Ed George and the BCWF

[Salty]

What you or I think about raunchy emails is irrelevant digger. There's laws in place, Worksafe BC to start that disallow this kind of thing in the work place and they've been around quite a while and any leader needs to be squeaky clean as far as the law goes. It is what it is.

[Apolonius]

It is nice to see the knives come out right away.Emails of this type have no place in a work place,although we do don't know the content.It was a firing offence?Maybe the Judge said it was legal for the BOD to fire him.Was it right?Did those emails do so much damage to the reputation of BCWF??Could it be solved nicely?I think so.Did the emails ,if that is the reason,damaged us, as hunters???This is the governing body that screwed up us with the allocation....this is firing offence!!!They should all hang their heads in shame.This are the same people that gave the podium to goabc in Victoria,that invited the minister that screwed up us,in Ernie...for a speech.They now make friends with the guides....good guides.And here their supporters spew vitriol non stop.You want to ban me ???Do it.But this is the truth.

[houndogger]

It is nice to see the knives come out right away.Emails of this type have no place in a work place,although we do don't know the content.It was a firing offence?Maybe the Judge said it was legal for the BOD to fire him.Was it right?Did those emails do so much damage to the reputation of BCWF??Could it be solved nicely?I think so.Did the emails ,if that is the reason,damaged us, as hunters???This is the governing body that screwed up us with the allocation....this is firing offence!!!They should all hang their heads in shame.This are the same people that gave the podium to goabc in Victoria,that invited the minister that screwed up us,in Ernie...for a speech.They now make friends with the guides....good guides.And here their supporters spew vitriol non stop.You want to ban me ???Do it.But this is the truth.

Odd huh can hack one but don't dare hack the other.

[Mulehahn]

Ed, firstly, your Petition was "dismissed", not "set aside". When you say "set aside" it means that someone has already granted an order in your favor. That never happened - plain and simple, your Petition was dismissed. So you've wasted the BCWF's money on a court case, never spoke up ONCE about your friends' defamatory and abrasive comments towards the BOD - the very same BOD whose actions and conduct were UPHELD by a Supreme Court justice, you've been involved in trying to force the President of Region 2 to step down because he voted to suspend you and you have the audacity to run for the presidency? "Onward to bigger and better things" - are you serious? You think you can just shrug your shoulders and sweep this under the rug?

The actions of the BOD have been vindicated - your conduct was such that your suspension was upheld. You have wasted OUR conservation dollars. Your actions have caused discord and animosity within the organization. YOUR actions have been the basis of the fighting we have seen here and yet you claim to want to put the Fed "back on track"? Unbelievable. I can only imagine what we would be reading had the decision gone the other way.

In my view it would be a severe blow to the credibility of the BCWF if you were elected as...anything, quite frankly.

I fully agree that Ed made a mistake, and has to face the repercussions. I am glad that it has finally been settled. Although I am looking forward to reading the judges reasoning. As I continue to believe that the Society Act clearly states you cannot "fire" a director of a society without following clearly established laws. The judge must of ruled that a suspension for the duration of the term was just that, a suspension and not a firing, or there are severe extenuating circumstances that no one else is privy to. This is reinforced by the fact Ed George is apparently running. If that was not the case, then no, money was not wasted as apparently laws and acts have no bearing on how a judge rules. It is a free for all.

However, 1899, unless I am missing something Ed is not the only one with concerns over the BOD and the President of Region 2. Everyone I know respects the right of the President of Region 2 to vote to suspend Ed. What is not acceptable is that he voted in a meeting of the Board of Directors (that is what was stated in the email I received from the BCWF). The only people allowed to vote at a BOD meeting is the BOD. Others are allowed as guests and such but they have no right to vote. If derogatory emails are enough to get one removed then what is an acceptable discipline for bypassing the clearly stated hierarchy and bylaws? How did an entire board allow a non-member to vote? If I am wrong then please let me know but I have read the email several times and cannot come to a different conclusion!

The BCWF has been great, and will be once a again. But as far as I am concerned a few of the current leaders (Ed included) have a long way to fall they unless are close to taking the BCWF with it.

[REMINGTON JIM]

What you or I think about raunchy emails is irrelevant digger. There's laws in place, Worksafe BC to start that disallow this kind of thing in the work place and they've been around quite a while and any leader needs to be squeaky clean as far as the law goes. It is what it is.

Your RIGHT about that Salty and sometimes you need to really SORRY about what you did wrong and sincerly apologize for it - BUT if your arrogant and have a big ego your shit can make ya Smelly ! and people don't like Smelly ! jmo RJ

[1899]

I fully agree that Ed made a mistake, and has to face the repercussions. I am glad that it has finally been settled. Although I am looking forward to reading the judges reasoning. As I continue to believe that the Society Act clearly states you cannot "fire" a director of a society without following clearly established laws. The judge must of ruled that a suspension for the duration of the term was just that, a suspension and not a firing, or there are severe extenuating circumstances that no one else is privy to. This is reinforced by the fact Ed George is apparently running. If that was not the case, then no, money was not wasted as apparently laws and acts have no bearing on how a judge rules. It is a free for all.

However, 1899, unless I am missing something Ed is not the only one with concerns over the BOD and the President of Region 2. Everyone I know respects the right of the President of Region 2 to vote to suspend Ed. What is not acceptable is that he voted in a meeting of the Board of Directors (that is what was stated in the email I received from the BCWF). The only people allowed to vote at a BOD meeting is the BOD. Others are allowed as guests and such but they have no right to vote. If derogatory emails are enough to get one removed then what is an acceptable discipline for bypassing the clearly stated hierarchy and bylaws? How did an entire board allow a non-member to vote? If I am wrong then please let me know but I have read the email several times and cannot come to a different conclusion!

The BCWF has been great, and will be once a again. But as far as I am concerned a few of the current leaders (Ed included) have a long way to fall they unless are close to taking the BCWF with it.

It's going to be exactly as I explained weeks ago - the judge has the discretion pursuant to Society Act, to validate actions that are in breach of the Act.

From reading the minutes of the meeting it stated:

“That a non-confidence vote against the President be voted on as he voted at the closed session of the BCWF board meeting for the suspension of Ed George which went against the wishes of the R2 BOARD.”

emphasis added.

This motion was seconded by one of Ed's vocal HBC advocates. Ed was present as a "guest". The president, rightfully so, refused to disclose how he voted, as it was a closed meeting. Then Ed told those in attendance how the president voted. I am pretty sure, although not certain, that how a person votes in a closed meeting is not to be disclosed.

Am I wrong about any of this stuff? I don't know whether he is allowed to vote or not. All I know is what I read in the minutes, which is quoted above.

[coach]

They should all hang their heads in shame.This are the same people that gave the podium to goabc in Victoria

Apolonius - I'll explain this one more time and then I'm done here.. The decision to allow Scott Ellis to speak at the rally in Victoria was 100% MY DECISION and had nothing at all to to with the BCWF. A few days prior to the rally, Mr Ellis sent an email to my employer attempting to discredit me due to the fact I had publicly spoken out against the GOABC and their back door tactics leading up to the allocation policy announced by minister Thomson. I'm sure they thought my company - run by people who support tourism and business - would see fit to fire me and replace me with someone else. Unfortunately for Mr Ellis, I'm "kind of" at the top of my field. Fortunately for me, my employer understood the tactics of the GOABC and was familiar with how much the organization is willing to cross lines. As a result, I managed to avoid being fired from my position and was still able to MC the Victoria event.

As I prepared to take the podium in Victoria, I was alerted to the fact Mr Ellis and a few of his assosciates were hanging out at the back of the crowd in the lawns of the legislature. Instead of ignoring them, I decided to confront them - alone. Things got ugly for a few seconds but I stood my ground. Mr Ellis listened to what I had to say and then asked if I would give him a minute on the mic. It was a very tough decision. Did he really want the mic? Was there anything he could gain by speaking?

My decision to give him a minute to speak was based on my belief that he really didn't want the mic in the first place. I didn't believe there was anything he could say that would help his cause. Imo - I called his bluff and at the same time proved we weren't a bunch of "hair on fire radicals".

You can call me whatever you want for making that decision. But don't blame the BCWF. Mr George made it clear he wasn't happy my decision - so don't get angry with him or the BOD.

if you want to take your anger out on someone - blame me! Quite frankly - if you're gonna take your anger out on me, then it's time you put your own reputation on the line and stand up for what you believe in.

If if all you're gonna do is yap here on HBC and blame others then GFYS!

I haven't posted here for a while and don't expect to be back anytime soon. Hopefully my explanation can cool off some of the ill feelings toward the fed. As for Mr George - people need to look at the facts, the judges decision, the lack of remorse from Mr George and his posse, and make up their own mind as to who's right and wrong in all of this.

[Weatherby Fan]

Thanks Coach.......been missing your posts.
WF

[Marsh Hawk]

1899 I am the person who put the motion of non confidence of the floor of the Region 2 board meeting in February. This was based "on his inability to correctly represent the views of our Board of Directors". This text that I quote is directly from the written motion that I submitted to our Secretary. It may have been recorded slightly differently but this was my exact motion. This motion was passed by a majority of our board after the chair was challenged as he didn't want to allow the motion. Unfortunately he has chosen to disrespect the wishes of the majority of our board and continues to sit in the chair as President of Region 2.

To straighten something out, the Presidents of each Region of the BCWF sit on the Board of Directors so they are entitled to vote at the Board meetings. My concern is that our regional president conveys the wishes of the majority of our Region 2 Board when he represents our Region at the main Board of Directors meetings.

[bcfarmer]

My concern is that our regional president conveys the wishes of the majority of our Region 2 Board when he represents our Region at the main Board of Directors meetings.

While not meaning to get in the middle of another Regions politics,
If any President, whether at the Club,Regional, or Provincial level fails to abide by the membership's wishes, they should step aside.
The BCWF prides and promotes itself on being a "bottom-up" organization. If you are given the privileged of leading then it is your responsibility to follow through with the members wishes.
BCF