News Dr Bridie O'Donnell elected to the board

[Stax on the mill]

Bridie was a guest panelist on the ABCs Offsiders program this morning.

The panel questioned her about only being a Collingwood member for 15 months and alluded to her Bulldog allegiances.

The panel came to the view that its better to have diversity on boards as opposed to rusted on club supporters who might not be very balanced or intelligent.

Fairly unsurprising that an ABC panel would arrive at that viewpoint.

 

[jackcass]

The issue is we currently have 4 people who sit on the board 50% who are not Collingwood people. I honestly doubt these people care if we win or lose. we have an accountant as president who obviously did not use his skillset to help with the management of the salary cap. Terrible governance. That leaves 4 on the board who are Collingwood people but of that group I dont think we have one person who truly connects with the fans/members for which the board is actually there to represent. I dont expect all but one person would be nice. lets not forget this board has brought in an activist to do a report that we are institutionally racist. Only a board full of idiots would have been so stupid to bring in Larrisa Bherendht (who answer to everything is racism) in to do that report which is insulting, damages the clubs reputation with a term that is so ambiguous in its meaning. There were plenty of good people they could have brought in that would have been fair to both the club and Lumumba. To then find out we are bringing in a gender equality activist is alarming. She is super talented but we really do need people who are looking after Collingwood's interest first rather than self interest at this time in our clubs history. This board has shown little effort to fight for the club, preferring to virtue signal and with it trash the clubs reputation. The scary part is I think they are actually proud of what they have done! They are woke elites who by talking spin every time one of them opens their mouths are basically treating us the fans with contempt. If one of them comes up with a vision to direct the club that would be great. They shouldn't fear the members anger they should embrace the passion of it and try to turn this club around.
I really do hope this Jeff Browne character is not just a myth and will soon become more vocal than Humphrey B Bear and if he is looking to join the board and be president has a genuine vision and direction. The club lacks leadership.

Wow, there is just so much wrong with this post it's hard to know where to start, and that's without even looking at the lack of paragraphs. So I'll try to break it down.

The issue is we currently have 4 people who sit on the board 50% who are not Collingwood people. I honestly doubt these people care if we win or lose. we have an accountant as president who obviously did not use his skillset to help with the management of the salary cap. Terrible governance. That leaves 4 on the board who are Collingwood people but of that group I dont think we have one person who truly connects with the fans/members for which the board is actually there to represent. I dont expect all but one person would be nice.

For a start, there are only 7 people on the board and I've got no idea who you claim these non-Collingwood people are. Even O'Donnell has been a member since February 2020 and a follower of all AFLW (including Collingwood) prior to that. That she didn't emerge from the womb a Pies supporter like many of us doesn't mean a lot.

Let's not forget this board has brought in an activist to do a report that we are institutionally racist. Only a board full of idiots would have been so stupid to bring in Larrisa Bherendht (who answer to everything is racism) in to do that report which is insulting, damages the clubs reputation with a term that is so ambiguous in its meaning. There were plenty of good people they could have brought in that would have been fair to both the club and Lumumba.

Selecting the most militant reviewer possible was a very astute move by the board. Can't be accused of hiding anything. I applaud them for their courage.

To then find out we are bringing in a gender equality activist is alarming. She is super talented but we really do need people who are looking after Collingwood's interest first rather than self interest at this time in our clubs history.

So it's just feminists you don't trust, or women in general? That she fights for gender equality in no way impinges her ability to serve the board and the club. That's the sort of thinking that should have dies long ago.

This board has shown little effort to fight for the club, preferring to virtue signal and with it trash the clubs reputation. The scary part is I think they are actually proud of what they have done! They are woke elites who by talking spin every time one of them opens their mouths are basically treating us the fans with contempt. If one of them comes up with a vision to direct the club that would be great. They shouldn't fear the members anger they should embrace the passion of it and try to turn this club around.

On the contrary. This board has turned the fortunes of this club around. We were just about on our knees when Ed took over. We now have state of the art training facilities which will soon be further expanded to include a sports science facility, are financially stable, have expanded the brand into AFLW, VFLW, wheelchair footy, and netball. And let's not forget that the board itself has been regenerated with 2 new members and a new president. The only negative from Ed's tenure commencing till today is only 1 senior AFL flag to show for it, but they should definitely be proud of their off-field achievements.

I really do hope this Jeff Browne character is not just a myth and will soon become more vocal than Humphrey B Bear and if he is looking to join the board and be president has a genuine vision and direction. The club lacks leadership.

Oh, he's very real. Time will tell what he'll ultimately contribute but people expecting dramatic change I think will be for the most part disappointed. We've done the hard work on and off field and our on-field performances will bounce pretty quickly irrespective of which board is in place.

 

[Stax on the mill]

The thing about Browne is that we have heard nothing from him so far.

Yes, he should at least come out and declare his position one way or the other. Allowing this to just fester away ad nauseam is causing disharmony and uncertainty within the club, and amongst the supporters and playing group.

 

[JB1975]

Never seen Ed referred to as a “woke elite” before, and yet it was him who had to fall on his sword after spinning the Do Better report as a “Proud Day for Collingwood”?

Oh na, Ed is totally woke.

The story goes that he went woke but could never be woke enough, so then the really woke (wokest of woke) turned on Ed and ate him. The beast that is woke can never be satisfied and will eventually turn on its own.

But then the poster you're replying to always ran the line that Larissa Behrendt was a nasty 'activist' --woke activist, no less-- who once said really really nasty things about another Aboriginal woman, an Aboriginal woman (Bess Price) who just happened to say lots of things which conservative types liked.

So, it seemed that Behrendt was the wrong type of Indigenous woman for some.

But the details are inconsequential. What matters is woke.

 

[sideswipe]

Yes, he should at least come out and declare his position one way or the other. Allowing this to just fester away ad nauseam is causing disharmony and uncertainty within the club, and amongst the supporters and playing group.

There is a belief that Browne will not show his hand unless he is assured of victory. Not the type to expose himself to a potential loss. This is just a theory.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Selecting the most militant reviewer possible was a very astute move by the board. Can't be accused of hiding anything. I applaud them for their courage.

 

[MarkT2]

Sorry that’s incorrect. All board members - whether they took over another member’s term or not - have always been subject to re-election at the end of their terms. The lack of elections comes from a lack of alternative candidates. Now the “strongarming” may have occurred but nothing in the constitution has actually stopped alternate candidates putting themselves forward.

No offence, but that's a naive view of the world and a fancifull take on reality at Collingwood and you don't strike me as either of those things.

Yes any member can nominate provided they are either sufficiently qualified as such or determined by the board to be membership qualification "exempt" it seems, but unless you have significant status and resources you have absolutely zero chance of success. Worse you have 100% chance of derision and disunity accusations. The president, board and CEO let alone the media make the ideal that any Collingwood member can serve on the board fanciful.

So here we are with someone even who does posess sufficient qualifications and resources being labeled as fractious to unity. FMD the unity at board level has been the issue for at least a decade. United in mediocrity, if not failure and unwilling to question the president who appointed each of them.

Now we have a professional undertaker trying to run a business he's failed to positively impact for a decade let alone one that has limited football knowledge.

I'm praying for a complete spill to throw open the floodgates. I hope we do get a complete spill rather than a 4man deal and I hope plenty of people nominate - but that won't happen.

 

[HFF]

Did she sign the declaration?
Because when it comes down to voting...oh wait

 

[Mike Olotripo]

She signed the letter today....

Can we please drain the swamp

 

[Queenie Hearts]

Parsing this post through the Articles of Association (I’m not a lawyer) ...

( http://footyindustry.com/files/constitutions/Collingwood Football Club Limited Articles of association (2010).pdf )



This is a bit murky.

Korda is invoking Article 55c. (The board have the power to appoint anybody to any committee, but they shall have no voting rights. IIRC they also did this with Peter Murphy when he ran his review, and then naturally he participated as a matter of course when he became acting CEO (Article 63), and then in turn as board member)

A counter view would invoke Article 32(b). “The Board shall have the power at any time to fill a casual vacancy occurring within the Board. Any person so appointed must satisfy the qualification for Board membership as required by Clause 30”, where Clause 30 states “Subject to paragraph (b), no member shall be qualified for election as a member of the Board unless he shall have been a member of the Club for at least twenty four (24) months immediately prior to his nomination.”, but paragraph (b) states “The Club in general meeting may pass an ordinary resolution waiving compliance with paragraph (a) in respect of a particular member, and if such a resolution is passed, the member shall be qualified for election as a member of the Board.”

I wasn’t paying close attention when Waitslitz got on the board in 1998, but my understanding is that it was similar circumstances so maybe there is some kind of precedent there.



I take it that if no more people nominate for the seat, that this will be covered by Articles 52 and 72b (Articles covering newly elected board members at AGM’s)



I guess in the Articles of Association parlance, Ed put members on the board using Article 32, and managed to keep anybody from invoking Articles 53 snd 54.



Whilst object (objective) in II.ii does state “The promotion of Australian rules football”, II.iii does state “The association of members for social, sporting and athletic purposes.” and II.ix “To promote and hold, either alone or jointly with any association, club or person, meetings, competitions and matches, and to offer, give or contribute towards prizes, medals and awards, and to promote, give or support dinners, balls, concerts and other entertainments.” And II.x “To establish, promote, or assist in establishing or promoting, and to subscribe to, give to or become a member of any association or club whose objects are similar in whole or in part to the objects of the Club, or the establishment, promotion or assistance of which may be beneficial to this Club.”

IMO (Not a lawyer) the club’s actions in establishing a netball team wasn’t against the Articles of Association.



This appears to be well with the scope laid out in Memorandum of Articles ...

II.iv: “To provide a suitable club premises with refreshment rooms with or without residential accommodation and other conveniences in connection therewith and to furnish and maintain the same, and to permit the same and the property of the Club to be used by members and other persons duly introduced by members, either gratuitously or for payment.”

II.v: “To purchase, hire, make, or provide and maintain all kinds of furniture, equipment, implements, tools, utensils, plate glass, linen, books, papers, periodicals, stationery, cards, games and other things required, or which may be conveniently used in connection with the premises of the Club by persons frequenting the same, whether members of the Club or not.”

II.vii: “To purchase, take on lease, or in exchange, or otherwise acquire, or develop any lands, buildings, easements or property, real or personal, which may be requisite for the purpose of or conveniently used in connection with any of the objects of the Club, and to sell, demise, mortgage, give in exchange, or dispose of the same.”

II.xvi: “To improve alter demolish and develop any property owned or leased by the Club.”

II.xix: “To do such other lawful things as are, in the opinion of the Board incidental or conducive to the attainment of the above objects or any of them.”



Nothing in the objectives or articles about AFL Premierships or winning them.



Already covered above that netball is OK, and AFLW subject to the same.



Under “interpretations”, it does state that “Words importing the masculine shall include the feminine and ...”, but IMO one of the reforms needed to the articles is that they explicitly clean up the use gender pronouns in the body.



Financials are covered in the Objects, for example ...

II.xi “To invest and deal with the moneys of the Club not immediately required, upon such securities and in such manner as may from time to time be thought fit.”

But there are other Objects (objectives) that the club have been addressing , such as II.iii “The association of members for social, sporting and athletic purposes.”, and the club in the last six years has dramatically improved that by introducing AFLW, VFLW, SNL, ANL and the wheelchair footy team.



Article 55 seems to cover that.



I couldn’t find any such article. Curious ... unless it’s implied by some kind of governing provisions? The only thing I could find is Artcle 93: “The Secretary shall within one month of the making of any amendment or alteration to these Memorandum or Articles of Association lodge with the Secretary of the Liquor Licensing Commission a certified copy of such amendment or alteration.”

Also interestingly, I couldn’t find anything in there about needing signatures from 5% of voting me,bers to trigger an EGM either. Maybe that’s in governing provisions, such as laws associated with Liquor and Gaming?



Nothing explicit, but I’d imagine that’s all covered in governing provisions.

I am a lawyer and you need to read this in conjunction with the Corporations Act.

On the strategy, the Board sets the strategy within the context of the Constitution. This is a key area of judgement and where choosing the right people is so important. I just don’t agree with their judgement on this. It isn’t illegal .

Equally, I query their oversight of risk management and compliance given the end of year fire sale over salary cap. Signing off on a long term deal for Grundy is open to them but a risk and again a matter of judgement with which I don’t agree.

To be clear, I don’t have any evidence to support that Browne will improve governance, risk management or the strategic direction.

 

[barrackers]

On top of her credentials there's another 15 million reasons why a female was appointed.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl...rol-of-collingwood-board-20210621-p582wg.html

The Magpies have secured $15 million from the federal government to fund a health and wellbeing research facility in partnership with Monash University, and they have pinned their hopes on gaining the same amount from the Victorian government to complete the research centre.

But in order to secure the $15m, the club will have to satisfy a recent Victorian government guideline that mandates that the organisation receiving the funding has a minimum of 40 per cent women on their board.

Should the seven-member board be spilled in an extraordinary general meeting, club sources acknowledge that there is a real possibility that the members will not elect three women in an open spill - potentially jeopardising that $15m in the short-term, until the club appoints the necessary quota of women to the board.

Also seems that regardless of whether an EGM / AGM vote occurs both Korda and Browne will overwrite members wishes should this quota not be achieved. I assume that someone would stand aside and we'll see the continuation of casual vacancy appointments should this eventuate.

Whatever the differences between Mark Korda’s board and Browne, the two camps are certain to agree upon the need for three women on the board. Under Collingwood’s voting system, there is no apparent way to ensure three women are elected in an open spill, besides are negotiated outcome before or after the vote.

Sources familar with Browne’s view of the female board issue said that if he becomes president, but Collingwood does not have three female directors due to the members’ vote, he would approach the government and make a commitment to have three women as soon as possible.

 

[whiskeytown]

What a sick society we are becoming.

when 15million in funding to an organisation that does plenty of charitable work, has invested in women’s AFL and netball... when 15million is tied to a gender quota at board level irrespective of whether the female board appointee has a background in football or is a Collingwood fan... but her appointment just has to be done from a point of woke compliance

 

[jmac70]

What a sick society we are becoming.

when 15million in funding to an organisation that does plenty of charitable work, has invested in women’s AFL and netball... when 15million is tied to a gender quota at board level irrespective of whether the female board appointee has a background in football or is a Collingwood fan... but her appointment just has to be done from a point of woke compliance

Something to do with women being paid less and kept out of managerial rolls for decades.

 

[piepark]

Something to do with women being paid less and kept out of managerial rolls for decades.

That isn't the issue. The issue is, does this person hold the best qualifications to be a board member? Is this person eligible to vote on the board? Has this person been a Collingwood member all her life?

I couldn't care less what goes on outside the club in regards to these sort of sponsorship deals. How about we look after the club first with the most passionate, well qualified FULLY PAID UP members.

Is that so hard? Surely there are long term members who are equal to or better than half these board members who meet some other criteria besides being tied to a 'quota'.

What a joke.

 

[jmac70]

That isn't the issue. The issue is, does this person hold the best qualifications to be a board member? Is this person eligible to vote on the board? Has this person been a Collingwood member all her life?

I couldn't care less what goes on outside the club in regards to these sort of sponsorship deals. How about we look after the club first with the most passionate, well qualified FULLY PAID UP members.

Is that so hard? Surely there are long term members who are equal to or better than half these board members who meet some other criteria besides being tied to a 'quota'.

What a joke.

Equal representation for women is no joke.

 

[whiskeytown]

Something to do with women being paid less and kept out of managerial rolls for decades.

Many identities were... The Irish were also paid less and deprived of opportunity for decades in early Australia.

I look forward to Jimeoin joining the Collingwood board

 

[Billys Back]

Many identities were... The Irish were also paid less and deprived of opportunity for decades in early Australia.

I look forward to Jimeoin joining the Collingwood board

‘were’ but not ‘are’

 

[jathanas]

Equal representation for women is no joke.

Correct. Every reasonable person in the 21st century would agree with your sentiment.

This does not mean I automatically support shoehorning women on the board in order to unlock 15mil of state funding which explains O'Donnell's appointment.

 

[Billys Back]

I agree it should be about appointing the best person for the job. Unfortunately, some are blind to realising that it may actually be a female. If it wasn’t for the gender equality push, I wouldn’t be surprised if most important roles were given to males because of the old mindset that men are more capable. The need to force the issue is really a reality check and I suspect in years to come it won’t be an issue.

 

[whiskeytown]

‘were’ but not ‘are’

women now graduate from university in higher numbers than men do. As the Boomer generation retire more board positions will naturally open up.

 

[whiskeytown]

I agree it should be about appointing the best person for the job. Unfortunately, some are blind to realising that it may actually be a female. If it wasn’t for the gender equality push, I wouldn’t be surprised if most important roles were given to males because of the old mindset that men are more capable. The need to force the issue is really a reality check and I suspect in years to come it won’t be an issue.

Fair point to say that old chauvinism has held women back... but it’s also a case of demographics.

- Due to child rearing women have always had... and will always have... lower work force participation rates and higher rates of part time and casual work.

- different genders gravitate towards different occupations. Eg Despite all the effort and preferential treatment to get women into the fire service... less than 5% of that workforce is female.

- more women than men now graduate from university.

In the 1980s... yes... but in 2021 the whole gender disparity thing is very overstated.

 

[jmac70]

Correct. Every reasonable person in the 21st century would agree with your sentiment.

This does not mean I automatically support shoehorning women on the board in order to unlock 15mil of state funding which explains O'Donnell's appointment.

Minimum three female board reps is a must. Both Korda and Browne recognise this.

 

[jackcass]

Correct. Every reasonable person in the 21st century would agree with your sentiment.

This does not mean I automatically support shoehorning women on the board in order to unlock 15mil of state funding which explains O'Donnell's appointment.

Seriously? It's not as if she isn't qualified for a board appointment. She was selected from something like 80-90 applicants and if the scuttlebutt is correct was actually in line for the Wilson appointment until her employer delayed that potential, but lets go with the $15M justification. Oh, and it'd more likely be $30M as I'd assume the $15M from the feds would be linked to co-funding confirmation.

In the end, the cash isn't what we stand to lose. It's our credibility when the funds are withdrawn or the location of the sports science facility is changed.

 

[MyManLynch]

It’s the old “just making up the numbers” argument.
I’m surprised that still has traction in 2021.

 

[Kappa]

Something to do with women being paid less and kept out of managerial rolls for decades.

now will you finally admit that Dr Bridie was appointed because she’s female and the male applicants weren’t considered?