I just think that MCU members should read the ICU Chairman letter at least for fairness and transparency . Why not ? Why the MCU Chairman would hide this letter from the members? I do hope that this letter will be printed for ICU AGM .

Mod edit - irrelevant personal stuff snipped

I see the reasons the MCU committee did not publish the letter have been explained on the MCU Website http://www.munsterchessunion.org. I wonder when the ICU Executive will explain why they ignored the Constitution.

ComDubh

Even if there had been grounds for a no-confidence vote, and even if it was a legitimate vote to take, having anyone travel across the country to attend an ICU meeting only to boot them out arrival was a simply rotten thing to do.

Lecale

What is the point of publishing the letter to the MCU and not to the ICU?

cdeb

MCU delegate's response

reunion

Lecale wrote: »

What is the point of publishing the letter to the MCU and not to the ICU?

The MCU's letter to the ICU complaining about the unconstitutional actions of the current ICU executive should be public.

members of the MCU were unhappy with the disregard for the Munster Chess Union. The letter should be public to show that it's not just chair of MCU to chair of ICU (i.e. that the MCU committee are writing on behalf of the entire MCU membership to the entire ICU membership through the chair/the executive of the ICU) and that the apology should be public to all MCU members.

Lecale

I was talking there about why send a letter about GG only to the MCU membership and not to the ICU membership. If you're going to transparently run the ICU and explain why you've ejected an executive member, wouldn't you want to explain that to everyone?

cdeb

They'd probably argue they were being nice to the guy not putting it out in the open I guess.

Regardless, you can work out what the letter from the ICU said by what Gerry is refuting in his post on the MCU site.

Assuming it's correct, then more ICU shenanigans.

reunion

Lecale wrote: »

I was talking there about why send a letter about GG only to the MCU membership and not to the ICU membership. If you're going to transparently run the ICU and explain why you've ejected an executive member, wouldn't you want to explain that to everyone?

The letter wasn't addressed to the MCU membership nor was it to be made public. It was sent from the ICU chair to the chair of the MCU. The chair of the MCU hasn't made the letter public (or given it to others). Some people have the letter though... since it was sent from the ICU chair to the MCU chair and the MCU chair didn't give it to people, I wonder who did?

This letter should not be made public - particularly as:

1. it doesn't relate to the individual's record as MCU rep.
2. No disciplinary action was taken against the individual in question.
3. None of the letter's contents gave any proof (so are just allegations). 2 out of 3 were disproven immediately by the MCU committee.
4. It was addressed to the MCU chair privately.
5. The MCU AGM agreed that the letter is not to be made public.


The MCU notice/letter/email/message to the ICU should be public, at least to MCU members anyway. Considering the MCU members voted for an apology for removing their rep without warning or consultation.

Let's not confuse the letter, the bad treatment of the individual and the breach of the ICU constitution. The letter is irrelevant (if it's so damning, the ICU can have their own disciplinary process to determine the appropriate punishment) and the treatment (making the individual drive 3 hours to the meeting to be turned away) is not the issue the MCU and it's members voted on.

The individual can be on the executive (as his nomination was accepted to run for the 2015-16 executive) so there is no basis to remove this individual as the MCU rep. This removed Munster's voice from the executive so the ICU need to apologise for this. Removal of the Munster's voice is a serious insult to the entire chess playing population of Munster and the entire organisation of the MCU.

I'm certain the LCU wouldn't tolerate their rep being removed without notice or consultation (and in breach of the ICU constitution). While this doesn't directly affect them, they should realise the insult and potential precedent that this sets where the ICU can determine who any provincial delegate should be.

LorcanOToole

So according to Gerry's rebuttal he has been accused of forging (photocopying I think) the rating officers signature in a document only sent to the same rating officer for submission to FIDE.

So is this technically an offence or not? Well I don't see anything in the ICU laws about it so I searched Irish civil law. From the "Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001" we have a definition:

"A person is guilty of forgery if he or she makes a false instrument with the intention that it shall be used to induce another person to accept it as genuine and, by reason of so accepting it, to do some act, or to make some omission, to the prejudice of that person or any other person."

Seems to me the last bit clears Gerry completely. There has to be intent to prejudice someone. And as he never submitted it himself, and highlighted the liberty he took, he can't be guilty of that. So here (using Gerry's testimony only) I think he is simply acting as a secretary.

Any legal eagles out there who see this differently?