Hi everyone, especially those members who attended the Annual Conference at Aston University, Birmingham, yesterday.
It was so good to catch up with you and network, exchange ideas, evidence, and practice—exactly what the SI Network is there for. The presentations were varied and interesting to listen to, with different take-home messages. Many congratulations, too, to all those of you who were awarded your Advanced SI Practitioner certificates and for those who were unable to make it. Two new awards were presented, which were excellent and worthy of applause.
The Chair, Rosalind Rogers, SLT, also thanked the three Directors who stood down/resigned from the Board on 31/3/17: Amanda Adamson, Kathryn Smith, and Gemma Cartwright.
On a personal note, I would like to record my thanks to each of them for their unique contributions, their passion, professionalism and drive in helping take forward occupational therapy and Ayres® Sensory Integration (the theory, assessment and therapy) at every level both nationally and internationally for SI Network. Those of us who have been privileged to be on the Board (and as a fellow lecturer) understand the commitment it has taken and the “Lifelong” changes that happen along that journey!
The SI Network board graciously invited me and others to an ‘Open Forum’ after the close of the Conference for a 50-minute facilitated discussion where our concerns could be put to the Board. It was not publicised, so many members might not have been aware of this open forum. However, amongst those who attended (approximately 12 members) were five past directors, including a fellow/past chair of the Network. Minutes were taken and were to be published.
The discussion focused primarily on the legal basis on which the Board is currently operating.
It was made clear that the Board has sought legal advice. However, the 2009 Articles of Association were indeed adopted by Special Resolution at a bona fide AGM and passed by a vote. Despite this, the new Board informed us that the Articles had not been filed at Companies House. While we understood this administration error, we had also been advised that a properly constituted AGM and members’ vote mean these 2009 Articles are legal, regardless of filing at Companies House.
The now-current Directors informed us that, without proper sign-off, the 2004 original Constitution and Articles are the articles and constitution that the ‘new’ Board is now using .
We dispute that this should be so. The 2009 Articles of Association encompassed the SI Network’s ‘spirit’ and moral focus.
A more detailed set of Articles was drawn up in 2009 to set out the network’s operating details – the assets, management, election/terms of office, and the number and accountability of the Directors to the members. This was to avoid any ambiguity in the future.
It also clearly set out that the Network was a membership organisation run by and for the members.
What the Board had sought to avoid at the time appears to now be a reality.
Further questions were asked of the Board to establish to whom the Directors and the Chair were accountable, as the ‘new’ Board is now apparently ‘the members’. This question was not clearly answered. It rests on a change in law and what now defines a member.
Several of those present gave examples of the lack of communication and explanation to the members about what appeared to be significant changes, particularly to the reputation of the SI Network and particularly to the fundamental changes to the Directors and membership of the Board.
Of particular concern was the lack of communication about the resignations of three Board members in March, which left no occupational therapists on the Board. This can be confirmed at the Companies House. The records make interesting reading.
The meeting finished at 17h00 due to the room not being available after that time and travel commitments.
The opportunity to express concerns to the Board was much appreciated, in the absence of any forum, such as an AGM, since 2014.
Clearly, the ‘new’ Board needs to urgently consider how it addresses accountability and two-way communication with the Network’s members.
Update: A follow-up personal letter from the Chair acknowledged that a number of issues had been raised and, with time constraints, there had not been time to fully explore and examine these issues; to be assured that the Board will continue the conversation with us.
I thank the Chair for the initial discussion of the open forum.
Ros Urwin
See the thread that led to this post after the Annual Conference, with no AGM as anticipated.