Foxes Trust Members Update

[Sol thewall Bamba]

5 hours ago, RYM said:

I wasn't critical at all, I mentioned on here weeks ago that full transparency with requests and replies etc to the FT would help give the group credibility otherwise it can come across as playground like. Don't just expose one side of the story. The same advice I've given any club or fan group for years.

 

 

Are you still involved in the reform group?

[themightyfin]

Basically the old boys are stuck in their ways and happy to plod on making little differenceto anything .

 

Young blood wants to come in and change things.

 

Old guys don't like that so offer a token gesture without giving up any control.

 

Young blood reject it wanting a bigger say and presence. 

 

Is this it in a nut shell? 

 

[Foxes Trust Reform]

5 minutes ago, Izzy said:

The old regime have it nice and cushy but are under pressure from the new regime to reform.

 

The old regime have offered the new regime places on sub committees in the hope this appeases them, but the new regime want a full take over instead.

 

"The Subgroups are where the bulk of the work of the Trust is done and are also routinely used by Trusts to get people involved who may wish to become Board members at some point"

 

Reads to me like you've got to serve your time on a sub committee first before being considered for a board position.

 

 

This doesn’t actually have to be the way.

 

The Foxes Trust have the opportunity to co-opt two more people to the board and existing board members told us that they needed more help at board level to drive true change.

 

We were subsequently told the only route to a board role was to serve on a subgroup for a period to time, reporting into the existing board which remains completely unchanged. They have chosen not to co-opt anyone new to the board at all.

 

Whilst other new joiners have volunteered their time to the subgroups (which is great: the more help for the Trust the better), we felt that ultimately nothing changes if nothing changes at board level and therefore rejected the offer of subgroup involvement to focus on real and genuine leadership change.

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

17 minutes ago, themightyfin said:

Basically the old boys are stuck in their ways and happy to plod on making little differenceto anything .

 

Young blood wants to come in and change things.

 

Old guys don't like that so offer a token gesture without giving up any control.

 

Young blood reject it wanting a bigger say and presence. 

 

Is this it in a nut shell? 

 

Half decent summary 👍

[Izzy]

2 hours ago, Foxes Trust Reform said:

This doesn’t actually have to be the way.

 

The Foxes Trust have the opportunity to co-opt two more people to the board and existing board members told us that they needed more help at board level to drive true change.

 

We were subsequently told the only route to a board role was to serve on a subgroup for a period to time, reporting into the existing board which remains completely unchanged. They have chosen not to co-opt anyone new to the board at all.

 

Whilst other new joiners have volunteered their time to the subgroups (which is great: the more help for the Trust the better), we felt that ultimately nothing changes if nothing changes at board level and therefore rejected the offer of subgroup involvement to focus on real and genuine leadership change.

If there's enough new members coming through plus the FTR group who all want change, surely you'll have the majority in terms of numbers?

 

Can you then vote in a completely new board at the next AGM and get rid of the old guard?

[the draper]

Change is coming 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

57 minutes ago, Izzy said:

If there's enough new members coming through plus the FTR group who all want change, surely you'll have the majority in terms of numbers?

 

Can you then vote in a completely new board at the next AGM and get rid of the old guard?

Yes you can but I'm imagining the new members might want to be respectful to the old members and approach it in a manner that's sensitive to this. If that doesn't work there is of course the EGM option but requires numbers to jump on board the foxes trust reform group.

[CosbehFox]

On 01/06/2024 at 07:48, CosbehFox said:

Just noting the existing board and sub group members were also asked to do the skills matrix.
 

Has there been changes there to the sub groups as an overall alongside the new members? 

@Foxes_Trustwas there any alterations to the sub groups and board following the existing members of these groups also undertaking the skills matrix ? 

[Guest Lako42]

I find it staggering the similarities between the board of LCFC and the board of @Foxes_Trust

 

No wonder we have been drifting towards this situation for so long, in both entities. 

 

 

Time for change 

Edited 5 June 2024 by Lako42

[Raj]

23 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

I find it staggering the similarities between the board of LCFC and the board of @Foxes_Trust

 

No wonder we have been drifting towards this situation for so long, in both entities. 

 

 

Time for change 

Looks good on CV's doesn't it?

Member of the FoxesTrust- taking action for the fans since 1990!

 

 

[Daggers]

On 01/06/2024 at 17:12, Chocolate Teapot said:

Yes you can but I'm imagining the new members might want to be respectful to the old members and approach it in a manner that's sensitive to this. If that doesn't work there is of course the EGM option but requires numbers to jump on board the foxes trust reform group.

It’s what makes the refusal to co-opt two onto the board completely ridiculous. The typical intransigence is inviting a stronger takeover style move. 
 

Oh well. Basin has made his choice, this will be how he’s remembered.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

22 minutes ago, Daggers said:

It’s what makes the refusal to co-opt two onto the board completely ridiculous. The typical intransigence is inviting a stronger takeover style move. 
 

Oh well. Basin has made his choice, this will be how he’s remembered.

Are you part of the reform group? 

[Daggers]

23 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Are you part of the reform group? 

No.

 

I support its aims.

[Foxes_Trust]

2 hours ago, Daggers said:

It’s what makes the refusal to co-opt two onto the board completely ridiculous. The typical intransigence is inviting a stronger takeover style move. 
 

Oh well. Basin has made his choice, this will be how he’s remembered.

The Foxes Trust always has & always will be ran by the board, not any one individual.

 

In terms of co-opting, the board debated the topic for a considerable amount of time,  8 members had stepped forwards to become more active, the decision we took was to enable all 8 to join Subgroups, with the Subgroups role to recommend policy within their remit, with the anticipation that the full board would back Subgroup proposals in the vast majority of cases. The first meeting with the 6 members who accepted the offer took place on Monday evening and was a very positive session where the skills of the new additions were clearly on display.

 

At this stage we did not feel that to select 2 of the 8 members to be directly co-opted onto the board was the right step, but that all 8 could initially contribute, those that then confirmed that they were still seeking a board position to attend some initial training provided by the Football Supporters Association on the running of Trusts, then the board would re-consider the best use of the 2 co-opted positions available until the annual elections, which take place early next year (with that option having been available every year since formation)

[foxinsocks]

6 minutes ago, Foxes_Trust said:

The Foxes Trust always has & always will be ran by the board, not any one individual.

 

In terms of co-opting, the board debated the topic for a considerable amount of time,  8 members had stepped forwards to become more active, the decision we took was to enable all 8 to join Subgroups, with the Subgroups role to recommend policy within their remit, with the anticipation that the full board would back Subgroup proposals in the vast majority of cases. The first meeting with the 6 members who accepted the offer took place on Monday evening and was a very positive session where the skills of the new additions were clearly on display.

 

At this stage we did not feel that to select 2 of the 8 members to be directly co-opted onto the board was the right step, but that all 8 could initially contribute, those that then confirmed that they were still seeking a board position to attend some initial training provided by the Football Supporters Association on the running of Trusts, then the board would re-consider the best use of the 2 co-opted positions available until the annual elections, which take place early next year (with that option having been available every year since formation)

But this process, as you say, was invented after the two initial meetings with the reform group...  it seems to be a delaying tactic and suggests denial of the urgent need for reform while the current board play on.  Maybe it is to hasten an egm. 

[Daggers]

43 minutes ago, Foxes_Trust said:

The Foxes Trust always has & always will be ran by the board, not any one individual.

 

In terms of co-opting, the board debated the topic for a considerable amount of time,  8 members had stepped forwards to become more active, the decision we took was to enable all 8 to join Subgroups, with the Subgroups role to recommend policy within their remit, with the anticipation that the full board would back Subgroup proposals in the vast majority of cases. The first meeting with the 6 members who accepted the offer took place on Monday evening and was a very positive session where the skills of the new additions were clearly on display.

 

At this stage we did not feel that to select 2 of the 8 members to be directly co-opted onto the board was the right step, but that all 8 could initially contribute, those that then confirmed that they were still seeking a board position to attend some initial training provided by the Football Supporters Association on the running of Trusts, then the board would re-consider the best use of the 2 co-opted positions available until the annual elections, which take place early next year (with that option having been available every year since formation)

 

 

Stagnation be thy name.

[CosbehFox]

17 hours ago, CosbehFox said:

@Foxes_Trustwas there any alterations to the sub groups and board following the existing members of these groups also undertaking the skills matrix ? 

?

Edited 5 June 2024 by CosbehFox

[the draper]

Change starts tonight 

[CosbehFox]

On 05/06/2024 at 15:15, CosbehFox said:

?

@Foxes_Trustwas there any alterations to the sub groups and board following the existing members of these groups also undertaking the skills matrix ? 

 

4th attempt - 11 days since I first asked.

 

This is why the Trust faces the scrutiny - simple question which is unanswered and it appears now that the existing members were all accepted on their skills matrix submissions.

 

Not to mention the optics that the submissions of existing board/sub-group members gets looked at by who?