SCCU ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING
Saturday 27th June 2015 at the Rotary District HQ, York Gate, London NW1
11 attended. Including the Independent Examiner as an observer, till he was enlisted as as a County rep. We remembered, once again, to establish at the start how many votes everyone had. It went: 3 votes, 2; 2 votes, 4; 1 vote: 5. Which probably adds up to 19 votes. Two NCMs were represented. Two Counties had 2 reps, one had 0, the rest had 1, and there were no proxies. (1) Officers' Reports. Not much to report, really.
(a) Junior Organiser. The Junior Organiser said the U14/130 wasn't finished yet. They were playing the Final that afternoon. You could tell anyway, because she was getting text updates on the score. To check whether her team won, go to the U14/130 page.
"Could we have the Junior Jamborees south of the river next year?" Not sure what the answer was, but it has been a largely southern enterprise in recent years. There certainly aren't any rules about it.
(b) Webmaster.
24.5.15 SCCU COUNTY FIXTURES 2015-16
We used to publish the Open fixtures in May, but that was in the days when we had the Open entries in May. This year we will have them in August like all the rest. County Match Controller David Smith writes:
Here below are the provisional dates for fixtures for the top four SCCU Divisions for 2015-2016. They are based on the assumption that the number of entries in these Divisions will not change. They are arranged to avoid clashes with the 4NCL, and with known Congresses, viz Witney, Metropolitan, Herts, London Classic, Hastings and Kidlington.
The U120 and U100 matches may or may not follow the same pattern.
Entries 2015-16. Please note that, following a change made at last year's AGM, entries for ALL the Divisions, Open included, will now be required on or before August 15th 2015, after publication of the July/August 2015 Grades
Dates 2015-16
Open, U160
Oct 10
Nov 21
Jan 09
Jan 30
Feb 27
U180, U140
Oct 31
Nov 28
Jan 23
Feb 20
Mar 12
Any queries, just say.
SCCU EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday 10th April 2015 (7 pm) at the Rotary District HQ, York Gate, London NW1
10 attended, plus an observer and, for the noughth item, the ECF CEO. The noughth item, starting at 6.30 pm, was not a part of the Executive meeting proper. (0) ECF CEO
The CEO, Phil Ehr, had asked to address the Executive "to assist SCCU preparation for the ECF Finance Council. I would particularly like to highlight the Independent Constitutional and Governance Review Commission."
For amnesiacs among our readership, the raison d'être for constitutional review was the introduction of the Membership Scheme. The current voting and governance structure was designed for Game Fee and might no longer be appropriate. The Commissioner, if that's the word, is Gareth Pearce who is a man of some importance in financial circles. This is the first stirring of action. An oral report from the Commission is on the agenda of the April Council meeting, but no advance details have been given and the meeting will take no decisions. The SCCU, hopeful perhaps of a sneak preview, asked the CEO to put something in writing before our meeting. He wrote:
"Gareth Pearce will speak to the Finance Council about the Independent Commission's intention. Gareth and I are in close contact, but he is entirely independent. He and his working group are calling their own shots. Here's what I can say:
"Commission members have interviewed a handful of people, mainly current and past ECF directors, with open-ended questions just to get their bearings for the main consultative effort. They intend:
• structured interviews with a wider group to include constituent unit presidents
• a survey sent to all Members who have email addresses on file with the ECF office
• to invite additional input from anyone by email
I am in the process of helping to arrange assistance from a law firm specialising in governance for other national governing bodies in the sport and recreation sector. That assistance will be free of charge to the ECF and complement David Anderton's normal pro bono assistance.
"The Independent Commission hopes to wrap up its work by end of July. Organisations, Council delegates and the membership should have plenty of time to consider their recommendations for potential action at the AGM."
Our meeting began. It emerged that Phil had already addressed the WECU on the subject for two whole hours (far too long, as he said himself). Some were unsure where he fitted into the consultation process in the first place, given his description of it above. Someone actually asked, "Does Gareth Pearce know you're talking to us?", and he wasn't sure.
Not much was said in the way of specifics. The balance between Board and Council (but not, we think, the continued existence of either) was mentioned but hardly discussed. Votes did not always follow cash flow. Someone suggested that congresses should lose their votes in Council, and the CEO rightly had no opinion. But he said the current setup had led to "some dysfunction" on the Board, and thought some executive Directors were too inclined to act independently when they should be consulting. He also felt that the position of Chief Executive should carry more weight.
"Does the time scale really permit decisions at the 2015 AGM?" Probably not, if they're final.
We hope we've got all of that right and not missed anything out by accident. THE MEETING PROPER began after a short break. (1) Insurance. (See 1(a) from the next meeting down.) We are still not insured. The found alternative to the ECF's insurance had turned out to be more expensive, and it was agreed to re-insure with the ECF. Apparently we will be required to do so with effect from 1st October last, which seems to raise all sorts of questions which your Webmaster can't answer. The "unrealistic" requirements have not gone away. The Surrey rep said his own County was also unhappy about them. (2) Juniors
(a) U14/130 ruling. A disagreement from March was with the Rules and Appeals Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee's convener told the Executive what the decision was, but placed an embargo on it because the Counties concerned had not heard it yet. (The formal report to them was still in draft.) It said "draw", and you can tell the world now because the result's in the U14/130 page.
(b) SCCU U18/14 Jamborees. This year's successful Jamborees had turned a profit of £175. Or rather less if we refunded the entry fee of the County which had withdrawn at short notice. We don't have a policy on this. It was agreed (1 con) to refund it in full, but to deduct a £10 admin fee if the question arose again. So we have a policy now, at least till a meeting decides differently.
Next year's venue was discussed. The Junior Organiser will look around. One-day venues aren't cheap these days, unfortunately.
(c) BCET Nominations. The Executive decided on two nominations for British Chess Educational Trust awards. We never say who our nominees are till the Trust has approved them. Not that they ever don't, but even so. (3) SCCU Individual Championship 2015-16 and British Championship qualifying places 2016. Applications had been received from five congresses, and we have four places in our gift. The congress that lost out was the (only) one that has had four places in the last four years. SCCU Championship 2015-16: Hertfordshire Congress (November). BCQ places: Thanet Congress (August 2015); London Chess Classic (December 2015: expected to be an international Open as last year, and if it wasn't we'd think again); Hastings International (December/January). (4) SCCU Rules. The Executive discussed two things, with the Union's AGM in mind.
(a) Use of F grades in County matches. The current County Match Rules did not see F grades coming, so make no mention of them. This means they are just "grades" like any other sort, and count for eligibility in the usual way. It was proposed that they cease to do so (though of course the CMC could still clear their owners, as "ungraded" players). Someone objected that we had to follow the ECF's national-stage rule, but the reason why was not obvious to everyone (quite apart from the fact that we'd be lucky to know the ECF rule by September). It was agreed (7 - 1) that we would ask the AGM to write F grades out of the SCCU eligibility rules.
(b) Proposals at SCCU meetings. We have no rules saying who can make proposals. Shouldn't we have? The Executive thought so, and it was agreed nem con to propose a rule change at the AGM. (What the Executive had in mind was something like "Any Union Officer, or any accredited representative of a Member organisation".) (5) ECF Rules. This is (5) from the next meeting down. Tne point was made that, quite apart from double-charging the teams that don't play in the national stage, the ECF rule is unfair to the Unions (eg SCCU) with the greatest proportion of such teams. It was countered that collecting the same amount from all the teams, just once in the season, is administratively easier. (We should repeat that entry fees, even ECF ones, are collected by the Unions.) This argument did not prevail, and it was agreed (6 - 0) to ask the SCCU AGM to propose change at the ECF one, to the effect that ECF entry fees are payable only by teams that play in the ECF stage. (6) ECF Matters, with reference to the forthcoming April Council meeting. (Our rep at it will be the Union President.)
(a) Increase in Subscriptions. We would ask our rep to vote on this as he saw best. The Executive took no decision on the independent proposal to work towards narrowing the gap between Bronze and Silver fees, with the eventual aim of merging the categories.
(b) ECF Yearbook (and Diary). We would vote against the Board's proposal to discontinue these after 2016. The Secretary, who had just offloaded two "free" Yearbooks (it's the time of year for it), concurred but was not the only person to think the Yearbook is an appalling piece of work which can be improved while cutting costs.
(c) Complaints Procedure aroused comment. There was some feeling that internal inquiries may not be enough. There has to come a point where independent people are involved. There was no decision to take it any further.
(d) Item 15 on the ECF agenda (we refuse to copy it out, but you can look it up.) It involves abolishing the practice of asking FIDE to delist players for payment irregularities. We would support such abolition, rather enthusiastically in the case of some Executive members.
The meeting closed at 10.07 pm.
rjh 12.4.15
ERIC CROKER 3.11.1923 - 18.12.2014
Eric Croker, SCCU President from 1979 to 1980 and again from 1987 to 1989, died aged 91 on 18th December after a long illness.
Eric also served a term as President of Middlesex CA. He was widely respected for decades as a mainstay of English chess administration, culminating in receipt of the BCF President's Award in 1991 toward the end of his active years. He was perhaps best known as a BCF senior arbiter, a role in which he was reputedly unflappable, officiating regularly at the British Championships, Guernsey Festival and elsewhere. He spent a period as Chairman of the Chess Arbiters Association, and became an International Arbiter in 1991.
Eric also found time to play chess. He was very active at a respectable standard in the Civil Service League.
SCCU EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday 3rd October 2014 at the Rotary District HQ, York Gate, London NW1
10 attended, plus an observer. (1) Money
(a) Insurance. Someone said at the AGM (next meeting down, item 7) that the ECF's insurance package didn't seem good value. Anyway, the SCCU's renewal falls due on 1st October each year. It occasioned some discussion this time. To indulge in a bit of history, the (unpublic) minutes of the October 2010 Executive meeting record that the Treasurer "had received a proposal form for insurance renewal, including a rather hidden and apparently new provision that claims would be invalid if “in relation to” them we had not fulfilled various child protection requirements, including some which seemed unrealistic for a voluntary body such as ours." We renewed, and have gone on doing so. Correspondence with the ECF about the unrealistic bits never came to anything.
Four years on, it's resurfaced. This time the Executive was less inclined to go along with it, and the Treasurer was asked to see if he could find a different insurer. We can still renew the ECF policy seamlessly by the end of the month if he can't.
What should we insure? At the moment we have public liability for £2M (premium £230), and £14K in trophy insurance (extra cost £340). Plus modest coverage for equipment and personal property, which you get whether you want it or not. (We haven't got any equipment.) It was agreed to increase the public liability cover to £5M. How about the trophies? Four years ago we decided to go on insuring them since we could afford to, and stop when we couldn't. This time we thought, what's the point of insuring if we don't claim anyway? We didn't claim for repairs to the Glenroy. (When did we last make a claim?) So we'll stop insuring them, but build up a Trophy Replacement Fund by way of self-insurance.
There was an incidental item. The ECF insurance which we may or may not renew includes a provision that we must adopt the ECF's Child Protection Policy. We have one of our own, dated 2005 (see http://www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/cpp.htm), which bears more than a passing resemblance to the ECF's. It was decided to adopt the ECF's anyway.
(b) Banking. You may recall, and if you don't it's four meetings down, that we updated the list of cheque signatories twelve months ago. We remarked that the two new ones would "spend a pleasant few weeks waiting on the Bank's paperwork". They've moved on to a replacement set of paperwork now, but they're still waiting. (2) Juniors. We can now say who our nominee was for a BCET award. Barham Primary School, Wembley (a Chess in Schools & Communities school). They are among this year's Award recipients. (3) ECF Matters. The following weekend's AGM, mostly.
(a) Elections. The Executive decided the Union's votes for the contested elections. No, we're not saying.
(b) Adjudications. This is the Home Director's proposal that events permitting adjudication be excluded from ECF grading with effect from 1st July 2015. It got no support at the meeting. Most of the SCCU counties do permit adjudication in their leagues, if in limited circumstances, so would have to change their rules rather hastily or drop out of ECF grading altogether. But is this really about adjudications? Some thought not. At bottom it's about the ECF's uneasy position as the "governing body" of English chess. (Is that the expression they use?) Should they be allowed to tell us how to run our competitions? The ECF Council must decide, but it would get a unanimous "no" vote from the Executive.
(c) Online Forums. See 7(e) in the next meeting down. The Directors and Officers Responsibilities Regulations have indeed been revised since then, but in the vaguest of ways and without really answering the question. Discussion at the Executive meeting confined itself to generalities.
(d) F Grades. You'll know that the ECF is to introduce a new F category, based on 5 - 8 games, in the January 2015 grading list. There has been discussion elsewhere on the pros and cons of taking any notice of F grades for the purpose of grading prizes in congresses. (Not a problem. It's for the congresses to decide.) A similar question was raised here. Should the SCCU leagues use F grades for eligibility purposes when they turn up at the halfyear for previously ungraded players? For the moment it's a non-question, because the rules say we use published grades, and F grades will be published grades. The SCCU rules never saw F grades coming. You could argue that the ECF should have waited for a new season rather than introducing F grades halfyear.
(e) ECF-stage Draw. See 6(c) in the next meeting down ("It's likely to go to the ECF AGM anyway"). It isn't doing; we gather the Home Director is to change the rules on his own initiative, or maybe on the strength of the Skype meeting next belowsaid. Sorry, 6(a) from the next meeting down. We'll know what the Director's changes are when he publishes them. He hasn't yet. (4) Future Meetings. We would fix a date for the next Executive meeting by email after we knew when the ECF Finance meeting was. (That was on the agenda for next weekend's ECF AGM.) SCCU AGM 2015 will be on Saturday 27th June. (5) ECF-stage Entry Fee. This one never had much chance of a decision at the meeting, because it wasn't on the agenda. Someone raised it under AOB. But it's a question that has rankled for years in some quarters, off and on. The ECF's County Championship rules say: A3. In the Union Stage, each team shall pay an entry fee, which shall be decided by the Board, to the ECF. Yes, you read that correctly. Every team entering at the Union stage pays an ECF entry fee, never mind whether it has the slightest expectation of getting nominated for the National stage, or even wishes to play in it. No one suggests the ECF are getting too much money out of the counties; in practice they're charging what they would have anyway, but they're charging the wrong people! Should the charge be spread out between the counties in this way? The point is arguable, but some might say it's not for the ECF to decide. The Union stages are scarcely the ECF's business. The alternative would be for each Union to decide when it collects the money. (Collecting the money has always been the Unions' job.)
That's one aspect of it. The other is, if counties are paying entry fees at the start of the season the ECF has no business changing the rules afterwards, as it habitually does.
Strongish views were expressed, in both or all directions, but no consensus was attempted. It will be on the agenda for the next Executive meeting.
The meeting closed at 9.38 pm.
rjh 10.10.14
SCCU ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING
Saturday 28th June 2014 at the Rotary District HQ, York Gate, London NW1
12 attended, plus the Independent Examiner as an observer. This year we remembered to establish at the start how many votes everyone had. Two people wore three hats so had 3 votes; three wore two so had 2; one wore only one hat of his own but a proxy vote boosted him to 2; and we think that leaves five people with 1 vote each. Things are much simpler on the Executive Committee where everybody has 1 vote and proxies aren't allowed. (1) Glenroy Cup (see next meeting down) is with Chris Ward now, having been presented in May at Kent's Finals Day. (2) Accounts 2013-14. The "audited" (we know that's not the right word, but is "independently examined?" said?) Accounts showed a deficit of £203 for the season and liquid assets of £4818. Annual surpluses and deficits are't really very meaningful when you're working on a cash basis. The deficit included some 2012-13 expenses paid in the wrong year, and would have been larger had it not been for a £370 surplus on junior activities. (3) Budget 2014-15. The Treasurer's proposals for fees were accepted. So County affiliation fee £50 (no change); NCM affiliation fee half of that as prescribed by the rules, but with a £5 discount if paid by 1st December; County Championship entry fee £20 per team (no change); U14/130 entry fee £35, with a £10 discount if paid by 1st December. (Was £30 but with no discount, so it's gone up or down as you will.) (4) Elections. Everyone was re-elected, or re-appointed. The meeting took the opportunity to regularise the Independent Examiner's position. The General Rules have always, forgetfully, required appointment of an Auditor though it's anyone's guess how long it is since we've had an Auditor as such. The Rules are now in line with practice. (5) SCCU County Matches
(a) Rule Change. It was proposed that County Match Rule 4 should require entries for all Competitions by 15th August (old rule said 30th April for the Open and 15th August for everything else). The proposal was carried, but not without some discussion.
Where did that 30th-April date come from? It had been there for ever. Its original purpose, we believe, was to ensure publication of dates in a national printed calendar produced annually. That reason had gone away, but there was still no harm in publishing dates as soon as possible. The upshot was, Council agreed to change the rule for consistency but publish a provisional fixture list anyway, in May or thereabouts, for all sections.
(b) FIDE ratings. "Will you be using the ECF's new FIDE conversion for the purpose of eligibility?" County Match Controller: Yes.
(c) Guidance to Match Captains. The meeting spent some time on the Union's Guidelines for Match Captains. Oddly, to your Webmaster's eye, it bore on the meaning of the word "any" in In no circumstances may the captain [when advising on draw offers] look at any game before giving their decision. It turns out there is ECF guidance (where?) with the same wording, probably cribbed from us, and it was agreed to ask the ECF what they thought it meant. (6) ECF Matters: County matches
(a) Skype meeting. The Home Director had called a Skype meeting for Union reps on 17th July (details here) to discuss various things, including the eligibility rules. Council saw little to worry about in the eligibility rules, save perhaps the "attendance as a teacher" bit. It was rather amused by the suggestion to use January grades for people who don't have August ones (now, who would have thought of that?), and had fun with the idea of allowing captains to choose between August and January grades for the purpose of the 10-point rule. "But he must be consistent and use one or the other throughout." - "I don't know, let's give him maximum freedom to use order of strength as he would have done before they brought in this 10-point thing." And as he still does down here in the SCCU stage.
The meeting won't make any actual decisions. Anthony Fulton agreed to "attend" it on the SCCU's behalf.
(b) Fines. The meeting discussed two sorts. The "county" sort, aimed at counties that accept nomination at the end of the Union stage and then default; and the "Union" sort, aimed at Unions that request, in December, more places than they are able to fill at the end of March. On the county sort, a proposal that we seek a reduction from £100 to £50 was lost by 4 votes to 8. On the Union sort, it didn't get as far as a vote. We will seek to have the penalty removed.
(c) The draw. Council inconclusively discussed the idea that the first two nominees from a Union be kept apart till the Final. It's likely to go to the ECF AGM anyway.
There was feeling that the draw should be properly monitored (eg by a representative appointed by the Unions). Someone mentioned the rather improbable coincidence that in this year's draw every single team with a quarter-final bye (seven of them) had a home match to follow. (We know at least one competition with an unwritten rule that teams with byes get an away match to follow!)
(d) Players Cleared to Play. It was noted that the names of cleared players had been published very irregularly, in some cases weeks after the player had played. (7) ECF Matters: Other. In no particular order:
(a) Insurance. Someone said his county didn't think the ECF's insurance package was good value. It wasn't on the agenda and this didn't seem the time to discuss it, but it may come up again.
(b) FIDE Laws and other rules. The meeting discussed a couple of things. (1) Mobiles, what else. No one suggests that the new FIDE rule in all its fervour is appropriate for your average English event. But ECF thinking, somewhere at the top, seems to be that a phone "found to be switched on", whether it makes noises or not, must incur automatic loss; and that games won't be graded otherwise. (Which games isn't entirely clear.) (2) Adjudication. It is suggested that, starting in 2015-16, any game potentially subject to adjudication will not be graded. We think this means any game where adjudication has not been ruled out before the game starts.
Council did not like these proposals. If the ECF wished to introduce either, we would want it to go to Council rather than the Board.
(c) ECF Player of the Year. Someone remarked that publishing running totals on the website while voting was in progress was inappropriate. Council agreed, and we would convey our feeling to the ECF CEO.
(d) ECF Minutes. Why so slow? Well, everyone's saying it.
(e) EC Forum. Was it true that ECF Directors and Officers were being "discouraged" from posting on the (non-ECF) Forum? A person who knew said yes, though no one knew how far-reaching it was. Maybe the rules might appear in the Directors and Officers Responsibilities Regulations at some point. (8) SCCU Bulletin. "Has there been any progress on digitisation of the SCCU Bulletin?" Whoops. About as much as there had been last time it came up. (Two years ago, was it?) The Editor would redirect his attention to it. No one knew what a professional job would cost, but we did have money in the bank.
The meeting closed at 6 pm, and was seamlessly followed by the traditional
SCCU EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
28.6.14
which did routine things. (1) Appointment of BCF and ECF Reps. D Smith in both cases. (2) Appointment of Rules and Appeals Sub-Committee. J Denning, K Elder, A Fulton, M Gunn, RJ Haddrell, JA Philpott (3) Date of Next Meeting Friday 3rd October 2014. Dates of other meetings to be fixed then.
The meeting closed at 6.20 pm.
rjh 12.7.14
16.5.14 SCCU OPEN FIXTURES 2014-15
County Match Controller David Smith davidandjanesmith@ntlworld.com writes:
Here are the fixtures for the Open Division of the SCCU Counties Championship for next season 2014-15. Please note that venues have been reversed from 2013/2014, with one exception: the Surrey v Middlesex match, where a reversal would have led to three Middx homes and three Surrey aways, an even more unfair situation. My apologies to Anthony Fulton and his Middlesex squad for this necessary adjustment.
Oct 11
Nov 22
Jan 17
Feb 7
Mar 7
ESx SyM
KM SxSy
EK MSx
KSy ME
SxK SyE
May I emphasise that at this stage the fixtures are provisional and can be changed by agreement between the Counties and Match Captains concerned. If changes are made however please ensure that the following points are observed:
(a) Ensure that both myself and the SCCU Webmaster Richard Haddrell are advised.
(b) No matches are to be re-arranged for Saturday 28th March 2015.
Any queries, just say.