Another British Horse Society c**k-up

Leo Walker

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 July 2013
Messages
8,641
Location
Northampton
I'll bet they're not contentious Groups though, ester. Some Groups I pop into have few members who actually post - and have no need. As in one OP, maybe 1 reply 5 days ago. So the OP post again to boost it to the top - when it was only 3rd to start with. But the BHS Members Group was having a huge number of new posts and loads of replies very fast - and a lot of those replies were from the same 1 or 2 people that said NOTHING new. Some members in bad satellite areas were crashing repeatedly. (I certainly was.)
What does your poor internet connection have to do with the group? It sounds really annoying but its not really relevant as theres a team of admin so if you cant get on then I'm sure they can cope. The group really wasnt having a huge number of posts. Some groups have multiple posts a minute, and no one turns off commenting. You say the original members arent listening, but neither are the current admin team.

Its all a mess. No one is representing themselves well and people are walking away rather than be drawn into the drama. If you cant sort this out between yourselves what hope do you have of doing anything else?
 

JanetGeorge

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 June 2001
Messages
6,579
Location
Shropshire/Worcs. borders
What does your poor internet connection have to do with the group? It sounds really annoying but its not really relevant as theres a team of admin so if you cant get on then I'm sure they can cope. The group really wasnt having a huge number of posts. Some groups have multiple posts a minute, and no one turns off commenting. You say the original members arent listening, but neither are the current admin team.

Its all a mess. No one is representing themselves well and people are walking away rather than be drawn into the drama. If you cant sort this out between yourselves what hope do you have of doing anything else?
Leo - you're obviously not following as closely. The Admin team is down to 3 at present - we all have other outside jobs. But we are listening to members - a lot of it in individual PMs and phone when Members are at risk. We (Admin team) are doing our utmost to listen, think and communicate with memers so they can make a decision. Very few members have left. Some are just watching and waiting, a few seem to have a personal agenda (though that might be my paranoia showing. ) All we can do is the best we can do.
 
Joined
10 January 2019
Messages
17

JanetGeorge

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 June 2001
Messages
6,579
Location
Shropshire/Worcs. borders
As I said right from the start, personal agendas, axe grinding with sour grapes thrown in. So obvious! The BHS are an amazing charity and have my full support. Rubbish sensationalism, and awful journalism!
Gee -and with 15 posts to your 'credit' - and joined to do your own version of axe grinding. I really do think there is a whiff of something there, lol.
 
Joined
12 January 2019
Messages
5
So my membership money is paying for CLUB CLASS travel for the CEO and Chairman. Economy return tickets to China cost as little as £300. Terrible, shocking waste of charity money! They must pay back the difference from their own pockets in the same way the CEO was allowed to pay back the money she continued to receive for her car allowance. Given the 'toxic' environment I'm guessing if any other member of staff had done that they'd have been sacked on the spot. Did the CEO still claim for her taxis and train fares whilst banned.....?? And all of this during the Dead Slow Campaign. So close to cutting up my membership card after 22 years and sending it back. Club Class on Charity Money. I bet the CEO at World Horse Welfare doesn't travel club class!
 

ycbm

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
16,513
Violet Tears, Janet George has the courage to post under her own name. Since you are supporting the BHS, you have absolutely nothing to lose, and I think you should do the same.

You joined the forum purely to campaign for the BHS. Have the guts to say who you are.
 

PAK

Active Member
Joined
7 December 2018
Messages
266
So my membership money is paying for CLUB CLASS travel for the CEO and Chairman. Economy return tickets to China cost as little as £300. Terrible, shocking waste of charity money! They must pay back the difference from their own pockets in the same way the CEO was allowed to pay back the money she continued to receive for her car allowance. Given the 'toxic' environment I'm guessing if any other member of staff had done that they'd have been sacked on the spot. Did the CEO still claim for her taxis and train fares whilst banned.....?? And all of this during the Dead Slow Campaign. So close to cutting up my membership card after 22 years and sending it back. Club Class on Charity Money. I bet the CEO at World Horse Welfare doesn't travel club class!
And more often than not the chairs of other charities take no remuneration.
 

PAK

Active Member
Joined
7 December 2018
Messages
266
How does one reconcile the statements and facts within today's article?
And sadly there was a precedence for a BHS employee being banned from driving. Except that poor person was sacked immediately.
 

PAK

Active Member
Joined
7 December 2018
Messages
266
It's in the public domain. The CEO's salary is roughly the same as that of the head of the RSPCA. However the BHS brings in about £11 Million from members while the RSPCA brings in about £100 Million.
 

PAK

Active Member
Joined
7 December 2018
Messages
266
So my membership money is paying for CLUB CLASS travel for the CEO and Chairman. Economy return tickets to China cost as little as £300. Terrible, shocking waste of charity money! They must pay back the difference from their own pockets in the same way the CEO was allowed to pay back the money she continued to receive for her car allowance. Given the 'toxic' environment I'm guessing if any other member of staff had done that they'd have been sacked on the spot. Did the CEO still claim for her taxis and train fares whilst banned.....?? And all of this during the Dead Slow Campaign. So close to cutting up my membership card after 22 years and sending it back. Club Class on Charity Money. I bet the CEO at World Horse Welfare doesn't travel club class!
£3000
 

PAK

Active Member
Joined
7 December 2018
Messages
266
It's in the public domain. The CEO's salary is roughly the same as that of the head of the RSPCA. However the BHS brings in about £11 Million from members while the RSPCA brings in about £100 Million.
I forgot to add - instead of selling insurance as primary means of raising money - the RSPCA have to fundraise for their £100 Million.
 
Joined
23 January 2019
Messages
3
I forgot to add - instead of selling insurance as primary means of raising money - the RSPCA have to fundraise for their £100 Million.
The RSPCA encompasses all animals. It’s ability to raise funds is far easier for them than a niche organisation, concerned with one species, like the BHS. The idea of insurance being included in the membership was an inspired means to raise funds imho.
 

JanetGeorge

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 June 2001
Messages
6,579
Location
Shropshire/Worcs. borders
Sorry! Not sure I understand how Phillip Green ties in. Is it the BHS name thing?
lol, that's just a handy co-incidence. Sir Philip covered up allegations of sexual harassment of his female staff with NDAs and pay-offs. He then went to war with The Telegraph to keep THEM quiet. The Telegraph has finally won - Sir Philip will have to cough up £3 million to cover their legal costs (+ his own, of course) And the Telegraph will be running some embarrassing stories, of course. The judgement stopped a little short of ideal from OUR point of view. It did not give total protection to those who have signed NDAs as a result of harassment or bullying. And didn't open the doors for full disclosure. But it's a good start. IMHO - and fortunately - that of many politicians - NDAs should be very restricted to purely protection of business 'secrets' - and NOT be allowed as a cover-up for any behaviour that would be frowned upon. I am still checking numbers on how many employees of OUR BHS have signed NDAs after being forced out for daring to question management decisions and being repaid with bullying and harassment. But it would appear at least 6 in the past 7 years. Some of those people had been excellent and valued employees for FAR longer than the current 'bosses'.
 

onemoretime

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 April 2008
Messages
1,611
It's in the public domain. The CEO's salary is roughly the same as that of the head of the RSPCA. However the BHS brings in about £11 Million from members while the RSPCA brings in about £100 Million.
You're joking - the RSPCA brings in a £100 million a year, I never realised that and they are always making out that they are hard up and need more handouts!!
 

JanetGeorge

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 June 2001
Messages
6,579
Location
Shropshire/Worcs. borders
You're joking - the RSPCA brings in a £100 million a year, I never realised that and they are always making out that they are hard up and need more handouts!!
Nope - figures for 2017 show
Income £140,877,000 ---- Spending £129,398,000 A large chunk of that was legacies and donations.

For the same year, the BHS was:
Income £11,205,000 --- Spending £11,807,000 More than 3/4 of that income was from Membership subscriptions. I think that gives members a RIGHT to have a say in how it is spent.
 
Joined
23 January 2019
Messages
3
Nope - figures for 2017 show
Income £140,877,000 ---- Spending £129,398,000 A large chunk of that was legacies and donations.

For the same year, the BHS was:
Income £11,205,000 --- Spending £11,807,000 More than 3/4 of that income was from Membership subscriptions. I think that gives members a RIGHT to have a say in how it is spent.
Interesting comment.
lol, that's just a handy co-incidence. Sir Philip covered up allegations of sexual harassment of his female staff with NDAs and pay-offs. He then went to war with The Telegraph to keep THEM quiet. The Telegraph has finally won - Sir Philip will have to cough up £3 million to cover their legal costs (+ his own, of course) And the Telegraph will be running some embarrassing stories, of course. The judgement stopped a little short of ideal from OUR point of view. It did not give total protection to those who have signed NDAs as a result of harassment or bullying. And didn't open the doors for full disclosure. But it's a good start. IMHO - and fortunately - that of many politicians - NDAs should be very restricted to purely protection of business 'secrets' - and NOT be allowed as a cover-up for any behaviour that would be frowned upon. I am still checking numbers on how many employees of OUR BHS have signed NDAs after being forced out for daring to question management decisions and being repaid with bullying and harassment. But it would appear at least 6 in the past 7 years. Some of those people had been excellent and valued employees for FAR longer than the current 'bosses'.
lol, that's just a handy co-incidence. Sir Philip covered up allegations of sexual harassment of his female staff with NDAs and pay-offs. He then went to war with The Telegraph to keep THEM quiet. The Telegraph has finally won - Sir Philip will have to cough up £3 million to cover their legal costs (+ his own, of course) And the Telegraph will be running some embarrassing stories, of course. The judgement stopped a little short of ideal from OUR point of view. It did not give total protection to those who have signed NDAs as a result of harassment or bullying. And didn't open the doors for full disclosure. But it's a good start. IMHO - and fortunately - that of many politicians - NDAs should be very restricted to purely protection of business 'secrets' - and NOT be allowed as a cover-up for any behaviour that would be frowned upon. I am still checking numbers on how many employees of OUR BHS have signed NDAs after being forced out for daring to question management decisions and being repaid with bullying and harassment. But it would appear at least 6 in the past 7 years. Some of those people had been excellent and valued employees for FAR longer than the current 'bosses'.
Interesting comment and thank you for being so thorough. I’m extremely uncomfortable with anyone being likened to how Philip Green has conducted himself. Any parallels just sounds like sensationalism to me. I understand the purpose of an nda from both parties is to bring closure to a matter. One side accepts money offered to them to sign a contract saying they will not discuss a situation any further. If we start building caveats into nda’s then there purpose is undermined and open to abuse from all parties. Imagine an open ended scenario where a disgruntled employee can still blackmail a company for evermore because they have a clause allowing them to do so. Two sides and all that imho.
 

JanetGeorge

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 June 2001
Messages
6,579
Location
Shropshire/Worcs. borders
Interesting comment.

Interesting comment and thank you for being so thorough. I’m extremely uncomfortable with anyone being likened to how Philip Green has conducted himself. Any parallels just sounds like sensationalism to me. I understand the purpose of an nda from both parties is to bring closure to a matter. One side accepts money offered to them to sign a contract saying they will not discuss a situation any further. If we start building caveats into nda’s then there purpose is undermined and open to abuse from all parties. Imagine an open ended scenario where a disgruntled employee can still blackmail a company for evermore because they have a clause allowing them to do so. Two sides and all that imho.
But NDAs were NEVER intended to allow unacceptable behaviour to be covered up - so that behaviour can continue. A disgruntled employee - if they have reason to BE disgruntled - cannot 'blackmail' an employer. If complaints are handled 'by the book', the employer has a clear conscience and doesn't need to pay an employee to keep quiet.
 

JanetGeorge

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 June 2001
Messages
6,579
Location
Shropshire/Worcs. borders
The first hint of success for our campaign: an e-mail sent to BHS Members today - some members do not get e-mails so read it here:

Dear Member,

As you may know, the Board recently proposed some amendments to the British Horse Society’s Articles of Association, and these were scheduled to be put to a vote at the general meeting held on 5 January. During the meeting, members had the opportunity to comment on the proposed changes, and members asked the Board of Trustees to consider various issues. A resolution to adjourn the meeting was then passed, to allow more time for those issues to be considered.

The Board of Trustees has two options: 1. Decide to reconvene the meeting and ask the members to reconsider the original amendments; or 2. Decide to adjourn the meeting indefinitely in order to consider different amendments or none We have decided to adjourn the meeting indefinitely. That means the vote on the changes to the Articles proposed at that meeting will not go ahead, and a new general meeting will be proposed in due course, at which any proposed changes would be considered afresh.

In the meantime, the Board of Trustees would like to invite members to contribute to the development of the Board’s plans for the future strategy of The British Horse Society, including the governance issues raised on 5 January. We plan to hold informal meetings, the first three alongside our 2019 National Conventions, at the times and venues below, and would like to extend an open invitation to all members. The meetings will be a chance for the Board and Executive to bring members into the discussion about the future strategy for The British Horse Society, and to allow members to ask questions and give their views. Date Location Time Tuesday 26 March Hartpury College, Gloucester 7.00pm to 9.00pm Tuesday 9 April Morris Equestrian Centre, Kilmarnock 7.00pm to 9.00pm Tuesday 14 May Cavan Equestrian, Ireland 7.00pm to 9.00pm Tuesday 16 July The British Horse Society offices, Warwickshire 10.30 am to 12.30pm

We look forward to meeting you. Best wishes, David Sheerin Chairman of the Board of Trustees Tel: 02476 840500 Email: generalmeeting@bhs.org.uk
 

JanetGeorge

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 June 2001
Messages
6,579
Location
Shropshire/Worcs. borders
And today:
The latest e-mail today was sent to Members of BHS - and our FB Group - who had originally signed the letter we sent. This was how it started: it was from the Chairman.

"Further to our invitation to meet with you on Friday 28 February from 10 to 12, at the BHS offices, I would like to confirm that the meeting will be attended by myself, some Trustees, Lynn Petersen CEO and members of the Executive. This meeting will give you the opportunity for us to discuss some of the issues which are causing you concern. I would like us to agree on the agenda before the meeting and would welcome suggestions for items which you would like included. The original invitation was for circa five members, named in the original email, to attend the meeting. Please can you advise the names of those who will be attending."

The balance of the e-mail was the bumph about Regional Meetings later - still some BIG parts of the country where a meeting is NOT scheduled.

Obviously this response - and the statement of who will/can attend is totally unacceptable to us.
 
Top