2015 Parramatta Leagues Club Election thread

[Gronk]

Piggy's link with Hadley is too hard to ignore. Too much of a coincidence to suggest that Piggy just got up one morning and felt the urge to run for an election to a Board of a club that he was at for 5 mins.

 

[Jodeci]

Can we please get the facts right regarding Ben Smith.

At the end of last year, Ben's contract with the club ended as he retired. He wasn't owed any contract money nor did he owe the club any money.

The club a few weeks back approached Ben about doing a few hours of work helping out Nathan Cayless on game day to walk around the Corporate Suites and chatting to our sponsors.

Ben was told to get his own ABN so he could put in a invoice for this work. Just like how you ring a plumber/tradie to come to your place to fix something, you obviously get an invoice and pay it.

So Ben put in an invoice from his own business to get paid for his service. It's not part time work and nor does he has a contract saying it is or that he is employed by the club. He was asked to help on a few home games if he had the time and Benny being the bloke he is said he would do his best to help.

 

[parra-matters]

So Ben Smith did a job once for the club and now he can't run?
If he had a on going contract i could understand it but doing a once off job that's completely different. He should challenge the ruling.

 

[Jodeci]

So Ben Smith did a job once for the club and now he can't run?
If he had a on going contract i could understand it but doing a once off job that's completely different. He should challenge the ruling.

He has no contract with the club saying that he is employed full time, part time, casual or whatever.

It was a casual chat asking him if he could help out and he said yes pending his location whether he can make it from Newcastle to the home games.

Benny doesn't have $50k for supreme court and has told the club to stick the appearances as he now no longer will be doing any more.

 

[Gronk]

Seems that Benny did not have all his ducks in a row before he nominated ?

Who was advising him ? Lack of due diligence has cost him the right to be on the ballot.

Oh well, if his interest was all about the club then he can run again next time as I am sure that his passion will not wane.

 

[parra-matters]

He has no contract with the club saying that he is employed full time, part time, casual or whatever.

It was a casual chat asking him if he could help out and he said yes pending his location whether he can make it from Newcastle to the home games.

Benny doesn't have $50k for supreme court and has told the club to stick the appearances as he now no longer will be doing any more.

Shame he can't run this time, i think he has the right passion to help the club out.

 

[phantom eel]

So Ben Smith appeared on the Club's latest payroll (albeit as an individual contractor) at the time nominations were received.

The first job of a returning officer after nominations close would be to check payroll and clarify the status of any nominee that appears to be employed by the club, given that people presently employed by the club are not eligible to hold office - or depending how you interpret that, to nominate in order to hold office.

Was the paid arrangement with Ben Smith just for one game day, or was it to be an ongoing/recurring role on game days? If Smith brought that recurring paid arrangement to a close after nominating (rather than before), then I can see why there may be a legal case for his nomination to be deemed ineligible.

Obviously only a Court could rule on the legal aspect to sort it out once and for all, but it's not an outlandish (or necessarily sinister) decision, imo. Fitzy blustered about going to supreme court so that his own nomination could be accepted, but it looks like he too decided not to proceed either.

Feel for the bloke, but the legal responsibilities of Club Directors are complicated and you can't just go into these things lightly, or without all of your i's dotted and t's crossed.

 

[Jodeci]

Seems that Benny did not have all his ducks in a row before he nominated ?

Who was advising him ? Lack of due diligence has cost him the right to be on the ballot.

Oh well, if his interest was all about the club then he can run again next time as I am sure that his passion will not wane.

Gronk, if the leagues club called my small business and said to me if I was to trim the hedges in the car pack and put new wood chip bark in the gardens and I did the job as I quoted and then invoiced them, would I not be entitled to receive my payment?

Would that then stop me from nominating myself?

Hopefully Ben comes back in a few years time and nominates himself again

 

[phantom eel]

Would that then stop me from nominating myself?

If it was understood to be a recurrent arrangement, then probably yes.

Hopefully Ben comes back in a few years time and nominates himself again

Agree. And he should re-consider continuing the game day role for the next 18 months or so until the chance comes around again, instead of throwing a tantrum about it.

 

[Jodeci]

If it was understood to be a recurrent arrangement, then probably yes.


Agree. And he should re-consider continuing the game day role for the next 18 months or so until the chance comes around again, instead of throwing a tantrum about it.

He didnt throw a tantrum. He advised the club that he cant do it any further.

 

[phantom eel]

Ok, he can't.

That sounds a bit different to "told the club to stick the appearances as he now no longer will be doing any more".

#passion

 

[Gronk]

Benny is not the first person who finds himself ineligible for a club/association/ government ballot or election and won't be the last.

AS Phantom said, it is the job of the returning office to scrutinize nominations. Best to do it now to avoid having to go back the polls after he/she is found to have been ineligible.

Time to put the scaremongering aside and get on with it.

 

[Jodeci]

Benny is not the first person who finds himself ineligible for a club/association/ government ballot or election and won't be the last.

AS Phantom said, it is the job of the returning office to scrutinize nominations. Best to do it now to avoid having to go back the polls after he/she is found to have been ineligible.

Time to put the scaremongering aside and get on with it.

Gronk, I'm purely stating what went on. people have been coming up with complete BS over what happened.

I'm clearing it up for everyone on here.

Like you said, lets get on with it.

 

[BennyBoy]

Bloody hell, we've had three changes in board makeup over the last 7 years but nothing ever changes, they are all rank amateurs playing the same petty little games over and over.

Personally I am sick to death of the lot of them and won't vote for any one who has ever been a director or is affiliated with anyone who ever was.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

So Ben Smith appeared on the Club's latest payroll (albeit as an individual contractor) at the time nominations were received.

The first job of a returning officer after nominations close would be to check payroll and clarify the status of any nominee that appears to be employed by the club, given that people presently employed by the club are not eligible to hold office - or depending how you interpret that, to nominate in order to hold office.

Was the paid arrangement with Ben Smith just for one game day, or was it to be an ongoing/recurring role on game days? If Smith brought that recurring paid arrangement to a close after nominating (rather than before), then I can see why there may be a legal case for his nomination to be deemed ineligible.

Obviously only a Court could rule on the legal aspect to sort it out once and for all, but it's not an outlandish (or necessarily sinister) decision, imo. Fitzy blustered about going to supreme court so that his own nomination could be accepted, but it looks like he too decided not to proceed either.

Feel for the bloke, but the legal responsibilities of Club Directors are complicated and you can't just go into these things lightly, or without all of your i's dotted and t's crossed.

Mate, there is no explicit prohibition on directors or other key personnel selling goods or services to the club, as long as this is fully disclosed and executed at arms length prices, and as long as this does not constitute an employment relationship. From the 2014 Annual Report:


"(b) Transactions with key management personnel
From time to time key management personnel of the company, or their related entities, may sell goods or provide services to the group. The group makes these purchases on the same terms and conditions as other non-key management personnel related transactions.
The following amounts were recognised during the reporting period from transactions with director related entities:......."

Can't say I think it is great practice (we all now about some recent apparent events), but merely having contractual relations with the club does not in itself prohibit you from being a director.

 

[phantom eel]

Mate, there is no explicit prohibition on directors or other key personnel selling goods or services to the club, as long as this is fully disclosed and executed at arms length prices, and as long as this does not constitute an employment relationship.

Yep. Which is what I'm getting at with suggestions of how these things might be defined or interpreted implicitly (and potentially legally), in the context of eligibility for nomination for the election of Directors.

Can't say I think it is great practice (we all now about some recent apparent events), but merely having contractual relations with the club does not in itself prohibit you from being a director.

...depending on how the Constitution and Act are interpreted together, firstly by the independent returning officer, and secondly by legal advice (since decisions of this nature are contestable and have to be able to stand up in court), and I guess ultimately by the Court system.

All I'm saying is that the Ben Smith situation is not definitely unjust or something to get uptight about, and is perfectly understandable from one point of view of the situation. I feel for the guy - he's been a one club player, and personally I expect that he would have brought more (in terms of passion and commitment) to the role than an ex-player that only spent a few years here following (or prior to) years spent with several other clubs.

 

[MarkInTheStands]

Gronk, if the leagues club called my small business and said to me if I was to trim the hedges in the car pack and put new wood chip bark in the gardens and I did the job as I quoted and then invoiced them, would I not be entitled to receive my payment?

Would that then stop me from nominating myself?

Please tell me that this isn't the case and your company Jagged Edge Mowing P/L as stated in your candidate profile as the owner off, does not trim the edges and put new wood chip bark in the gardens Ray?

 

[eel speel]

Good example, of which I was also aware. I'm just saying that everything isn't necessarily like it is for other professions and under other circumstances, and that among several possible interpretations, there is one where the refusal of Ben Smith's nomination can seem like "common sense" and not controversial or a big deal in the slightest.


It's only a circus because for some reason we still have historical factions (Fitzy, Spagnolo) who keep wanting to reclaim control of the Board. 27 candidates for 7 spots, a bun fight for no real reason...! Sharp isn't perfect however is his own man, and his team will live or die into the future via his performance and decisions.

So far it looks (to me) like Sharp's successfully steered the ship through the middle of the two duelling ego-factions that have plagues our club's governance sing 2008. This should be the election where the members finally put the Fitzy and Spagnolo factions out to pasture, never to come back.... The last thing we need now is to chop and change course or let any of those candidates aligned to these fighting factions back into the picture.

Well said. #stopthe factions. #stopfitzystopspags

 

[eel speel]

Can we please get the facts right regarding Ben Smith.

At the end of last year, Ben's contract with the club ended as he retired. He wasn't owed any contract money nor did he owe the club any money.

The club a few weeks back approached Ben about doing a few hours of work helping out Nathan Cayless on game day to walk around the Corporate Suites and chatting to our sponsors.

Ben was told to get his own ABN so he could put in a invoice for this work. Just like how you ring a plumber/tradie to come to your place to fix something, you obviously get an invoice and pay it.

So Ben put in an invoice from his own business to get paid for his service. It's not part time work and nor does he has a contract saying it is or that he is employed by the club. He was asked to help on a few home games if he had the time and Benny being the bloke he is said he would do his best to help.

You sure that is the truth? Why doesn't Ben Smith come out and say that personally?

 

[not graham olling]

Bloody hell, we've had three changes in board makeup over the last 7 years but nothing ever changes, they are all rank amateurs playing the same petty little games over and over.

Personally I am sick to death of the lot of them and won't vote for any one who has ever been a director or is affiliated with anyone who ever was.

That's a great way to make your vote count for the future of our club