Proposed Changes to Civilian Committees

[JoeBloggs]

So an interesting thing happening down here. Just seen an email that says the Wing Treasurer must become a signatory on every Squadrons accounts. Reasoning being to avoid a situation where the F60 can’t be signed if all the CWC leave.

Seems a bit odd to me, and I really can’t see how they can mandate become a signatory. It may seem like a practical idea, but hasn’t really been though through as far as I see it…

[Moist_Van_Lipwig]

If nothing else, the wing treasurer’s credit rating will take a bit of a bash - going through 30 or so credit checks in a short space of time…

[bob]

So is the wing treasurer going to have to become at least a part-time committee employed post with all the implications that comes with it as I can’t see a volunteer taking that on as a role? If it became a paid role, who actually funds it?

This really does leave the Wing Treasurer at risk with 30+ different Squadrons with different financial requirements.

[Chief_Tech]

@JoeBloggs

So an interesting thing happening down here. Just seen an email that says the Wing Treasurer must become a signatory on every Squadrons accounts. Reasoning being to avoid a situation where the F60 can’t be signed if all the CWC leave.

Fat chance of that happening, having an argument with the bank as they are not permitting new signatories to be added without the old signatory’s but they haven’t updated their list so are asking for signatories from 12 years ago.

[JoeBloggs]

@Moist_Van_Lipwig

the wing treasurer’s credit rating will take a bit of a bash - going through 30 or so credit checks in a short space of time…

Does becoming a signatory on a charity or similar account cause a credit check to happen? Didn’t know this! And I’m meant to be becoming a signatory of something similar soon, so good to know.

(Thinking about this a bit more after posting, it does make a lot of sense to be fair. I hope our wing chairman knows this!)

@bob

So is the wing treasurer going to have to become at least a part-time committee employed post with all the implications that comes with it as I can’t see a volunteer taking that on as a role? If it became a paid role, who actually funds it?

Not that I know of. I’m more interested to know whether or not they have to become a a member of each squadrons charity too, to become a signatory. Surely they can’t be a signatory without being an elected member too? In which case they’d now need to be attending every CWC meeting for every unit…

@Chief_Tech

having an argument with the bank as they are not permitting new signatories to be added without the old signatory’s but they haven’t updated their list so are asking for signatories from 12 years ago.

Funny you say that, the end of this email says “We know it is sometimes difficult to add new signatories to the bank but it is important that the Wing Treasurer is added as soon as possible.”

[bob]

@JoeBloggs

Not that I know of. I’m more interested to know whether or not they have to become a a member of each squadrons charity too, to become a signatory. Surely they can’t be a signatory without being an elected member too? In which case they’d now need to be attending every CWC meeting for every unit…

I believe that the treasurer should be a member of the squadron association and elected to the post by the members. What happens if the members don’t vote in favour of the wing treasurer are they imposed by the Wing chair?

[JoeBloggs]

I honestly don’t know. But how I see it, for someone to be a signatory of a charities bank account, they need to formally be a part of that charity. In this case the charity is the Squadron CWC, so surely the wing treasurer need to be a part of each Squadrons CWC first, before becoming a signatory on the bank.

That’s only my POV. It’s likely not factually accurate!

[bob]

You are correct I believe.

[WhiskeyNovember]

@JoeBloggs

So an interesting thing happening down here. Just seen an email that says the Wing Treasurer must become a signatory on every Squadrons accounts. Reasoning being to avoid a situation where the F60 can’t be signed if all the CWC leave.

Whilst in the minority, we do have squadrons who are registered charities.

Where a member is imposed by another charitable organisation, the Charity Commission are going to have an absolute field day. Especially if such an imposition happens to be against either organisations’ charter document.

[WestlandScout]

Also if the Wing treasurer is an officer of each Squadron charity won’t they be liable if the wheels come off?

[bob]

@WhiskeyNovember

Whilst in the minority, we do have squadrons who are registered charities.

They are independent I believe in Scotland under Scottish charity law, now are RAFAC high command just going to ignore the law in Scotland?

[Torphoon]

No it doest each squadrons funds and assests stay that way

[IrishKiwiUK]

We had a Wing meeting recently where this topic was discussed at length.
From what I understand, each Sqn CivComm will still have their funds ringbarked for them. There will be one large account with each Sqn having its own sort code and account number within that. Each Sqn will HAVE to have internet banking. Payments can be approved and made as they are now - the CivComm retains the authority on that.
We should be able to get better deals on broadband/mobile etc with higher spending power as a larger overall account.
It’s not clear yet what will happen with F60’s etc - I expect similar to now.
It also isn’t clear how this is going to be managed nationally - I believe the Air Commandant is talking of employing some bods at HQ level but for me this raises issues with non-public funds being managed by uniform.
We have submitted these queries (and others) up the chain, however, until the trial is over I suspect there won’t be any answers as it is exactly that - a trial.

[bob]

@IrishKiwiUK

is talking of employing some bods at HQ level but for me this raises issues with non-public funds being managed by uniform.

People employed at any level with be civil service employee’s and should be nowhere near dealing with non-public money.

[IrishKiwiUK]

I totally agree

[Chief_Tech]

So I stumbled across this article from 2011 about St. John’s - sound familiar? (Quite as behind paywall)

St John Ambulance 'abandoning volunteers over restructure project'

# St John Ambulance ‘abandoning volunteers over restructure project’

St John Ambulance, the charity, has been accused of abandoning its volunteers as it attempts a widespread restructuring project.

By Andrew Hough06 August 2011 • 8:00am

The first aid organisation has announced plans to streamline its management amid financial woes.

It is set to embark on a major restructuring exercise to rebalance its books, which includes setting up eight regional boards and merging offices in 41 regions.

But the charity, which has recorded operating losses seven years in a row, was last night accused of “kicking volunteers in the teeth” by those who regularly help out.

They claim that disillusioned volunteers will no longer want to raise money if the cash goes in a central pot rather than helping local projects.

“All counties work in their own particular way according to their local people and in a way that can only be done by them,” one senior volunteer said.

“If the structure is changed … what incentive is there for local people to volunteer and raise money?”

A former chairman of a county division claimed the changes would lead to “financial ruin”.

“We are absolutely horrified because we feel that this restructure is doing away with the strong volunteer ethos of St John’s. It’s like kicking volunteers in the teeth” she said.

Under the plans eight regional directors will be created on salaries of £80,000 a year plus benefits to represent London, the south east, south west, East Midlands, West Midlands, East of England, North-West and North East.

Officials admitted that “financial” pressures were partly behind the new structure as well as “increasing regulation”. It denied it was in “imminent financial crisis”.

While the service claimed there would be no redundancies the charity admitted “some roles have been placed at risk and are therefore undergoing consultation”. It would not provide further details.

The charity, founded in 1877, currently employs about 1600 staff across the country and has more than 40,000 volunteers on its books.

It trains more than half a million people a year and has more than 1000 ambulances that provide support to NHS trusts. The Duke of Gloucester is the service’s Grand Prior of the Order.

In a letter sent to volunteers around the country, Rodney Green, the charity’s Prior and chairman of board of trustees, admitted the organisation faced a “number of difficult challenges in the years ahead”.

A briefing note sent to volunteers explaining the changes, a copy of which has been seen by The Daily Telegraph, said the organisation needed to increase its “charitable and community impact”.

“We need a greater consistency in our quality – so that we can meet more stringent regulatory requirements and also better support the front line,” stated the document, titled “Becoming ‘The Difference’: transforming St John Ambulance”.

“More urgently, we need to balance the books and achieve secure finances.

“For seven years running, we have spent more than we earned and are set to make further losses this year. The charity cannot sustain this.”

Mr Green insisted the changes, signed off by the trustees last month following “rigorous analysis of the current structure”, would transform the organisation “so that we can save yet more lives”.

Sue Killen, the chief executive of St John Ambulance, defended the changes as necessary for secure the financial future of the service.

“We need to change our structure to better meet the needs of society,” she said.

“Our current structure … doesn’t allow us to tackle this situation as quickly and efficiently as we want to.

“The new structure is less expensive and means that resources can be shared so we can better target areas that need our help.”

She added: “We’ll be able to train more people in schools and in communities in first aid and provide first aid cover at events to an even higher standard.

“The bottom line is that St John Ambulance is not in imminent financial crisis but has been running deficits for several years which is unsustainable.”

She added: “With these changes, we can be more responsive to society’s first aid needs and help more people be the difference between life and death.

“It is absolutely crucial that this process strengthens, not weakens, the charity’s ability to deliver charitable work in communities.” She said the charity had been transparent to volunteers and staff.

Mrs Killen admitted the new structure would “deliver substantial savings”.

[bob]

Brought in outsiders and it became a shambles with so many volunteers leaving.

[Chief_Tech]

St Johns is used as a case study of cascade failure in a volunteer organisation.

It lost nearly half its volunteers in the space of seven years

(Over 40000 in 2011, only 23000 in 2018)

Kicked off in parliament too - the issues are all too similar.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2014-01-22/debates/14012282000001/StJohnAmbulance

[pEp]

Duty rumour is that a) a “fund manager” has been hired to look after the main central pot of money (can’t remember the name) and b) that the trial in Yorkshire wing hasn’t gone well and they are still operating separate bank accounts for each sqn as they can’t find a way to merge them.

None of that is confirmed.

[bob]

With a fund manager will they be allowed to ‘invest’ monies in the financial markets to generate interest?