Pre AGM 2009 Interviews

[John Upham]

It would appear that some (all?) prospective Board candidates are required to offer themselves for interview by the Board in the classy environs of Euston Square Hotel as follows :

Dear ****

There will be an ECF Board held at the Euston Square Hotel, 152 – 156 North Gower Street, London NW1 2LU on Saturday 17 October 2009 starting at 11.00am and finishing about 30 mins before the start of the Council meeting. The Board interviews candidates for office and may decide to recommend a candidate to Council. Please advise whether you are able to attend.

Regards

Chris Majer

ECF CEO

I would like to know :

1. Is this new procedure?
2. Are all candidates being interviewed (including incumbents)?
3. What if the candidate chooses not to be interviewed by the Board? Are they eliminated at this stage?


This would appear to suggest that Council should rubber stamp whomsoever the Board recommends.

Maybe the results of the election are decided already?

[Paul Buswell]

John:

I am not familiar with ECF practice in recent years but this procedure, or a variation of it, goes back quite a few years.

My recollection way back when is that the Board would interview (a) all candidates for an election where there was more than one candidate; (b) any candidate for an apparently uncontested election who was new to the post.

I regard it as a perfectly straightforward and proper procedure and of course failure to attend can't disqualify a candidate.

PB

[John Philpott]

Paul's description accords with the present practice. I am not sure on what basis John has interpreted what is clearly an invitation into a requirement: I am already aware that not all the candidates will be attending Council (which almost certainly does not benefit their chances in the election), never mind being able to appear at the Board meeting. The Board may or may not decide to make a recommendation following the interviews: Council will, of course, make its own decision, with any Board recommendation only one of a range of factors that will be taken into account (such as the content of a candidate's election address). A Board recommendation (or attendance at Council by a candidate) is, of course, of no influence on any delegate who has given a directed proxy.

[John Upham]

Thanks Paul and John. I would like an assurance that failure to attend the grilling will not be reported to Council (before or during the Council meeting) as clearly it will be pre-judicial.

I can just imagine the line of questioning : "So, you think you can do a better job than I haven't : why?"

[Jonathan Rogers]

John, you are getting rather over-excited about this. It seems that the Board can do nothing more than recommend one candidate in favour to another as a result of these interviews, and perhaps that is something which they would have been able to do anyway? It may be different if they can use particular answers given by a candidate at the interview against him at the AGM, but it doesn't sound as though they can.

You should advise your candidates to attend if possible, so as not to appear as "dangerous (or arrogant) outsiders", in my view. They have nothing to lose.

[John Philpott]

John Upham wrote

I would like an assurance that failure to attend the grilling will not be reported to Council (before or during the Council meeting) as clearly it will be pre-judicial.

You are certainly not going to get one from me. It would seem entirely reasonable for Council to be informed that a particular candidate was invited to be interviewed by the Board but declined, as that is a straightforward matter of fact. It would seem equally reasonable for the first question that Council asks of that candidate (assuming that he is attending the Council meeting) to be why the invitation was declined.

[John Upham]

Another year wasted then...

[Carl Hibbard]

Another year wasted then...

Which candidate are you SO worried about then John as that isn't clear to me?

[Jonathan Rogers]

As I say, if the details of the interviews cannot be relayed (that, I think, is the question that JU should be putting to JP),then I don't think that a simple "the Board recommends x who presented well at interview" will carry all that much weight. In a case of, say, outsider CJ v the obvious Board favourite, everyone knows already whom the Board will recommend (or at least, so they might think). Of the few who are able to vote, who would be influenced by the Board's recommendation just because it was said to follow an interview?

And perhaps at this interview CJ would be able to ask some awkward questions of the Board himself, which he would not have an opportunity to ask otherwise? Any one else think that this might be an opportunity for him as well as some form of ritual humiliation?

[Carl Hibbard]

I think its rather important we publish as much information regarding the AGM here as possible so everything is seen as open as it can be...

As much reporting afterwards as possible from people on site would be welcomed

[Carl Hibbard]

Last years live blog/reporting from site (who was that?) will probably not be that welcomed by the board

[Roger de Coverly]

In a case of, say, outsider CJ v the obvious Board favourite, everyone knows already whom the Board will recommend (or at least, so they might think).

I suppose we look forward to the Board's reasoning as to why a long-serving but totally obscure member of Council should be elevated to the high profile post of President.

[John Philpott]

Carl Hibbard wrote

Last years live blog/reporting from site (who was that?) will probably not be that welcomed by the board

Unfortunately, I have it on good authority that this reporter (whoever he might happen to be) will be spending the afternoon of 17 October at the Britannia Stadium Stoke rather than the Euston Square Hotel.

[Carl Hibbard]

In a case of, say, outsider CJ v the obvious Board favourite, everyone knows already whom the Board will recommend (or at least, so they might think).

I suppose we look forward to the Board's reasoning as to why a long-serving but totally obscure member of Council should be elevated to the high profile post of President.

No problem there with CJ getting elected, its the Gerry versus Nigel one that is of interest of course!

[John Upham]

I expect Gerry to appear at the Council Meeting with a rapturous reception similar to :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGgaJwGa ... playnext=1

The wrestling bout will feature a current Director of Chess Centre Ltd plus a candidate for the role of Non-Executive Director

Ten two minute rounds with no conferring...