That is correct I'm afraid.  It always seems to me that it is a mistake to resign from an organisation when you (and the people who voted for you) disagree with an action the organisation is taking. Sometimes people think it is an effective way of making a point but in fact it just means there is one less person to argue the case you wish to make.  As leader of the opposition on a district council for the last 15 years it is my belief that all democratic organisations need to have wide representation of their stakeholders' views on their governing body.



Margaret



Margaret Rowley MA BSc MCLIP DMS

Head of Knowledge Management & RA Manager

Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust

Rowlands Library, Charles Hastings Education Centre

Worcestershire Royal Hospital

Charles Hastings Way

Worcester

WR5 1DD



Tel: 01905 760601 (direct)  01905 763333 ext 33765

Mob: 07788 415799



Worcestershire Health Libraries bringing knowledge to the home and workplace







-----Original Message-----

From: Library and Information Professionals [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Phil Bradley

Sent: 12 August 2014 12:52

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: John Dolan rejoins CILIP Council in Tom Roper's place



Charles, this is disappointing. You know full well that this is the process that CILIP has always had; there is nothing new or different here, and it's something that members are aware of, and certainly those who stand for, or who stand down from Council know will happen.

This is therefore not a 'casual vacancy co-option offer', but the way that a democratic organisation works; it would have been offered to whoever came 5th in the election process, and that's exactly how it should work.



What would your solution be? To have Council with 11, rather than 12 trustees for the rest of the year, and then elect 5 this autumn for

2015 (assuming that we are still using the current system). I don't really see how helpful that would be, and in any case, that would mean electing 5 people for next year, and if John stood, and was 5th again, we'd end up with exactly the same situation; ie. him becoming a trustee again. Or would you prefer Council to co-opt someone who was not involved in the elections at all, which would be rather similar to one of the governance proposals that you've already said that you're against.



To say that "It demonstrates a degree of contempt by Council for CILIP members' views" is nonsense - CILIP members had an opportunity to vote, they voted, this is the outcome, and it is taking into direct account what members wanted. In fact I could argue that to actually leave Council so soon after being elected to sit for three years is rather more in contempt of those people who voted for them than anything else. If Tom had not stood, John would have been elected, and that would have been the end of the matter.





Phil.



On 12 August 2014 12:08, CHARLES OPPENHEIM <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> See

> http://www.cilip.org.uk/cilip/news/john-dolan-becomes-cilip-trustee-se

> cond-time

>

> Let me make it clear I have absolutely nothing against John, who is a

> very honourable gentleman who is 100% committed to CILIP's success,

> but I am astonished at this news.  If I had been rejected by the

> electorate at the last Council elections, I wouldn't have the nerve to

> accept a casual vacancy co-option offer, and nor should Council have

> offered it. It demonstrates a degree of contempt by Council for CILIP members' views.

>

> It's very difficult to make me nearly speechless, but this news has

> achieved just that.

>

> Charles

>

> Professor Charles Oppenheim







--

Phil Bradley: Internet Consultant, Trainer, Social Media observer and Author.

     Visit http://www.philb.com for free information on aspects of the Internet ,

   search engine articles, social media tips and a host of other free information.

        Weblogs: http://www.philbradley.typepad.com/

                       http://philbradley.typepad.com/i_want_to/

Unless expressly stated otherwise, the information contained in this email is confidential and is intended only for the named recipients. You must not copy, distribute, or take any action or reliance upon it. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender. Any unauthorised disclosure of the information contained in this email is strictly prohibited.