mdingwall
Administrator
It contains many issues which should be of concern to Club 1872 members.
Dear Mark,
I hope this finds you well and in good spirits despite this extraordinary week when the Club is under assault from all quarters over matters for which it has no control. I understand you or one or two people whom you know may be considering standing for election to the club 1872 Board of Directors. Since my resignation late last year I have kept my own counsel as to why I resigned. I did discuss the matter with someone who could be regarded as a senior and trusted Rangers supporter who was a driving force for fan ownership of shares but other than that have not spoken about why I resigned. I believe people standing for election to any organisation should know how the organisation operates and the standards of conduct of the organisation. I apologise for the length of this document but this is because of the background and detail necessary. Serving on the Board of Club 1872 was for me a great honour and privilege. Increasingly I came to have concerns about its operation and that it was not a unifying voice on behalf of the fans. The background relating to my resignation may explain why there is little information made available to members and little actual accountability to the membership.
I initially raised concerns about governance of Club 1872 in April and May, 2020. It appeared Euan and Laura as agreed representatives to meet from time to time with senior management of Rangers FC were taking decisions in the name of Club 1872 without consulting with the Board. It certainly seemed to me we may have reverted to the unfortunate situation which forced the resignation of Iain Mulholland.
In July last year I was alarmed to learn of an email purporting to be in the name of Club 1872 sent by Laura and Euan to Castore. Neither Alan Fraser or myself knew of the existence of this email. We only learned of this approach to Castore on receipt of an email to the Club 1872 Board on 6th July from Stewart Robertson alleging Breach of Confidence. The Breach of Confidence was by virtue of Club 1872 as a principal shareholder having used privileged knowledge and contact. Castore naturally passed the email to the Club which was also unaware this unauthorised email had been sent. Besides not having been approved by the Board of Directors the email to Castore referred to contracts and supply arrangements and had not been legally checked potentially exposing expose Club 1872 to the risk of litigation. It is one thing to perhaps request a jersey for auction but seeking contractual or commercial information which may be used to disrupt a contract or discredit individuals is not the place of Club 1872. Least of all, when this is a personal approach which had not been discussed by the Board of Directors nor had the Club management been given the courtesy of knowing about this approach. In fact the Club had furnished Club 1872 with as much information as it could and that email could be interpreted as a crude attempt to check up on the Club.
The response to Stewarts raising this matter with the Club 1872 was outrage from Laura supported immediately by Joanne and Euan who had co-authored the letter. Within a couple of hours they offered unconditional support for Laura who then produced an angry justification which she intended to send to Stewart. This meant that instead of an open discussion by the Board of Club 1872 about the matter there was a predetermined position adopted in advance of any Board meeting. Nonetheless Alan Fraser and myself both suggested we seek a meeting with Stewart and the whole Board of Directors of Club 1872 in order to clarify and resolve the matter.
A meeting of the Board of Club 1872 was convened on 9th July. This meeting was to last almost 2½ hours. The meeting was punctuated throughout by Laura saying on around 9 or 10 occasions, “This is a deal breaker for me.” The Board was left in no doubt that Laura would resign if it did not support her position.
Towards the end of that meeting Joanne raised the fact that I had spoken with Stewart. Stewart was puzzled by the email to Castore and had in fact called me. I was willing to speak with him because I needed to understand from his perspective given my fellow Directors had not apprised me even of the existence of the email and I was quite alarmed by the implications of both the content and the act of sending an unauthorised email of this type. I wanted to explore how it might be possible to resolve the matter amicably. Joanne accused me of being hypocritical. I explained that in speaking with Stewart I was attempting to fulfil my duties as a Director and that she was entitled to disagree. Laura then followed up and directly called me a hypocrite. For someone in my profession this is a very serious allegation. Laura then went on to refer to an email which I’d sent several weeks before in which I raised the question as to Euan being the correct person to assume the communications role when in Alan we had an acknowledged communications professional who had also been Chair of Walter’s Testimonial Year. She then upped the temperature and said loudly that if she was Euan, she would have been extremely angry with me for raising the matter. As someone whose professional life often involves reading people and meetings I could easily see there had been some preparation for this moment. Euan then intervened to say he was ‘fuming’ and in doing so began to take on an intemperate shouting. He was wearing a headset with microphone and began to wave his arms around and got up angrily walking around the room. He shouted I needed ‘to be careful’ and that I had to ‘watch my tone.’ It was manufactured outrage as some two months had elapsed since that email had been sent and we’d all had several discussions in that intervening period.
The full enormity of what had occurred was not actually realised by me until after the meeting. Had Euan conducted himself in this manner in the course of a meeting in his professional employment he would have been referred to the HR department and quite probably instructed to attend an anger management course.
A few days later Alan Fraser resigned as a Club 1872 Director. He pointed out that when we concluded that meeting we had all agreed a different response be sent rather than the aggressive and antagonistic one Laura wanted but now it appeared to revert to a slightly amended version of Laura’s response. Alan is a businessman and company director of some 40+ years experience. He has connections across the top end of the political and business worlds and has worked at the highest levels with charities such as the Variety Club. To lose someone like Alan after some 4 months as a Director of Club 1872 was a heavy loss to the organisation.
With Alan resigning I felt I was compelled to take legal advice in order to afford some protection to my personal and professional reputation and in the event of any litigation arising from that email to Castore. In consulting in this way I did not refer by name or implication to Club 1872 and I believe the person I consulted would not know of my involvement with Club 1872 and not being in the slightest bit interested in football is unlikely to know of Club 1872. I advised the Board of the advice received and Joanne responded by demanding to know who had given the advice. My response in an email below on 17th July stated
“With regard to the detail of my conversations I respectfully point out I am not under trial nor will I be the subject of cross examination. Nor will I be intimidated or coerced into supporting a position which I consider to be fundamentally flawed. In the course of last week's meeting I was subjected to several angry and intemperate outbursts including the accusation of being hypocritical. I did not respond to this unwarranted aggression as I had hoped we could through civilised discussion reach an agreed position. I confirm I did not criticise or undermine any decisions of Club 1872 and made it clear I was not speaking on behalf of the Board of Directors of Club 1872 collectively or on behalf of any individual other than myself. The purpose of any conversation I may have had was, as I said in last week's meeting, to explore what means may be open towards restoring a working relationship of mutual trust and respect between Club 1872 and the club. I consider that to be part of my responsibility as a Director of Club 1872.
Dear Mark,
I hope this finds you well and in good spirits despite this extraordinary week when the Club is under assault from all quarters over matters for which it has no control. I understand you or one or two people whom you know may be considering standing for election to the club 1872 Board of Directors. Since my resignation late last year I have kept my own counsel as to why I resigned. I did discuss the matter with someone who could be regarded as a senior and trusted Rangers supporter who was a driving force for fan ownership of shares but other than that have not spoken about why I resigned. I believe people standing for election to any organisation should know how the organisation operates and the standards of conduct of the organisation. I apologise for the length of this document but this is because of the background and detail necessary. Serving on the Board of Club 1872 was for me a great honour and privilege. Increasingly I came to have concerns about its operation and that it was not a unifying voice on behalf of the fans. The background relating to my resignation may explain why there is little information made available to members and little actual accountability to the membership.
I initially raised concerns about governance of Club 1872 in April and May, 2020. It appeared Euan and Laura as agreed representatives to meet from time to time with senior management of Rangers FC were taking decisions in the name of Club 1872 without consulting with the Board. It certainly seemed to me we may have reverted to the unfortunate situation which forced the resignation of Iain Mulholland.
In July last year I was alarmed to learn of an email purporting to be in the name of Club 1872 sent by Laura and Euan to Castore. Neither Alan Fraser or myself knew of the existence of this email. We only learned of this approach to Castore on receipt of an email to the Club 1872 Board on 6th July from Stewart Robertson alleging Breach of Confidence. The Breach of Confidence was by virtue of Club 1872 as a principal shareholder having used privileged knowledge and contact. Castore naturally passed the email to the Club which was also unaware this unauthorised email had been sent. Besides not having been approved by the Board of Directors the email to Castore referred to contracts and supply arrangements and had not been legally checked potentially exposing expose Club 1872 to the risk of litigation. It is one thing to perhaps request a jersey for auction but seeking contractual or commercial information which may be used to disrupt a contract or discredit individuals is not the place of Club 1872. Least of all, when this is a personal approach which had not been discussed by the Board of Directors nor had the Club management been given the courtesy of knowing about this approach. In fact the Club had furnished Club 1872 with as much information as it could and that email could be interpreted as a crude attempt to check up on the Club.
The response to Stewarts raising this matter with the Club 1872 was outrage from Laura supported immediately by Joanne and Euan who had co-authored the letter. Within a couple of hours they offered unconditional support for Laura who then produced an angry justification which she intended to send to Stewart. This meant that instead of an open discussion by the Board of Club 1872 about the matter there was a predetermined position adopted in advance of any Board meeting. Nonetheless Alan Fraser and myself both suggested we seek a meeting with Stewart and the whole Board of Directors of Club 1872 in order to clarify and resolve the matter.
A meeting of the Board of Club 1872 was convened on 9th July. This meeting was to last almost 2½ hours. The meeting was punctuated throughout by Laura saying on around 9 or 10 occasions, “This is a deal breaker for me.” The Board was left in no doubt that Laura would resign if it did not support her position.
Towards the end of that meeting Joanne raised the fact that I had spoken with Stewart. Stewart was puzzled by the email to Castore and had in fact called me. I was willing to speak with him because I needed to understand from his perspective given my fellow Directors had not apprised me even of the existence of the email and I was quite alarmed by the implications of both the content and the act of sending an unauthorised email of this type. I wanted to explore how it might be possible to resolve the matter amicably. Joanne accused me of being hypocritical. I explained that in speaking with Stewart I was attempting to fulfil my duties as a Director and that she was entitled to disagree. Laura then followed up and directly called me a hypocrite. For someone in my profession this is a very serious allegation. Laura then went on to refer to an email which I’d sent several weeks before in which I raised the question as to Euan being the correct person to assume the communications role when in Alan we had an acknowledged communications professional who had also been Chair of Walter’s Testimonial Year. She then upped the temperature and said loudly that if she was Euan, she would have been extremely angry with me for raising the matter. As someone whose professional life often involves reading people and meetings I could easily see there had been some preparation for this moment. Euan then intervened to say he was ‘fuming’ and in doing so began to take on an intemperate shouting. He was wearing a headset with microphone and began to wave his arms around and got up angrily walking around the room. He shouted I needed ‘to be careful’ and that I had to ‘watch my tone.’ It was manufactured outrage as some two months had elapsed since that email had been sent and we’d all had several discussions in that intervening period.
The full enormity of what had occurred was not actually realised by me until after the meeting. Had Euan conducted himself in this manner in the course of a meeting in his professional employment he would have been referred to the HR department and quite probably instructed to attend an anger management course.
A few days later Alan Fraser resigned as a Club 1872 Director. He pointed out that when we concluded that meeting we had all agreed a different response be sent rather than the aggressive and antagonistic one Laura wanted but now it appeared to revert to a slightly amended version of Laura’s response. Alan is a businessman and company director of some 40+ years experience. He has connections across the top end of the political and business worlds and has worked at the highest levels with charities such as the Variety Club. To lose someone like Alan after some 4 months as a Director of Club 1872 was a heavy loss to the organisation.
With Alan resigning I felt I was compelled to take legal advice in order to afford some protection to my personal and professional reputation and in the event of any litigation arising from that email to Castore. In consulting in this way I did not refer by name or implication to Club 1872 and I believe the person I consulted would not know of my involvement with Club 1872 and not being in the slightest bit interested in football is unlikely to know of Club 1872. I advised the Board of the advice received and Joanne responded by demanding to know who had given the advice. My response in an email below on 17th July stated
“With regard to the detail of my conversations I respectfully point out I am not under trial nor will I be the subject of cross examination. Nor will I be intimidated or coerced into supporting a position which I consider to be fundamentally flawed. In the course of last week's meeting I was subjected to several angry and intemperate outbursts including the accusation of being hypocritical. I did not respond to this unwarranted aggression as I had hoped we could through civilised discussion reach an agreed position. I confirm I did not criticise or undermine any decisions of Club 1872 and made it clear I was not speaking on behalf of the Board of Directors of Club 1872 collectively or on behalf of any individual other than myself. The purpose of any conversation I may have had was, as I said in last week's meeting, to explore what means may be open towards restoring a working relationship of mutual trust and respect between Club 1872 and the club. I consider that to be part of my responsibility as a Director of Club 1872.