PDA

View Full Version : IPSE CC elections - who's going to stand this year?



TheFaQQer
3rd May 2016, 09:56
It's that time of year again - IPSE CC elections are open for nominations until Thursday at 6pm, with 12 places available. You can read about the election here (http://crum.pl/CC16News) and you can read about what the CC does and why you should consider it here (http://crum.pl/CC16IPSE).

So this is my appeal to try to encourage those that are members to stand for election. It may be nerve-wracking (and possibly unnatural to a contractor) to think about being seen as some kind of representative or politician (I'm a techie and always will be, so the thought of getting thrown into policy discussions was a little daunting when I first stood for CC).

BUT - a member of the CC doesn't have to be a policy expert, or a public speaker, or a strategist, or any of those things. IPSE has those experts already (I know that some people round these parts may find that hard to believe, but it's true!), so you don't have to be a policy genius or strategic thinker to join the CC.

So, what do you need to be a CC member? You need to be a contractor / freelancer / self-employed / independent professional / any other term that you use to describe the way that we all work. You are an expert on the way you work and the issues that you face - and IPSE is weaker without a reality check that says "good in theory, but..." to ideas. That's all you need to be - yourself. Nothing more, nothing less.

The policy team rely on real input from contractors into every aspect of the work that they do. What the choices are, what are the upsides and downsides of decisions, will be made clear at the CC meetings - you are there to be consulted by the board and staff, and you will be listened to. There will be plenty of discussion and debate, but the thoughts of the CC are always considered when making strategic and policy decisions.

It's easy to construct a hypothetical contractor (let's face it, we've seen HMRC do it for years!) and then use that model to push all sorts of things. What the CC needs is members who can make their points about how things work in the Real World, and to work well together with other members, the staff and the Board.

The reality is if you can't do that, you're probably not a very successful contractor to begin with. But IPSE can only thrive it if genuinely understands you and the pressures you actually face day-to-day.

Please help make IPSE stronger. Stand for the CC. Go to the election site (http://crum.pl/CCElection16) and put yourself forward. Go on :)

TL;DR > Stand for election - the site can be found here (http://crum.pl/CCElection16).

cojak
3rd May 2016, 10:15
Well I've got my CC member spreadsheet at the ready for the existing CC members, but never fear - you and mudskipper have exceeded my criteria for re-election. :)

eek
3rd May 2016, 11:55
Well I've got my CC member spreadsheet at the ready for the existing CC members, but never fear - you and mudskipper have exceeded my criteria for re-election. :)

Given the current number of candidates compared to the number of available spaces unless things drastically change I really don't think you'll need a spreadsheet.

I highly doubt there will need to an election

malvolio
3rd May 2016, 12:03
Given the current number of candidates compared to the number of available spaces unless things drastically change I really don't think you'll need a spreadsheet.

I highly doubt there will need to an election
Same thing as last year - we ended up with 18 candidates that time. Expect others to appear over the next week.

teapot418
3rd May 2016, 12:10
Same thing as last year - we ended up with 18 candidates that time. Expect others to appear over the next week.

2 days. But yes, it was last minute for many in previous years.

SimonMac
3rd May 2016, 12:26
Given the current number of candidates compared to the number of available spaces unless things drastically change I really don't think you'll need a spreadsheet.

I highly doubt there will need to an election

It should be noted that there is quality candidates rather than quantity :D

eek
3rd May 2016, 12:33
It should be noted that there is quality candidates rather than quantity :D

Looking at the 4 that are currently there I'm a bit unsure about a couple of them....

SimonMac
3rd May 2016, 12:40
Looking at the 4 that are currently there I'm a bit unsure about a couple of them....

Throw your hat in the ring then, give them some competition!

eek
3rd May 2016, 12:50
Throw your hat in the ring then, give them some competition!

Nope I know my plans for the next 2 years. I don't have time for what I'm planning to do before I add more to it.

Remember I said the options were to either fight or move out of the contracting game. I'm going for the latter - a highly specialized consultancy that can actually deliver...

northernladuk
3rd May 2016, 12:52
a highly specialized consultancy that can actually deliver...

Isn't that what contracting was supposed to be?

eek
3rd May 2016, 13:02
Isn't that what contracting was supposed to be?

I think contracting - providing your expertise at a daily rate

This is more here are the tools to do that for a reasonable sum of money £1-10k a month. Now here is the training And development courses and these are the associates we trust to deliver. And over time those associates will be replaced by permies...

Personally the only safe option at the moment is to get off the contracting treadmill. Using the most specialized parts of my skillet seems to be the safest way to do that. Especially when even the previously regarded specialized consultancies at the moment have reputations that are in the mud

LandRover
3rd May 2016, 14:44
What do IPSE do?

I don't see them helping to defend huge swathes of contractors and freelancers?

Isn't rather a elitist organisation?

northernladuk
3rd May 2016, 14:49
What do IPSE do?

I don't see them helping to defend huge swathes of contractors and freelancers?

Isn't rather a elitist organisation?

When you don't say you see them defending us, do you actively follow them reading the newsletters and publications or do you just cast a vague eye in their direction every so often?

eek
3rd May 2016, 14:54
When you don't say you see them defending us, do you actively follow them reading the newsletters and publications or do you just cast a vague eye in their direction every so often?

I was thinking due to landrover's signature that it was more a complaint that IPSE are not supporting those caught up in Tax schemes that was on HMRC's radar.

I know that complaint has been made a few times on here but I can't remember if landrover is someone who has stated as much in the past.

northernladuk
3rd May 2016, 15:01
I can't see his sig on the Mobile App. It just sounded like a person that doesn't really get involved in politics asking what do they do for him. Just checking like.

TheFaQQer
3rd May 2016, 15:16
What do IPSE do?

https://www.ipse.co.uk/what-we-do


Isn't rather a elitist organisation?

Not in my experience.

LandRover
3rd May 2016, 18:39
I was thinking due to landrover's signature that it was more a complaint that IPSE are not supporting those caught up in Tax schemes that was on HMRC's radar.

I know that complaint has been made a few times on here but I can't remember if landrover is someone who has stated as much in the past.

Correct in analysis of my questions.

We have thousands caught up in a potentially huge life changing situation. Obviously there are many who think it is just deserves for people being easily led & fooled & greedy, I could go on with plenty of further adjectives...

Many, in this nightmare, are probably members of IPSE or ex-members, so why are IPSE so silent on this matter, when we are talking about real peoples lives been ruined? Why are they not calling this government & HMRC to account for there lack of action on this matter for years?

No doubt there will be some who will tut tut and take the high moral ground, but many have no idea how we ended up in this nightmare, and it would really be honourable that an organisation like IPSE actually helped its members and the wider Independent Professional Self Employed Contactors and Freelancers.

eek
3rd May 2016, 18:49
Correct in analysis of my questions.

We have thousands caught up in a potentially huge life changing situation. Obviously there are many who think it is just deserves for people being easily led & fooled & greedy, I could go on with plenty of further adjectives...

Many, in this nightmare, are probably members of IPSE or ex-members, so why are IPSE so silent on this matter, when we are talking about real peoples lives been ruined? Why are they not calling this government & HMRC to account for there lack of action on this matter for years?

No doubt there will be some who will tut tut and take the high moral ground, but many have no idea how we ended up in this nightmare, and it would really be honourable that an organisation like IPSE actually helped its members and the wider Independent Professional Self Employed Contactors and Freelancers.

Sadly I'm one who takes that high ground. IPSE should not be fighting for those conned or tricked into joining schemes either to avoid ir35 or to maximize after tax income when I'm sure they never recommended such a scheme. I am however all ears if you have evidence to the contrary.

You are of course welcome to try and join the cc to argue your point. Your argument would not however be one that I would vote for.

v8gaz
3rd May 2016, 19:16
It should be noted that there ARE quality candidates rather than quantity :D

FTFY. Oh, the ironing :)

malvolio
3rd May 2016, 19:23
Correct in analysis of my questions.

We have thousands caught up in a potentially huge life changing situation. Obviously there are many who think it is just deserves for people being easily led & fooled & greedy, I could go on with plenty of further adjectives...

Many, in this nightmare, are probably members of IPSE or ex-members, so why are IPSE so silent on this matter, when we are talking about real peoples lives been ruined? Why are they not calling this government & HMRC to account for there lack of action on this matter for years?

No doubt there will be some who will tut tut and take the high moral ground, but many have no idea how we ended up in this nightmare, and it would really be honourable that an organisation like IPSE actually helped its members and the wider Independent Professional Self Employed Contactors and Freelancers.
IPES's stance has always been to treat any such scheme with extreme caution, but they haven't said (in fact, cannot say) to use them or not to use them. From memory - and it's a few years back - members using such schemes are very few in number, possibly no more than double figures.

Also they have been following the cases and have offered to help out, but the guys leading the battle are more than capable and have the necessary focus, so personally I doubt IPSE would add any value to this particular fight.

eek
4th May 2016, 15:38
Don't think I will be voting for Philip Ross if he ends up being nominated

malvolio
4th May 2016, 16:03
Don't think I will be voting for Philip Ross if he ends up being nominated
I don't think any of us will...

Fred Bloggs
4th May 2016, 18:09
Don't think I will be voting for Philip Ross if he ends up being nominated
What's the background story, wasn't he a big shot in the PCG?

eek
4th May 2016, 18:35
What's the background story, wasn't he a big shot in the PCG?

Ever heard of the concept of an FLC? or seen https://www.amazon.co.uk/Freedom-Freelance-Beginning-fight-against/dp/1471771490?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0 shudder...

Alias
4th May 2016, 18:36
Ever heard of the concept of an FLC?

*shudder*

Fred Bloggs
4th May 2016, 20:29
Ever heard of the concept of an FLC? or seen https://www.amazon.co.uk/Freedom-Freelance-Beginning-fight-against/dp/1471771490?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0 shudder...Indeed I have, FWIW, I would never vote for anyone in favour of such a half cocked, half baked, stupid idea as FLC. The book, I'm aware of but rarely read stuff like that as it is usually an attempt to cash in your chips thinly disguised as a helpful book.

So, the story is?

malvolio
5th May 2016, 09:25
Indeed I have, FWIW, I would never vote for anyone in favour of such a half cocked, half baked, stupid idea as FLC. The book, I'm aware of but rarely read stuff like that as it is usually an attempt to cash in your chips thinly disguised as a helpful book.

So, the story is?
It's all very well claiming a part in the formation of the PCG, which is fair enough, but that PCG was dead and buried in 2003 and replaced by a much smarter organisation, and that in turn has morphed into IPSE which is a quantum leap away form PCG Mk1 other than keeping up its key anti-IR35 defence effort. So his wilderness years didn't help PCG/IPSE in the slightest and his original work is irrelevant now.

Also his version of an FLC is miles away from the far more credible IPSE one (which HMG have taken on board for consideration) and does little to address the issues and was carefully aligned to Labour's own agenda on self-employment.

That said, he is once again a freelance and a member and has every right to stand and to have his voice heard. Just don't expect me to vote for him.

Fred Bloggs
5th May 2016, 09:46
Thank you for taking the time to write that. It is appreciated.

Pondlife
19th May 2016, 09:08
And we're off!

Vote early and vote often :D

https://election.ipse.co.uk/

Scruff
19th May 2016, 09:43
Get up, stand up. Vote Scruff, vote Life!

mudskipper
19th May 2016, 10:08
Three regular CUKers in the running that I'm aware of. :)

Pondlife
19th May 2016, 10:38
Three regular CUKers in the running that I'm aware of. :)

I believe that as well as Scruff, one posts under their real name but the other uses an alias of some sort.

Best of luck to all three. :yay:

eek
19th May 2016, 10:44
and a certain camnomis (or simonmac backwards)

Would be useful if the form stated how many people you could vote for

northernladuk
19th May 2016, 10:48
and a certain camnomis (or simonmac backwards)

Would be useful if the form stated how many people you could vote for

It does remind you when you cast your vote how many you can do and asks if you want to cancel and vote for more but yes telling you before would have been nice.

missinggreenfields
19th May 2016, 10:49
and a certain camnomis (or simonmac backwards)

Would be useful if the form stated how many people you could vote for

Hover over the "12" and it says "This is the number of seats available and how many votes you can cast"

Pondlife
19th May 2016, 10:53
and a certain camnomis (or simonmac backwards)


Just had a WTF moment.

SimonMac
19th May 2016, 11:04
Just had a WTF moment.

Really?!

Fred Bloggs
19th May 2016, 12:04
And we're off!

Vote early and vote often :D

https://election.ipse.co.uk/
Can't say I'm impressed so far. I have one vote fairly decided on and one definite no. TBH in the main it seems like voting for sheep.

SimonMac
19th May 2016, 12:06
Can't say I'm impressed so far. I have one vote fairly decided on and one definite no. TBH in the main it seems like voting for sheep.

Have you engaged with any of the candidates? Feel free to ask any questions here on there.

Fred Bloggs
19th May 2016, 12:23
Have you engaged with any of the candidates? Feel free to ask any questions here on there.Is it too much to expect candidates to say what they stand for and thus kick start a discussion?

mudskipper
19th May 2016, 12:26
Most posted their statement. Very few were then asked questions about it.

eek
19th May 2016, 12:34
Most posted their statement. Very few were then asked questions about it.

Very few have appeared at any point to answer the general questions that were directed at all of them

Fred Bloggs
19th May 2016, 12:51
Very few have appeared at any point to answer the general questions that were directed at all of themLack of interest is astonishing.

Scruff
19th May 2016, 13:25
The questions were mostly long winded or short and too open ended, imho. If you don't care to vote for me, or any others, based upon their statements, or the fact that they never answered then that's ok, too.

missinggreenfields
19th May 2016, 13:34
There were very few serious answers from candidates. In answer to being asked why someone joined IPSE, I would have liked to see more than a "I was told I'd get a free beer if I did" (or similar) as a response.

Very different from last year, where there were a lot of questions and a lot of in-depth answers from many of the candidates.

I'll give it a few days and see if anyone deigns to contribute to the discussion further :tumble:

malvolio
19th May 2016, 14:37
The questions were mostly long winded or short and too open ended, imho. If you don't care to vote for me, or any others, based upon their statements, or the fact that they never answered then that's ok, too.
Ermm... :spank:

You want to be on the CC. Presumably you want to make your voice heard. So why not raise this very point on the Elections forum and challenge people to ask relevant questions?

As I've said many time, complaining on CUK has zero effect on IPSE.

(Actually, not quite true. Some IPSE members do take complaints on here forward. But why rely on middlemen?)

malvolio
19th May 2016, 14:38
There were very few serious answers from candidates. In answer to being asked why someone joined IPSE, I would have liked to see more than a "I was told I'd get a free beer if I did" (or similar) as a response.

Very different from last year, where there were a lot of questions and a lot of in-depth answers from many of the candidates.

I'll give it a few days and see if anyone deigns to contribute to the discussion further :tumble:
I'm not holding my breath, to be honest...

Of those that have deigned to join in, only two have really offered anything constructive so far.

mudskipper
19th May 2016, 15:12
I'm not holding my breath, to be honest...

Of those that have deigned to join in, only two have really offered anything constructive so far.

I seem to remember you moaned about last year's lot too. :laugh :hug:

eek
19th May 2016, 15:23
The questions were mostly long winded or short and too open ended, imho. If you don't care to vote for me, or any others, based upon their statements, or the fact that they never answered then that's ok, too.

To be honest I'm glad there is a vote as there is one person there who I don't want. Apart from that I just need to find one other person to dislike and my decision will be made...

SimonMac
19th May 2016, 15:24
To be honest I'm glad there is a vote as there is one person there who I don't want. Apart from that I just need to find one other person to dislike and my decision will be made...

:wave:

malvolio
19th May 2016, 16:01
I seem to remember you moaned about last year's lot too. :laugh :hug:
With some justification as it's turned out... :wink

Scruff
19th May 2016, 16:08
Ermm... :spank:

You want to be on the CC. Presumably you want to make your voice heard. So why not raise this very point on the Elections forum and challenge people to ask relevant questions?

As I've said many time, complaining on CUK has zero effect on IPSE.

(Actually, not quite true. Some IPSE members do take complaints on here forward. But why rely on middlemen?)

I actually wasn't complaining? I made a statement why I never replied to the question(s).

missinggreenfields
19th May 2016, 17:18
The questions were mostly long winded or short and too open ended, imho.

So they were too long, or short, and allowed for a range of responses? OK :)

Scruff
19th May 2016, 18:20
So they were too long, or short, and allowed for a range of responses? OK :)

This is hard work, sometimes :) too longwinded, or too vague :smokin

missinggreenfields
19th May 2016, 18:27
This is hard work, sometimes :) too longwinded, or too vague :smokin

I can understand how things like "why did you join", "do you think it's important to be visible to the members", "what do you get out of IPSE membership", "why do you want to be on the CC" are incredibly vague and long-winded questions that you couldn't possibly hope to answer.

But you'll get elected, so you don't need to worry about actually considering anything like what it entails, or why you want to do it, or anything like that.

Scruff
19th May 2016, 20:13
Just what are you trying to achieve? Have you considered standing for the CC? If not, then why not? You seem to be rather antagonistic. I have taken the opportunity to stand for election. I don't hide behind a different name on IPSE, so my identity isn't hidden. If I'm lucky enough to be elected, I will then have the opportunity to represent the membership of IPSE and be able to liaise between them and the BoD. Good enough?

missinggreenfields
19th May 2016, 20:16
Just what are you trying to achieve? Have you considered standing for the CC? If not, then why not? You seem to be rather antagonistic. I have taken the opportunity to stand for election. I don't hide behind a different name on IPSE, so my identity isn't hidden. If I'm lucky enough to be elected, I will then have the opportunity to represent the membership of IPSE and be able to liaise between them and the BoD. Good enough?

I'd like to think that a candidate can answer a question like "why are you standing" or "why are you an IPSE member". Clearly either you can't answer the question, or you don't feel that you need to engage with your electorate.

So, not really, no. You've avoided answering any straight / open-ended / short / long / wordy question which has been put to the candidates - that's your right, and as I said, you'll get elected so it'll be interesting to see how you liaise with the members when you are.

cojak
20th May 2016, 04:46
I'd like to think that a candidate can answer a question like "why are you standing" or "why are you an IPSE member". Clearly either you can't answer the question, or you don't feel that you need to engage with your electorate.

So, not really, no. You've avoided answering any straight / open-ended / short / long / wordy question which has been put to the candidates - that's your right, and as I said, you'll get elected so it'll be interesting to see how you liaise with the members when you are.

That's why I've never bothered. If the only answers I could whistle up were 'because someone else suggested that I stand' and 'for the insurance', then it wasn't meant for me. :happy

dx4100
20th May 2016, 07:44
Correct in analysis of my questions.

We have thousands caught up in a potentially huge life changing situation. Obviously there are many who think it is just deserves for people being easily led & fooled & greedy, I could go on with plenty of further adjectives...

Many, in this nightmare, are probably members of IPSE or ex-members, so why are IPSE so silent on this matter, when we are talking about real peoples lives been ruined? Why are they not calling this government & HMRC to account for there lack of action on this matter for years?

No doubt there will be some who will tut tut and take the high moral ground, but many have no idea how we ended up in this nightmare, and it would really be honourable that an organisation like IPSE actually helped its members and the wider Independent Professional Self Employed Contactors and Freelancers.

I don't want IPSE wasting my membership money defending a bunch of people who very activity went out of their way to avoid paying tax. The grey area of IR35 and people trying to operate within / around it is light years away from what you guys did with all these schemes.

You all took the piss and got burnt. Time to pony up the money. :smokin

Might sound harsh but if you want to waste my money defending the indefensible then I am going to have something to say about it.

:smokin

SimonMac
20th May 2016, 07:47
Correct in analysis of my questions.

We have thousands caught up in a potentially huge life changing situation. Obviously there are many who think it is just deserves for people being easily led & fooled & greedy, I could go on with plenty of further adjectives...

Many, in this nightmare, are probably members of IPSE or ex-members, so why are IPSE so silent on this matter, when we are talking about real peoples lives been ruined? Why are they not calling this government & HMRC to account for there lack of action on this matter for years?

No doubt there will be some who will tut tut and take the high moral ground, but many have no idea how we ended up in this nightmare, and it would really be honourable that an organisation like IPSE actually helped its members and the wider Independent Professional Self Employed Contactors and Freelancers.

I see IPSE as a preventative organisation lobbying for future change to avoid problems like this in the future, while also advising people (where necassary) to stay away from scheme's which are questionable at best.

SueEllen
20th May 2016, 07:55
That's why I've never bothered. If the only answers I could whistle up were 'because someone else suggested that I stand' and 'for the insurance', then it wasn't meant for me. :happy

I'm sure with a bit of help you could come up with a better statement that you wrote yourself.

malvolio
20th May 2016, 08:18
I see IPSE as a preventative organisation lobbying for future change to avoid problems like this in the future, while also advising people (where necassary) to stay away from scheme's which are questionable at best.
I've said it before but will say it again, my understanding on this area is:

IPSE has always taken the position that any scheme is inherently risky and should only be used with care and due diligence

IPSE will defend its members against any tax-related investigation as best it can. It will probably take on wider cases if that would benefit the membership as a whole (which is why Arctic, for example).

The number of IPSE users in such schemes was vanishingly small; hence it is difficult to justify a specific campaign

IPSE offered to help the two main campaigns and do maintain a watching brief, but are probably not going to add a lot of value to what is a specific and very complex situation


As I say that is my understanding and opinion; others are available. But to say IPSE aren't taking notice is simply wrong.

Scruff
20th May 2016, 11:50
I'd like to think that a candidate can answer a question like "why are you standing" or "why are you an IPSE member". Clearly either you can't answer the question, or you don't feel that you need to engage with your electorate.

So, not really, no. You've avoided answering any straight / open-ended / short / long / wordy question which has been put to the candidates - that's your right, and as I said, you'll get elected so it'll be interesting to see how you liaise with the members when you are.

I have stated what the CC is there for in my last post. The CC doesn't have any executive role, nor steer IPSE. There is no point in elaborating that which is moot.

I'm an IPSE+ member for all the reasons that membership offers, the whole being greater than the sum of the parts. When I first joined in the early noughties, it was for the IR35 insurance. Times have changed.

I won't be hurt or upset if you choose not to vote for me, but at least exercise your right to vote ( assuming that you are a member).

Forgotmylogin
20th May 2016, 12:33
One thing I don't like is the nomination process.

While I don't think anyone is abusing the system, in particular I don't like:

One person being able to Propose multiple candidates (put forward the individual you support most)
Proposals being made by Directors (don't the CC elect the BoD?)
Proposals being made by current CC members (could lead to group-think / echo chambers)
Cross-Proposals from two candidates putting each other forward (could allow the creation of cabals joining the CC together)


As I said, I don't think it's being abused, but these could lead to accusations of attempts to stack the CC, and if there was ever again an election with fewer candidates than posts, and all candidates had Director / current CC proposals it would look even worse.

As it is, you see multiple posts where Directors tell ordinary members that they're not allowed to know details of how decisions are made (e.g. Brooksons), and if it came to a point where the CC were all put forward by the BoD then ordinary members could lose trust in the only representation they have.

Just some random thoughts after reviewing the candidates.

SimonMac
20th May 2016, 12:40
One thing I don't like is the nomination process.

While I don't think anyone is abusing the system, in particular I don't like:

One person being able to Propose multiple candidates (put forward the individual you support most)
Proposals being made by Directors (don't the CC elect the BoD?)
Proposals being made by current CC members (could lead to group-think / echo chambers)
Cross-Proposals from two candidates putting each other forward (could allow the creation of cabals joining the CC together)


As I said, I don't think it's being abused, but these could lead to accusations of attempts to stack the CC, and if there was ever again an election with fewer candidates than posts, and all candidates had Director / current CC proposals it would look even worse.

As it is, you see multiple posts where Directors tell ordinary members that they're not allowed to know details of how decisions are made (e.g. Brooksons), and if it came to a point where the CC were all put forward by the BoD then ordinary members could lose trust in the only representation they have.

Just some random thoughts after reviewing the candidates.

I think the nominee process is too restrictive, I rather have a lot of engaged candidates rather than those just being put up by mates, nomination does not guarantee election, but it does guarantee at least their voice being heard (if they so wish), which is another issue given the radio silence from a number of the candidates, but then again the more I talk the more likely I might say something someone disagrees with so its a delicate balance required.

malvolio
20th May 2016, 12:45
One thing I don't like is the nomination process.

While I don't think anyone is abusing the system, in particular I don't like:

One person being able to Propose multiple candidates (put forward the individual you support most)
Proposals being made by Directors (don't the CC elect the BoD?)
Proposals being made by current CC members (could lead to group-think / echo chambers)
Cross-Proposals from two candidates putting each other forward (could allow the creation of cabals joining the CC together)


As I said, I don't think it's being abused, but these could lead to accusations of attempts to stack the CC, and if there was ever again an election with fewer candidates than posts, and all candidates had Director / current CC proposals it would look even worse.

As it is, you see multiple posts where Directors tell ordinary members that they're not allowed to know details of how decisions are made (e.g. Brooksons), and if it came to a point where the CC were all put forward by the BoD then ordinary members could lose trust in the only representation they have.

Just some random thoughts after reviewing the candidates.
Not that random. All good points that have been raised.

Since last year it is a lot easier to amend the rules of the elections (they used to be embedded in the Articles meaning an AGM was needed to change stuff) so if there is a case to be made for limiting who can vote for whom, it can be done.

However, undermining that is the essence of IPSE, which is that it is run by contractors for contractors. Everyone is a member (in fact, every member is an owner) and all have the same rights. Denying one group a free vote goes against that principle.

You can see who proposed and seconded people. If you're not comfortable that they are being impartial, then don't vote for that candidate.

Forgotmylogin
20th May 2016, 13:15
However, undermining that is the essence of IPSE, which is that it is run by contractors for contractors. Everyone is a member (in fact, every member is an owner) and all have the same rights. Denying one group a free vote goes against that principle.


Not quite true though, is it? All members are equal in the sense that all animals on Orwell's farm are equal - some are a little more equal than others. You can't have true equality of rights.
You need to have some information restricted, as has been acknowledged several times by two-legged beasts. Sometimes I think that is abused (again, I'll use the Brooksons example - "We've decided to promote a firm with a terrible reputation, but trust us, it's for a very good reason that you're not allowed to know and now I'll refuse to talk to you anymore"). Sometimes it may be for very good reasons, e.g. needing to keep strategy confidential until it's time to release to the wider world.
You need to have some leadership, and someone has to be able to make a final ruling. If everyone had the same rights then it would be a plebiscite on every issue, and not decisions being taken behind closed doors by elected representatives.
If I'm truly an equal owner with everyone else, then presumably I can view the minutes for all meetings? Ah, no Ted.

But at the same time, to have directors proposing who should form part of their small group of electors... How did that get past the governance review? It's questionable whether directors should have a vote for the CC at all, as it's a fairly blatant conflict of interest. In any case, I didn't say I had a problem with them voting, it was with nominating.


As I said before, I don't think there has been any abuse, but it could give cause for concern and mistrust. Don't try and spin the "everyone is equal" line when it's obviously untrue.

SimonMac
20th May 2016, 13:22
However, undermining that is the essence of IPSE, which is that it is run by contractors for contractors. Everyone is a member (in fact, every member is an owner) and all have the same rights. Denying one group a free vote goes against that principle.


As much as I thank you for seconding me in the elections, this in my opinion is what is fundamentally whats is wrong with the organisation, certain members still think of it as PCG, for contractors, however TPTB are (rightly or wrongly) trying to move the membership from its core to encompass all freelancers and the self employed, not just contractors.

malvolio
20th May 2016, 13:22
As I said before, I don't think there has been any abuse, but it could give cause for concern and mistrust. Don't try and spin the "everyone is equal" line when it's obviously untrue.
Except it is, and everyone has the same opportunity and the same access to information with the sole (and obvious) exceptions of on-going politically sensitive discussions, commercial issues and staff matters.

As for the rules being biased or fair, for some time I've been on the working party with the intention of preventing block-voting and the same cabal of directors taking control; what we have now is the best compromise between fairness and privilege that we can come up with. I'm sure the new CC will welcome any better or alternative approaches.

Forgotmylogin
20th May 2016, 13:37
Except it is, and everyone has the same opportunity and the same access to information with the sole (and obvious) exceptions of on-going politically sensitive discussions, commercial issues and staff matters.

As for the rules being biased or fair, for some time I've been on the working party with the intention of preventing block-voting and the same cabal of directors taking control; what we have now is the best compromise between fairness and privilege that we can come up with. I'm sure the new CC will welcome any better or alternative approaches.

I agree that the politically sensitive discussions, etc should be kept private. Good to know that everything else is open to view.

Could you post a link to where I can view the minutes of the CC meetings, BoD meetings please? I won't mind the black bars over the redacted sections.
At the moment I can't seem to access the report on CC member engagement - as this isn't a staffing issue, politically sensitive or commercial info I presume the report will be in full without redactions, and it will be interesting to see the levels of engagement from my elected members, and if any have low engagement any reasoning they provide.

Thanks

missinggreenfields
20th May 2016, 13:44
If I'm truly an equal owner with everyone else, then presumably I can view the minutes for all meetings? Ah, no Ted.

I own shares in Tesco, but the buggers wouldn't give me access to all their minutes either. Who do I complain to?

mudskipper
20th May 2016, 13:58
I agree that the politically sensitive discussions, etc should be kept private. Good to know that everything else is open to view.

Could you post a link to where I can view the minutes of the CC meetings, BoD meetings please? I won't mind the black bars over the redacted sections.
At the moment I can't seem to access the report on CC member engagement - as this isn't a staffing issue, politically sensitive or commercial info I presume the report will be in full without redactions, and it will be interesting to see the levels of engagement from my elected members, and if any have low engagement any reasoning they provide.

Thanks

Minutes from the CC meetings can all be found in the governance section of the forum. I will happily address your other questions on the IPSE forums if you care to post them there.

Forgotmylogin
20th May 2016, 14:32
Minutes from the CC meetings can all be found in the governance section of the forum. I will happily address your other questions on the IPSE forums if you care to post them there.

Found the CC minutes, thanks MS. I didn't realise they were in a forum - I was looking for a document repository. I'd already looked in there, but didn't scroll down far enough!

I'd rather post on here where I can be a bit arsey than on IPSE where I try to be a bit more professional. Fully understand if you think your answers should be kept internal to IPSE members so don't want to reply though.

I actually wasn't all that bothered, but since finding out that I have the same rights as the CC and Directors in terms of access to information it's sparked my interest. Partly because I believe that it's bollocks.

I've just deleted a long laundry list of information that is not sensitive but is withheld, as at this stage I can't be arsed arguing.

malvolio
20th May 2016, 15:26
Found the CC minutes, thanks MS. I didn't realise they were in a forum - I was looking for a document repository. I'd already looked in there, but didn't scroll down far enough!

I'd rather post on here where I can be a bit arsey than on IPSE where I try to be a bit more professional. Fully understand if you think your answers should be kept internal to IPSE members so don't want to reply though.

I actually wasn't all that bothered, but since finding out that I have the same rights as the CC and Directors in terms of access to information it's sparked my interest. Partly because I believe that it's bollocks.

I've just deleted a long laundry list of information that is not sensitive but is withheld, as at this stage I can't be arsed arguing.
Are you having trouble with the idea of "members only" I wonder. :wink

Ask a question on IPSE's forums or drop a PM to a Director or CC member and you'll get an answer wherever possible. Ask here and you'll likely get nothing. As for "the same information", very little is not passed down to the membership in due course and that is strictly the personnel and commercially confidential material as you would expect.

cojak
20th May 2016, 15:59
Minutes from the CC meetings can all be found in the governance section of the forum. I will happily address your other questions on the IPSE forums if you care to post them there.

WMSS.

I completed my spreadsheet with info from the minutes.

I haven't really needed it because the worst non-attender offenders have dropped out of the CC.

teapot418
21st May 2016, 11:06
One thing I don't like is the nomination process.

While I don't think anyone is abusing the system, in particular I don't like:

One person being able to Propose multiple candidates (put forward the individual you support most)
Proposals being made by Directors (don't the CC elect the BoD?)
Proposals being made by current CC members (could lead to group-think / echo chambers)
Cross-Proposals from two candidates putting each other forward (could allow the creation of cabals joining the CC together)


As I said, I don't think it's being abused, but these could lead to accusations of attempts to stack the CC, and if there was ever again an election with fewer candidates than posts, and all candidates had Director / current CC proposals it would look even worse.

As it is, you see multiple posts where Directors tell ordinary members that they're not allowed to know details of how decisions are made (e.g. Brooksons), and if it came to a point where the CC were all put forward by the BoD then ordinary members could lose trust in the only representation they have.

Just some random thoughts after reviewing the candidates.


I've just gone through the booklet. If you rule out people who are proposed by CC members, board members or other candidates, you'd have four left. Apply the same to seconders, and you're just left with Philip Ross :) (who is proposed by an ex-director).

The concerns are valid, but I suspect it's an indication that the board and CC are doing their job, as in they're talking to people about IPSE, what it does, and why they should think about joining the CC. Those people then ask that board/CC member to propose/second them. It kinda follows that the people who are likely to be interested in joining the CC are more likely to be those that know CC members. Your average member who's never shown any interest in joining the CC is unlikely to be extolling its merits.

As long as proposers are honest about knowing candidates, it's down to the voters.

elpato
2nd June 2016, 14:09
This is the most obvious IPSE thread so - as I'll be signing up later this month (read: when my next invoice is paid), who wants to refer me and get us some Amazon vouchers? ;)

malvolio
2nd June 2016, 15:09
This is the most obvious IPSE thread so - as I'll be signing up later this month (read: when my next invoice is paid), who wants to refer me and get us some Amazon vouchers? ;)
Well I would, but I never signed up for the member-get-member scheme :smoking Doubtless there are others who will oblige. Or try searching the forum, bound to be a few knocking around.

Don't need a referee anyway, you just quote their magic word (if you have one) as part of the sign-up process.

missinggreenfields
2nd June 2016, 15:10
This is the most obvious IPSE thread so - as I'll be signing up later this month (read: when my next invoice is paid), who wants to refer me and get us some Amazon vouchers? ;)

You'd be better off using the CUK discount code.

mudskipper
2nd June 2016, 15:35
You'd be better off using the CUK discount code.

WMGFS ContractorUK16 for 15% off.

Alias
2nd June 2016, 16:15
Or if you really want to go through the referral then click here (https://tr.im/M7Lg6)