16.06.2014 Views

2006-07 board of rckl diraja named - Rotary Club of Kuala Lumpur ...

2006-07 board of rckl diraja named - Rotary Club of Kuala Lumpur ...

2006-07 board of rckl diraja named - Rotary Club of Kuala Lumpur ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Wednesday, 4th January <strong>2006</strong><br />

Issue 23 - 2005/06 Page 4<br />

THE 50% LUNCH PRE-COLLECTION RULE<br />

Voted at the <strong>Club</strong> AGM on 28th December 2005<br />

To start <strong>of</strong>f with, Hon. Sec. Freddy announced that the <strong>Club</strong><br />

was fortunate to have sufficient members in attendance at the<br />

AGM for quorum to be reached.<br />

Then we continued with a most exciting and rather<br />

controversial topic – the “lunch pre-collection rule <strong>of</strong> 50%”. In<br />

spirit, it appeared that all members present were prepared to<br />

support the rule. However, Rtn Louis raised some pertinent<br />

concerns regarding the mechanisms involved in deciding on<br />

the quantum, collecting and accounting for the pre-payment.<br />

are many complexities implied by the proposed rule which are<br />

unanswered if the Board does not verbalize its mechanics.<br />

PP Kanesalingam also stood up to agree that it seemed<br />

difficult to vote when clarity was not given on the matter. At<br />

that juncture, Hon.Sec. Freddy noted that the floor had 3<br />

lawyers speaking who seemed to be at odds with each other.<br />

This caused a great deal <strong>of</strong> mirth and somewhat distracted<br />

from the issue at hand.<br />

Rtn Louis asking for details <strong>of</strong> implementing the<br />

proposed rule<br />

Rtn Louis animatedly raising his concerns on the 50%<br />

quantum<br />

Rtn Louis was uncomfortable to vote on something as<br />

important as this proposed rule without having the current<br />

Board communicate the mechanics <strong>of</strong> implementation.<br />

Hon.Sec. Freddy replied that the Board had decided that it<br />

was best to ask for members’ approval before planning the<br />

structures for implementation. The logic was that if members<br />

did not approve, then why waste time to plan for its<br />

implementation. However Rtn Louis made the point that there<br />

Rtn Louis also challenged the logic <strong>of</strong> why 50% would be precollected.<br />

Given RI attendance guidelines, a member could<br />

attend only 30% <strong>of</strong> his own <strong>Club</strong>’s meetings and make up the<br />

balance to meet minimum attendance needs. Hence, why not<br />

30% pre-collected instead <strong>of</strong> the proposed 50%? This query<br />

did not receive a clear response.<br />

Finally the floor voted and the majority carried the vote to<br />

agree on allowing this new rule to pass. The Board then<br />

PP Kanes making his point about the need for clarity<br />

Rtn C ham Mew ran thru’ the accounts for 2004-05<br />

Bulletin <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Rotary</strong> C lub <strong>of</strong> <strong>Kuala</strong> <strong>Lumpur</strong> DiRaja

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!