[quote=“easylife” post=8700]Has anyone seen the update to the local news paper about the squadron:
So the Civ Comm didn’t turn upto a planned meeting with the uniformed staff, it seems as if they are all talk when it comes to “Doing it for the kids.”
At least hopefully it seems to be moving forward!
:mad: civ comm have made it extremely difficult and they have been asked to resign on a number of occasions now but refuse! They say legal matters, new sub comm are prepared to take on what is necessary to get cadets back up and running.
It is childish behaviour from civ comm, I wish I was part of the sub comm and help try and save 863 Squadron.
Civ comm didn’t turn up to a major meeting with Air commodore and others in high positions, along with the new sub comm members, who ALL turned up.
Chairman requested the minutes taken by the new Sub comm, so he can respond! He is creating puppets on strings, but these puppets won’t perform for civ comm long.
If you are under the illusion Civ comm want to resign desperately, you are very much mistaken. It is about winning for them. They would be happier for the Squadron to close, than to resign! Not 1 of them has a cadet in 863.
It’s a sad state of affairs it’s ended up like this.
I do find this whole process rather odd.
Someone has a bee in their bonnet over something (usually with the civcoms it’s their son/daughter not getting promoted or not getting preferential treatment at the sqn).
I agree with the posts above though - disband the squadron, change it’s number and surely the existing civcom would cease to exist as they have no squadron! Then use this new group of parents to act as the civcom on 864 sqn (apologies if that already exists!), and we have a winner?
You know, although I’m not involved this situation makes me really angry.
All the posturing and the “in it for the cadets” claptrap that these people spout is just utter tripe.
If the civ com had any sense of morality they would bow out and crawl back under whatever rock they came from and let the squadron (you know the charity they were supposed to support in the first place) get on with it!
What happens to the money, if the sqn was disbanded?
If not one of this bunch of egotists can get to a meeting to help move on and resolve things, they aren’t going to sign over the money if the sqn is disbanded as they think it’s their’s. If they really were “in this for the cadets” they’d have attended this meeting and looked to work something out.
I feel genuinely sorry for those trying to make a go of it, when faced with such idiots. I thought my CWC were bad, but this lot put any shennanigans members of CWC have got up to over the years into shade.
someone should take all this to Look East, the press would have a ‘field day’…
Being a cadet on the Sqn. has let me see the devastation on the faves of every single cadet, and all because 3 little men, can’t let go. they are just power hungry and are getting more people against them each day, as the truth comes out…
Problems with the cwc seem more common than I thought.
Is cwc problems becoming more commons or are we more aware because of media and communications?
Is it a result of a change in society?
Seems that the local paper has it reasonably well covered and it’s on the local reporter’s radar, which is good.
A decent feature writer could really make a good study of this. Rampant egomaniac(s?), innocent children caught up in a power struggle, good but massively put-upon volunteers just trying to do the right thing, thwarted officialdom… it’s all there.
CWC problems have been around for as many years as we’ve had CWCs, probably.
What you find are these and combinations of them
People who think they run the squadron
People who join the CWC and fail to comprehend they raise money, essentially for the CO to spend
People who don’t listen when you tell them how the organisation they are supporting operates
People who form cliques, don’t work as a team and don’t achieve anything
People who elect their own leader and then snipe behind their back because they don’t just appease them constantly
People who suspect the chairman and CO talking and accuse them of collusion and then become chairman and have the same relationship
People who expect the staff and cadets to turn up and do their work at fund-raising events
People who think because their children are on the sqn they should get preferential treatment
But then you get periods when it all works well.
:mad: the problem is, if they shut the Squadron, the money is gone! This Salmon Trust holds a huge donation of money from the Squadron. It was setup in good faith and now the Salmon Trust do NOTHING for cadets, i feel for the cadets who have done nothing wrong.
The bullying of uniformed staff by civ comm is disgusting, nobody will work with them. I have seen the emails in black and white utterly shameful.
[quote=“fabulousdarling74” post=8763]:mad: the problem is, if they shut the Squadron, the money is gone! This Salmon Trust holds a huge donation of money from the Squadron, many thousands of pounds. It was setup in good faith and now the Salmon Trust do NOTHING for cadets, despite the load of bull being told to local people that they are raising money for them! Sick and twisted, I feel for the cadets who have done nothing wrong.
The bullying of uniformed staff by 3 key people in civ comm is disgusting, nobody will work with them. I have seen the emails in black and white utterly shameful.[/quote]
Actually, if the Salmon Trust’s objectives fail, the money may revert on resulting trust back to the squadron…
If this is the case how do they get re-elected, given that Sqn CWC execs are re-elected each year?
There’s no trying to cover this with chat about the status of CWCs in the eyes of the charity commission.
I would have throught as the current CWC are not fulfilling their raison d’étre the Wing Committee could call an EGM with the reason to elect new excecs. Post “willing to stand for office” forms in the sqn HQ (until a week before the meeting), where all those willing to stand have to be proposed, seconded and a sign to say they agree to fulfil the role of the office if they are elected, if they don’t sign themselves they can’t stand. This is how my Legion and RAFA branches have done it for years. If more than the current encumbents stand and the situation is as described the old guard will be removed. If they don’t turn up to sign the forms then it is clear indication they wish no further involvement. Actually this is clear from the fact they didn’t turn up for the meeting.
The new Chairman then writes to them (as trustees of the Salmon Trust) stating that you want all money ‘donated’ to the Salmon Trust by the sqn returned to the sqn. You should be able to ‘see’ the actual amount money ‘donated’ to the Salmon Trust in the accounts, if it’s not readily visible then I would have thought proceedings for fraud would be quite easy. Afterall the Salmon Trust is only holding the money for the sqn and the sqn want it back.
Either :- http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/fraud/give-information-about-fraud
Or speak to a friendly solicitor (I know one or 2) that will take em to the cleaners
If this is the case how do they get re-elected, given that Sqn CWC execs are re-elected each year?[/quote]By the CWC…
If this is the case how do they get re-elected, given that Sqn CWC execs are re-elected each year?[/quote]By the CWC…[/quote]
What I mean is if no one will work with them, how do they get re-elected by the CWC?
Because they re-elect themselves back in, themselves. From the previous statements it sounds like the CWC is made up of a bunch of people who don’t have children at the squadron and so to keep themselves in, come an AGM or EGM only they vote ‘probable because they don’t invite anyone else’ and vou’lar, they vote themselves back in.
How can you oust a CWC that is a clicky group? Is it possible?
Exactly.
If there’s no one left in the CWC other than these three, they just elect each other to the relevant posts.
Isn’t it the case that the CWC has to have an AGM to which parents and supporters of the Sqn are invited and where people can join the CWC? They can then propose a vote of no confidence and elect a new committee.