Shu

[Kyleakin Lofts]

What is the Scottish Homing Union?

 

Is it a Governing Body or an Administrative Body?

 

Its objects state:

 

a) The provision of an organisation for persons interested in pigeon racing and showing in all its branches.

b] The provision of uniform rules and regulations for the ringing and registration of racing pigeons as to the ownership

and transfer of same and for the conduct of races and shows.

c) The promotion of races and shows and the provision of money and other prizes for same and grant donations for objects

approved by the Annual General Meeting.

d) The trading in any requisites for the provision and benefit of members as approved by the AGM from time to time.

e) The provision of a court of appeal for the final disposal of all questions or disputes that may arise between and

among its members and organisations.

f) The protection and advancement of the interests of its members; with legal aid in respect of questions arising

between themselves and / or third parties on matters falling within the foregoing objects and approved by the

council.

 

These objects, in my opinion, show that the SHU is an Administrative Body.

 

a) Provides a body to organise racing and showing for its members. This is administration.

b] Provides uniform rules and regulations for general conduct as well as races and shows, ring registration and

transfers. This is administration.

c) Promotion of races and shows providing prizes and donations. This is administration.

d) Providing requisites. This is administration.

e) Providing a court of appeal. This is administration.

f) Member benefits. This is administration.

 

Does the SHU meet its objects?

 

a) How does the SHU organise racing and showing? I have no idea and for me they fail. To organise racing and showing,

they should licence races and shows. This would create a uniformity and produce income for licence fees and

renewals. What the SHU does is provide a list of race points, most of which they do not administer. They follow

this up with the provision of measurements. They also provide race rules and show rules and ownership verification.

b] On this object, for me, they pass to an extent. They do not follow up on their rules, but rather leave it to

individual clubs to administer the rule which leads to object (e). To follow up, they would have to become a

governing body and I do not think there is an appetite for this.

c) On this object, for me, they pass.

d) On this object, for me, they pass.

e) On this object, for me, they pass.

f) On this object, I know they make an effort, so pass.

 

One could say they meet all objects of an administrative body, expecting their members and member organisations to administer their rules in a proper manner.

 

Do the members and member organisations assist the SHU in this respect? Answer that yourself, but the Life Ring thread may shed some light on the matter. Pigeon people tend to prefer to argue points and may even create their own problems instead of attempting to assist the SHU by following the guidelines laid down and perhaps working toward the intention behind that guideline.

Edited December 19, 2018 by Kyleakin Lofts

[Walter swanston]

Governance is the act of governing in other words the implementing of rules of conduct for an organisation whereas administration is the mirror of governance as it deals with The implementing of rules laid down by the governing body.Therefore the SHU is both a governing and administrating body.Hope this answers your quandary Andy

[Kyleakin Lofts]

Governance is the act of governing in other words the implementing of rules of conduct for an organisation whereas administration is the mirror of governance as it deals with The implementing of rules laid down by the governing body.Therefore the SHU is both a governing and administrating body.Hope this answers your quandary Andy

 

Are we implementing the rules of conduct first hand and if so how do we manage this? I think the SHU is happy to sit back and administer.

 

Other governing bodies carry out annual checks to ensure their governance is implemented. Most use their structure to accomplish this. In our case, that would be to use the Federations to check that the clubs are following the rules, etc.

 

The SHU is happy to administer the rules, if and when, and only if and when, a complaint is raised. They rely on their members and member clubs to fulfil the implementation.

 

I am not saying this is wrong, but when some members complain or ask what the SHU does for them, perhaps they should ask, "What do we do for the SHU".

[Walter swanston]

Shades of John Fitzgerald Kennedy

[Kyleakin Lofts]

Shades of John Fitzgerald Kennedy

 

Never knew J F K was a SHU member.

[cemetary]

Andy, maybe am thick, but I really can't see where you are going with this.

 

Can you enlighten me with some pointers, as its xmas time, I don't really ask for anything from anyone, so take it, your the first.

[tiger]

Andy, maybe am thick, but I really can't see where you are going with this.

 

Can you enlighten me with some pointers, as its xmas time, I don't really ask for anything from anyone, so take it, your the first.

 

Was thinking the same ????

[cemetary]

Was thinking the same ????

 

 

So am not alone then mate, glad you piped up, wonder how many more are sitting on the high fence,

[clockman]

So am not alone then mate, glad you piped up, wonder how many more are sitting on the high fence,

 

We all know who sits on the fence,

[Walter swanston]

At my federations AGM where about 70 members attended no one could be persuaded to represent us in the SHU council.Make what you will ofthat!!

[cemetary]

We all know who sits on the fence,

 

 

True mate, but really, as I have said in my last post, I just cant get it.

 

Am waiting on an answer, or an explanation regarding the post.

[Kyleakin Lofts]

I was just musing, thinking in print. Walter answered my musing, but this in turn causes another question.

 

I made reference to the Life Ring thread because within that thread wing stamps were raised. I updated the poster on the current situation since it was clarified at the SHU AGM in December.

 

Reference was then made to the SNFC which apparently does not allow wing stamps and will therefore not allow wing stamps nor ID rings. This took up a few posts and not wishing to hijack a thread I referred to the original post of Life Rings.

 

It appears that some think the SNFC is a governing body and that the current SHU rules do not include it. I always thought that the SNFC was a SHU member club and therefore the SHU rules do include it.

 

Now rules is rules, but they are only as good as the people who follow them and the governing body that enforces them. Latitude may be allowed as long as the meaning of the rule is being followed, but the acid test is when a complaint is brought forward to the governing body. It seems that the SHU works under the premise that once the rule is made then the fanciers will follow the rule, but that only works if the fanciers know the rule and the committees of the member clubs know the rules and inform their members. It is then incumbent on these committees to ensure the rule is followed or else they leave their club open to complaint.

 

Thus the question: - The SHU provides the rules [object b] so they fulfil the administration, but to govern they would have to follow up and ensure the rules are being followed. I don't think there is an appetite for this. I think they would prefer to leave well alone unless it comes to a complaint (object e) where they would then have to deal with the matter.

 

Is this the correct way to govern?

 

I am not saying this is wrong, but when some members complain or ask what the SHU does for them, perhaps they should ask, "What do we do for the SHU".

 

The normal attendance at SHU meetings are thirteen or fourteen maximum. Distance is not the only problem since Angus and Solway are almost always represented. Further north I am able to understand. With the small attendance there is a lack of ideas and a lack of manpower to fulfil these ideas leading to a case of if it is not broken don't fix it.

 

Members then complain, but don't attend the AGM where there complaints should be heard.

 

Coming to the earlier point, will the SNFC follow the rules and allow ID on young birds? Some think not, but then if a complaint is raised they will fall foul of the rule.

 

How do they circumvent this? My understanding is that they don't want ID in case a bird is reported and clocked when collected. This is cheating so I can understand their concern. If they blot out all wing stamps as they have done in the past and remove all personal telephone numbers as they would now have to do, they still have to comply with the rule, so they will have to wing stamp with SNFC and Mary's phone number. I am sure Mary will take the details and contact the fancier after the race is over.

Edited December 20, 2018 by Kyleakin Lofts

[Kyleakin Lofts]

At my federations AGM where about 70 members attended no one could be persuaded to represent us in the SHU council.Make what you will ofthat!!

 

I am well aware of this and I admire your dedication having travelled for years to represent your Federation and commend you for having stood up for them and for your unstinting work within the SHU.

 

I am just a "young buck" not in years, but certainly in service. I have however chaired a National Governing Body and in that position I travelled the country to check and ensure compliance. It seems pigeons are very different, so I am still "finding my feet" within the organisation, but like you have stated regarding the current situation in your Federation, it seems few wish to assist. Many wish to criticise.

[cemetary]

I was just musing, thinking in print. Walter answered my musing, but this in turn causes another question.

 

I made reference to the Life Ring thread because within that thread wing stamps were raised. I updated the poster on the current situation since it was clarified at the SHU AGM in December.

 

Reference was then made to the SNFC which apparently does not allow wing stamps and will therefore not allow wing stamps nor ID rings. This took up a few posts and not wishing to hijack a thread I referred to the original post of Life Rings.

 

It appears that some think the SNFC is a governing body and that the current SHU rules do not include it. I always thought that the SNFC was a SHU member club and therefore the SHU rules do include it.

 

Now rules is rules, but they are only as good as the people who follow them and the governing body that enforces them. Latitude may be allowed as long as the meaning of the rule is being followed, but the acid test is when a complaint is brought forward to the governing body. It seems that the SHU works under the premise that once the rule is made then the fanciers will follow the rule, but that only works if the fanciers know the rule and the committees of the member clubs know the rules and inform their members. It is then incumbent on these committees to ensure the rule is followed or else they leave their club open to complaint.

 

Thus the question: - The SHU provides the rules [object b] so they fulfil the administration, but to govern they would have to follow up and ensure the rules are being followed. I don't think there is an appetite for this. I think they would prefer to leave well alone unless it comes to a complaint (object e) where they would then have to deal with the matter.

 

Is this the correct way to govern?

 

I am not saying this is wrong, but when some members complain or ask what the SHU does for them, perhaps they should ask, "What do we do for the SHU".

 

The normal attendance at SHU meetings are thirteen or fourteen maximum. Distance is not the only problem since Angus and Solway are almost always represented. Further north I am able to understand. With the small attendance there is a lack of ideas and a lack of manpower to fulfil these ideas leading to a case of if it is not broken don't fix it.

 

Members then complain, but don't attend the AGM where there complaints should be heard.

 

Coming to the earlier point, will the SNFC follow the rules and allow ID on young birds? Some think not, but then if a complaint is raised they will fall foul of the rule.

 

How do they circumvent this? My understanding is that they don't want ID in case a bird is reported and clocked when collected. This is cheating so I can understand their concern. If they blot out all wing stamps as they have done in the past and remove all personal telephone numbers as they would now have to do, they still have to comply with the rule, so they will have to wing stamp with SNFC and Mary's phone number. I am sure Mary will take the details and contact the fancier after the race is over.

[geordie1234]

.

[cemetary]

You have taken some time to write a load of stuff, dosent make any sense to me, but that's my opinion.

 

As an SHU member, I pay what's to be paid as the same as other SHU members as required to be done.

 

If you don't attend any meeting, you have got to go with the what's been passed etc, SIMPLES.

 

Your thread is about the SHU, not the SNFC, maybe you want to either write about one or the other on another thread so members can follow this.

 

You mentioned regarding the thread about life rings, well I only asked what other members thought, but you've brought this up.

 

Don't jump from one thread to another mentioning various things.

 

Am lost with some of the wording, but again, I was thick at the school at times.

[Kyleakin Lofts]

You have taken some time to write a load of stuff, dosent make any sense to me, but that's my opinion.

 

As an SHU member, I pay what's to be paid as the same as other SHU members as required to be done.

 

If you don't attend any meeting, you have got to go with the what's been passed etc, SIMPLES.

 

Your thread is about the SHU, not the SNFC, maybe you want to either write about one or the other on another thread so members can follow this.

 

You mentioned regarding the thread about life rings, well I only asked what other members thought, but you've brought this up.

 

Don't jump from one thread to another mentioning various things.

 

Am lost with some of the wording, but again, I was thick at the school at times.

 

I am not an SNFC member, so cannot really comment on their governance, however, several fanciers have raised the matter of SNFC on the Life Ring thread. I did not wish to hijack that thread, thus the SHU post.

 

Having started the post, I knew I would be invited to expand, thus have brought in that discussion.

 

As can be seen on both the Life Ring thread and now on this one, an outdated rule of the SNFC is being spouted. Some fanciers think that because this rule is in the rule book that it must be followed, but at some time a fancier will challenge it at the SHU and the SNFC will lose because their rule is in direct conflict with the SHU. I have merely stated the way the SNFC can get around this, but still meet the intention of the SHU rule.

 

However some may wish to wait until the rule is tested.

[JonesyBhoy]

I am not an SNFC member, so cannot really comment on their governance, however, several fanciers have raised the matter of SNFC on the Life Ring thread. I did not wish to hijack that thread, thus the SHU post.

 

Having started the post, I knew I would be invited to expand, thus have brought in that discussion.

 

As can be seen on both the Life Ring thread and now on this one, an outdated rule of the SNFC is being spouted. Some fanciers think that because this rule is in the rule book that it must be followed, but at some time a fancier will challenge it at the SHU and the SNFC will lose because their rule is in direct conflict with the SHU. I have merely stated the way the SNFC can get around this, but still meet the intention of the SHU rule.

 

However some may wish to wait until the rule is tested.

 

If you have prepared a pigeon to go to a National race and it was refused entry.. what would you gain from going to the SHU and complaining.. it wouldn’t make that pigeon now accepted in the race..

 

The rule is stated in the SNFC rule book this year so is certainly not outdated.

[JonesyBhoy]

And I think it’s nonsense that the SHU or RPRA for that matter should dictate that any member must stamp or have a phone ring on their pigeons

[Kyleakin Lofts]

[Novice]

When the rules made by the "Governing Body", irrespective of how well intentioned they are,compromise the security of the race then its time for a rethink.

[clockman]

I am not an SNFC member, so cannot really comment on their governance, however, several fanciers have raised the matter of SNFC on the Life Ring thread. I did not wish to hijack that thread, thus the SHU post.

 

Having started the post, I knew I would be invited to expand, thus have brought in that discussion.

 

As can be seen on both the Life Ring thread and now on this one, an outdated rule of the SNFC is being spouted. Some fanciers think that because this rule is in the rule book that it must be followed, but at some time a fancier will challenge it at the SHU and the SNFC will lose because their rule is in direct conflict with the SHU. I have merely stated the way the SNFC can get around this, but still meet the intention of the SHU rule.

 

However some may wish to wait until the rule is tested.

 

Mind your own business then.

[Rebus]

Wing stamp them with the SHU phone number.

[JonesyBhoy]

When the rules made by the "Governing Body", irrespective of how well intentioned they are,compromise the security of the race then its time for a rethink.

 

Agree

[Kyleakin Lofts]

Wing stamp them with the SHU phone number.

 

The SHU is not a club, so it has to be personal details, which compromise the race, or SNFC details which don't compromise the race.

 

When the rules made by the "Governing Body", irrespective of how well intentioned they are,compromise the security of the race then its time for a rethink.

 

SNFC wing stamps would not compromise the race and are within the rule.

 

Mind your own business then.

 

It could be my business in the future.