Another committee question for you all....

[Hobbit]

Sod all to do with any of that,it's a committee that primarily runs the playing side of the club so hee haw to do with finances etc.

Do you want honest replies or do you want posters to agree that its fine?????????????????????

Those you disagree with you've not exactly welcomed their opinions.

Golf clubs need to compete with each other, and need a USP to lift them above the competition. Having someone in the position you suggest wouldn't be acceptable in the business world for a reason. I'm not questioning the guy's integrity, I'm suggesting what is common business practice. AND I wouldn't put him in a position where one day he may have to choose because on that day one of the clubs would be poorly served.

But hey, sounds like you've already made your decision anyway.

 

[Tommo21]

If he is a paid by one club to be secretary then he should not really be on the committee of the other club as you could have a conflict of interests. Who does he show loyalty to? The club that pays his wages or the club that he has been a member of for years, you have said that it is not as nice as where he works as secretary. So he could start using ideas that they have to try and improve his club where he is a member at. Surely both clubs would be in competition with each other for members as they are not that far apart.

If the mans honest he can show loyalty to both with ease. I know of a few people, not that long ago, who have shafted golf clubs and their conflict of interest has nothing to do with another club. Running a golf clubs finances and running competitions and handicaps are two different things, the reason all clubs that I know are partitioned this way.

 

[bladeplayer]

2 totally different clubs 20 plus miles apart or 35 minutes by car.

I am interested as to why the club he works at would not wish him to be serving on another clubs committee and as to why you think it would be a minus point for him to do so?

If this is the case,should there not be something written into constitutions then?

My 2cents worth would be i dont think it would be a good idea , i think even unconsciously there MIGHT be conflict of intrest , for him on a personal thing aswell there could arise a problem,... just as a scenario totaly hypothetical.. say if you are represented in both clubs & one club is doing well & the other is struggling , id imagine at a meeting someone is going to ask the guy , how are ye managing to attract societys , what deals are ye offering etc , are ye planing any offers/ changes etc.. if he tells them he p's off the other club & gets in trouble, if he refuses he will p off this club , this might be a simplistic way of looking at it , but for me i think been involved in 2 businesses that compete or may have cause to compete with each other will only cause hassel for the person involved , he is the only one who could possibly loose out ..

 

[MadAdey]

regarding lots of committees within the club mine does have several. Listen to this little lot. Club Committee, Course committee, Finance Committee, Golf and Social Committee and house Committee.

 

[chrisd]

regarding lots of committees within the club mine does have several. Listen to this little lot. Club Committee, Course committee, Finance Committee, Golf and Social Committee and house Committee.

Thats pretty normal - in effect different sub comittees looking after their areas of interest and then meeting together for the big decisions

Chris

 

[bluewolf]

I hate to say it, but I don't think it would be a good idea. If one club is performing better than the other, then it puts pressure on the individual to reveal the reasons for any perceived success. The individual would then have to choose between complete honesty (upsetting one club), or silence (upsetting the other). It would take a lot of understanding from both sides for the arrangement to work, and the last time I checked, understanding wasn't a common character trait in any walk of life.

 

[SocketRocket]

As I have said previously the person is a member of BOTH clubs....it has been said in black and white so I am struggling to understand how you have missed it.

Thanks for the input though.

Are you sure you said that? maybe you can show me where you said he was a member of both clubs. I can only see where you have said he was the Secretary of one (I guess that means he is an Employee) and a member of the other.

I am struggling to see where I missed it as well.

 

[Airlie_Andy]

More important than any of that is why anyone would continually include their name within a post when it's quite clear who has posted it?

Andy

 

[viscount17]

from what I can see, the only real conflict may be that of time. Most committees that I know anything about hold their meetings in the evening and as Secretary he would be expected to attend all of that clubs meetings, so there may be a question as to how much time he can give to the other.
The only other concern that his home club could have is that if there were an issue raised (at either club) where there was a real or perceived conflict of interest then at his home club he could step out while it was discussed (pretty much normal practice) but that is something he would not be able to do at his place of employment.

 

[chrisd]

More important than any of that is why anyone would continually include their name within a post when it's quite clear who has posted it?

Andy

Can't see why either!


Chris

 

[Airlie_Andy]

Can't see why either!


Chris

Andy