Democracy and WIRES Structure
- Details
- Published on Monday, 17 October 2011 00:00
The most important reform needed in WIRES is to amend the Constitution. Stronger democratic principles need to be embraced so that every member is treated the same by management, with respect, irrespective of their political views. All WIRES members should be entitled to an equal say in how their organisation runs, and must be given equal opportunity, in principle and in practice, to both stand for election, and be elected to, the Board of WIRES. This is not the case at the moment.
One of the reasons that a new constitution was written in 2007 was to rectify a system of regional representation which was largely skewed towards country branches. This was changed in the new constitution so that every branch had equal representation on the State Council. Each branch had one representative. The Council would then elect a Board of Management to run the organisation from those members elected to Council. This meant that every member of WIRES had close to equal say in the running of the organisation through their Branch representative. It also meant that every nominee for the Board had a near to equal chance of election to the Board as did every other nominee, coming as they did from a similar electoral base.
The draft constitution was recommended to members by a letter from the Secretary which said the “ownership” of WIRES was with “its membership”, and that the previous system was “clearly undemocratic”. Members were told that the new Constitution would provide for a Board elected from, and accountable to, the WIRES Council. This was claimed to be a more efficient way to provide management “which is both democratically elected and accountable”. Members were also told that “No person is eligible to vote on the State Council, other than those elected to the positions by their branches. The State Council will be a body representative of WIRES Inc and WIRES branches best interests”.
WIRES is now undemocratic, as each representative does not have a nearly equal electoral base, and therefore each member does not have equal representation on the governing body
It is very clear from this letter that the members involved in the preparation of the 2007 Constitution did not intend representatives of permanent committees and sub committees to have the right to stand for the Board. However, in 2010 the Council agreed, on a “show of hands” vote, to let representatives of standards teams nominate for election to the Board. This was a decision clearly in conflict with the statements made in the letter to WIRES members in 2007 when asking them to vote for the new constitution. It is suggested that WIRES should have sought advice from a constitutional lawyer in relation to this contradiction, making sure it was legal, before representatives of standards teams were allowed to stand for election. WIRES is now undemocratic, as each representative does not have a nearly equal electoral base, and therefore each member does not have equal representation on the governing body. The Council is now made up of two types of representative: Those representing Branches, and those representing Standards/Management Teams.
Branch representatives have a large constituency of 100 or more members. These Branch representatives are nominated and voted for by the members of their own Branch exclusively. Standards/Management team representatives on the other hand have a very different representational base. They have a constituency of approximately nine members who vote them on to Council. The Standard/Management Teams were set up to advise and deliver training, and formulate policy, on each species group. They were to report and assist Council on animal matters, that is, as advisers and not part of the governance structure. There is now the situation where some Branches have up to five of their members on Council, one officially representing the Branch, with the others technically representing a number of Standards Teams. This also means that representatives of Standards Teams are themselves represented on Council by their Branch Representative.
A representative of a Standard/Management Team only represents at most a group of 5-9 members from which that representative might seek direction on how to vote on issues at Board level. These Team representatives are already represented by their own Branch representative (as each is also a member of a Branch). The result of this situation is that an individual member of a Standard/Management Team has an enormous say and representation on the Board and deprives WIRES members of anything close to equal representation.
It is even possible under the present system for the Board to consist mainly of members from the one Branch... effectively a gerrymander and this disproportionate representation will only increase as more Management Teams are created by the Board and Council
Allowing a representative of a Standard/Management Team to vote and hold a Board position can result in a branch representative, representing some 100 members, being out voted by a group of members representing less than half their own constituency. It is even possible under the present system for the Board to consist mainly of members from the one Branch. This change in practice, on a show of hands, is effectively a gerrymander and this disproportionate representation will only increase as more Management Teams are created by the Board and Council.
The situation is made worse by the Board being involved in the selection of management teams, even going so far as to vet candidates and issue recommendations to the Council before voting is held. This is a recent improvement, as previously no one knew who was on standards teams, and the Board were unable to supply this information. These representatives are not elected by the general membership, but by a select group of at times unknown people, and there is a potential for “Council stacking” and favouritism being shown towards friends and allies of Board members.
Another urgent need is to impose a restriction in the Constitution on the time a member can remain on the Board. This solves the problem of the same group of people remaining in power indefinitely. The need for this reform is particularly evident with the current disproportional voting system that leaves itself open to abuse. The previous Constitution at least had a 3 year maximum term for the Chair which allowed for turnover of members, with new blood and new ideas, but this provision was not kept in the 2007 Constitution.
The approach of the Board currently is a personal one... not a professional and impartial one. The underlying idea is that members should blindly trust the Board, that they should not question them as to do so would offend personal feelings
The Board has responded with indignation when these matters have been brought to their attention previously. They are offended, feeling that any inquiry into their conduct is in some way a personal slight or implied accusation of impropriety. This is a very frustrating response as it appeals to the emotional and casts doubt on the reasonable professional motives of the inquirer. However, this reaction in its way reveals the heart of the problem: The approach of the Board currently is a personal one, subjective, just like the reaction; not a professional and impartial one. The underlying idea is that members should blindly trust the Board, that they should not question them as to do so would offend personal feelings. This goes against the whole meaning of an association where all members are equally entitled to not only the benefits of association but also the responsibility. All members have a right to know how their group is being run and who is running it. It needs to be realised that in professional relationships trust is important but transparency is of greater importance. Trust is good when things are going well, but accountability is insurance against them going wrong.
In conclusion, the present practice of allowing representatives of management teams to have a vote on the State Council and to be able to stand for election to the Board is undemocratic and alleged to be unconstitutional.
Write the minister
Got Something to Say?
Don't Like Us?
FREE SPEECH says it all
WIRES won't let their members speak about what really goes on. FREE SPEECH is where you can say what you want anonymously without fear of reprisal.
Comments
To date Wires do not remove dangerous lizards, native pigeons, wood ducklings, pacific duck families, or pelicans . it seems that our local police are doing the job for wires as wires has the money but no Indians to make use of it for good rather than evil.
To deceive the public into donating into wires and not revealing that 2% is spent on care and 12% is unaccounted for is in my eyes FRAUD. Which is why most people leave wires. If you stay you are tainted. and if you raise the subject you are sent to Coventry. WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THIS COUNTRY? This country was built on altruistic deeds Now it is being destroyed by greed .
In another instance a young single mother of 3 small children had a venomous snake encounter in her house. WIRES also told her that they are unable to help.
The WIres database shows 6 separate reports for one and the same animal requiring urgent assistance but it was not attended to. The locals who were calling in for the animal were not impressed, another organization eventually attended.
In another occasion a wombat joey stayed 2 days with the MOP after Wires received the call. The MOP upset and unable to care for the joey rang another Wildlife group. To top the situation a Flying fox stayed 24 hours in a box waiting for a Wires rescuer to attend? The mother Flying Fox had a little baby under its broken wing. The Wires rescuer finally arrived and was very apologetic and would have arrived earlier had she been informed at the time of the call.
In another case a MOP saw the car ahead hit a kangaroo resulting in a serious compound fracture of the leg and reported it to Wires. A follow up showed that Wires recorded and transferred the rescue to the local police for their attention. But Police had no records for such any such incoming call!
Whilst they are a lot of good operators at SRO the Wires centralized call centre cannot cope with the incoming calls. Wires has obviously lost the plot and their main goal.
What happened to Joanne and the other drivers? They worked for a mere pepper corn wage and ended up Gillarded in the back. The Van driver was just the one to attend to the Monitor Problem.
Wires are Doing a Ruddy good job of mismanagement They are doing for animals what the RUDDYARDS did for Australia.
Send in your ideas and complaints to the Dept of Fair Trading on this link and you may at last be heard:
http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/ftw/About_us/Have_your_say/Improving_governance_in_incorporated_associations.page?DCSext.ref=HomePageClick:Haveyoursay
That would be a good start. But whose left to stand? We'll see how many changes there are to Council this year.
Clearly the image WIRES portray to the public eye and that experienced by it’s members are two different things.
How can we care for the animals to the best of our ability...
with fantastic support... sharing our skills and knowledge...
Lets get it together people...
Yes there are big big problems that really need to be dealt with, they can no longer be ignored
but then what...
Those applying for any position within WIRES BMC, Standard teams, should have the qualifications to do the job. There should be a mentoring program for all Management positions within WIRES on how to their job and how to deal with people. Keep the carers happy and the animals will be looked after.
The branch structure needs to be looked at, branch responsibilities, almalgamations, or redrawing of territories specially for branches which are not working well or continue to have personnel problems. Working together as one organisation not 28 plus a call centre.
The Call centre and GM positions and authorites need to be looked at. The money being spent on this part of the servce is excessive and not what donors think their money spent on. More money to branches for the care for animals.
WIRES could be a great organisation.
The members have been battered and the animals neglected due to the unworkable licencing system in NSW which supports this immoral anti social behaviour.
People should complain to their local members and ask for change. Write to Barry O’Farrell - he has the power to change it. Ask for charities to be accountable and transparent. Ask for much more scrutiny of charities.
The big word needs to be TRANSPARENCY in all sectors, and respect and support for carers.
I am publicly ashamed to say I am member of Wires because of what happens in our branch. The volunteers doing the work and paying $ big time for the privilege are being bullied, emotionally blackmailed and slandered if they open their mouths because they love our wildlife Further more if you do say anything they run out “ Bring Wires in to disrepute “ ending your membership and any right to handle animals in NSW
? Is it not time for NPWLS and NSW Government to listen for many years it was easier for them to let the Volunteers do the work Soon there will be no volunteers left who want to be associated with WIRES and then who suffer even further OUR WILDLIFE
Instead of WIRES feathering the nests of their office croneys they need to start picking up the slack of getting more trained carers. Why is it always left up the the few in each branch to do all the caring then its expected that we then run training courses and THEN have to run our own fundraising to try and keep each branch afloat.
The carers that do everything are exhausted but WIRES still bleeds us dry, with out the ones that are still dedicated to the “cause” they would be screwed, its about time they damn well realise that with out us they have NOTHING, with out us all those paid staff would be out of jobs, may be its time for a state wide strike of all carers.
I would be really upset if I thought I left my money to something and had my trusted family and friends to make sure it happened the way I wanted and strangers argued about it and tried to force my wishes to be disrespected. And I would tell people not to will their money because what they said to their executors would be disrespected.
More and more it seems people get angry then look for excuses to stay angry instead of looking at what is realy happeningin front of them. From what turtlebub first said the executors didn’t use the money at all. The committee used it for what itneeded to care for animals being bats. What IS the problem? I don’t get it.
money was left to the branch
2 exes are the executors of the will
ex husband said it was for gneral purposes
The ex wife said the person liked bats and would of wanted it spent on that
committee voted to spend some of the money on care of bats which is both bats and general purposes
somene else didn’t like the way the vote went
Is this about the money or getting back at the ex wife. Is the exes new girlfriend on committee or in the branch as well.
dID the ex husband want the money spent on different things or someone else and resented the vote.
What is the problem? Why is this supposed to be a big deal? Or is it personal and nothing to do with wires ?
All wills must go through Probate and it is via this process that any beneficiary via the Executor will have money given to them.
If the Benefactor stated that the branch itself was to get the money then the branch by law must get it but it would be up to HO to administer the funds to the branch as requested in the will, eg cages and stock or vet allowances.
Democracy would be if all members had the opportunity to run for the Board. Currently this is not what happens the Board is voted from the Council by the Council. Sadly the Standard teams are now just a political vehicle in getting people back on the Council and onto the Board. It’s a shame as Standard teams were set up to provide the best standard of care to animals. The Board also vets all candiates running for the Standard Teams, so they choose. The Board will have you believe it’s a council vote, but with 9 members of the Board also voting at a meeting with 23 - 25 people you do the math.
It is my observation that most groups have “political” issues, which covers a multitude of sins. These range from overzealous committees to unethical carers and everything in between. And each person is certain that they are in the right.
The group I volunteer with is not immune, but on the whole, is pretty good. However, my partner and I made a decision several years ago. We simply don’t participate in the politics, we don’t take sides, and we put all our energies into looking after wildlife. We have been subject to bullying in the past, so I won’t pretend it is not an issue, or that it is not hurtful.
But as others have stated above, it does end up being about ego mostly, so if we focus more on OUR efforts to heal wildlife, and less on ego, It is a start. I read a book many years ago, and it said something to the effect that you can’t change others, so focus on changing the things you can. Generally that means starting with yourself and asking - “what could I have done differently?”.
Like “seeking change” sometimes the answer lies is finding another path to the same end. It worked for me.
Like everything its about finding a balance. Last July DECC/OEH changed the wildlife rehab licence rules limiting who can apply for a willidfe rehabilitation licence. It is now impossible to either start a new group where an existing one already is, or apply for a general licence. This would be a good arrangement for government as there will be less organisations to monitor, but not so good for carers who are having problems within their group if there is no alternative group. To make it worst if your group has an internal dispute the government department responsible will NOT get involved. Currently WIRES does not have a complete grievance policy relating to management and the one we have is not followed either are other polices or constitution. Which makes the governing body of your group not accountable to its members or its donors. Whatever is decided here there either needs to be stronger checks and balances with existing groups or they allow general licence and new wildlife groups to continue. I would suggest everybody read the new OEH Code of practice for injured sick and orphaned protected fauna and their groups constitution. Boring I know but essential.
I resigned from WIRES as a volunteer. I asked a question about a wonderful workshop I attended... that is when my trouble began.
I was hurt and very disappointed at the way my question was answered and handled. Meetings resulted to try and solve this issue but sadly it grew much larger. I tried to turn it into a positive and asked for help from Head Office as the people I had the complaint against were the members of the Branch Management Committee and they were the ones to whom I had to report the complaint. It was made very clear to me that the committee did not want other members to be made aware, as there was no mention of any correspondence noted IN or OUT at any meeting until I brought it to their attention, and they would not allow the matter to be discussed at a General Meeting. Everything was put under the banner of confidential. I was only given the option to meet them at a committee meeting, which I attended. I went higher thinking I may find support. I thought I had found support and was very pleased that WIRES Inc agreed there were problems and a “Special Meeting” was organised, to hear both sides. But, unknown to me, I was already being labelled a “problem that needed to be dealt with”. They are not my words they are the words of the powers that be... At the end of this heated meeting to my relief a member put up her hand to be voted in at the next meeting as Grievance Officer... I cried from relief that I and the other members of this Organisation would have someone we could go.
To my dismay and surprise, 5 days before this member could be voted in, I received a letter threatening my termination with 10 unfounded complaints listed against my name. I joined WIRES as a volunteer to give my time and experience to rescue my beloved wildlife and for the rehabilitation of our wildlife and also to enjoy friendships and share knowledge. As mama possum mentions, yet this is how I was treated.
I have to say that this caused me huge grief, and I still find it very hard to talk about it today. WIRES is no longer an organisation I wish to be associated with. I cannot see a solution to this problem, but I give my full support to those trying so hard to achieve change, as my problem appears to be just the tip of a very large iceberg. Normally I would continue on in the fight, but this brought so much hurt and anger into my life, I did not wish to continue and gave them what they wanted, I resigned. Sadly I am still not able to care for our Australian Native Wildlife, but I cannot and will not be bullied into submission. That is not why I volunteered. I have put this behind me now, which has taken quite a bit of strength, as I was so hurt by their treatment of me! I have finally turned it into a positive for myself as I have grown stronger, in myself. I have learnt , that I can not change how others choose to treat people or behave and I can’t control those who choose to stay quite and stand behind those being the bullies doing nothing about the bully behaviour, therefore being bullies themselves. Maybe they too are scared to speak up in fear of being bullied and targeted also. FEar that they too will be targeted and have to stop doing what they love. We are all replaceable , they just run another RIC course to get new members. Something needs to change. So glad the discussion has finally started, each comment weather we totally agree with it or not is a step closer to a solution.
Do not seek to change others ....Become the change you seek. Oprah
I am not sure yet of how I will continue to do what I love, but I will find the right path for me, and it will be for the welfare of our Australian wildlife. Thank you for your time.
I see your dilemma with leaving WIRES and finding an alternative way for continuing to care for our native wildlife. An excellent tool to help in making a choice of which organisation you might like to belong to (or change to) can be found on;
http://nwc.org.au/resources/injured-wildlife-find-your-nearest-rescue-group
It is an interactive map using OEH data and when you enter your address, it drops a pin-drop on the map which will bring up the various organisations that cover that location. When WIRES left the NSW Wildlife Council, they requested all reference to WIRES be removed from the website, so they are no longer mentioned as an option.
The once great organisation we knew as WIRES has reached its peak and is now descending into becoming irrelevant as a wildlife carer organisation and the turning point came when the Fascist Board of bully-boys took control. Just look around, WIRES used to either sponsor or present at the various major state and national conferences and send a delegate or two. Because they know it all and increasingly regard themselves as the font of all knowledge and custodian of all learning, such information is only passed on to the chosen few and if you are an outsider, you’ll pay top dollar to attend and have to whistle for a manual if you are lucky. What does the “E” in WIRES stand for?
Nothing will get better while Wires is controlled by this group of people. I just hope it will not be too late.
What is interesting is that when members leave Wires their names are not taken of the total Wires membership list. This is so the authorities still think they are the biggest group in town.
We need people to stand up, we need new blood on the Council, Board and Wildlife Council, we need every branch to have a say and turn up to meetings and new ideas with an action goals to make it happen. WIRES is owned by the membership.
I once had a car that was DESIGNED to do what cars are supposed to do.
Unfortunately, it didn’t. I had to change it for a better one.
In reply to Blinky Bill and Guest, I am one of the two carers who rescued that possum and took it to the vet.
The possum in question here, that the co-ordinator picked up from the vet, wasn’t even given the chance to prove if it could recover, even though the vet had stated "with good care this possum should do well". The co-ordinator took it from the vet’s premises, and it is alleged took it home and shot it. It is also alleged he did not consult the vet, he did not ask that the possum be humanely euthanased by injection. His reason, he said, was because it was geriatric. It was definitely and obviously a juvenile.
Given your statement that you condone unauthorised euthanasia of WIRES animals, can it be assumed that this practice is widespread among WIRES carers and co-ordinators?
The person was not universally loved. He has some very admirable qualities, but like all of us, some that were not so admirable. There is also the potential that events may have taken place which many people may not be aware. So it is quite understandable that friends and admirers will feel he has been hounded, while detractors will feel that he should have been forcibly removed years ago.
In the end, it tends to be the anonymous moderators who have the final say, and who are capable of putting a “Spin” on the discussions. And if that happens, you become just as non-representative as you accuse the board of being.
In short, this forum may be cathartic, or it may be the unfortunate dogs-breakfast that the old “Wildlife Whistleblower” site was many years ago, which would be unfortunate. I wish you luck, as your ideas are fine. But these forums often tend to bring out the worst, rather than achieve the best.
This site is not about one particular person - I know to whom you refer. It is for everyone and about everyone - and about no one.
It is about what is really happening and about ideas suppressed. In answer to another post today (this is the SPIN and its announced): too many times in WIRES “politics” is equated with back-stabbing, undermining, character assassination and other unsavoury activity. This leads people to say “lets forget about politics”. Politics is there like it or not, and it need not be a bad thing - its how people convince each other and come to agreement - how they regulate power (that is the definition). That can be done without abuse of power or imbalance of power. To say “lets get rid of politics” in an organisation depending as it does on its people is like saying “lets make all the wheels on the car spin in different directions” - you go nowhere fast (except maybe to hospital). Another analogy: “lets forget about the nurses’ problems and get on with running a hospital”.
Will there be editing of comments on this site? Yes - that is outlined in the commenting rules. We will remove specific words/phrases that might be illegal. We will always tell you we are doing it. We will take down an edited comment if the author is unhappy and we welcome revised submissions. We will not reject something because of the views it expresses - we welcome all points of view. We are not here to stop the debate - we are here to start it.
That is the only way to get truly honest progress.
I’m afraid your apologies do not wash ... you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
I suggest that WIRES is under the control of members suffering from the “volunteer association syndrome”, people who use the organisation to boost their own egos and whose interest in helping wildlife is secondary.
Let’s hope that the majority of WIRES carers, who have a genuine interest in their animals, will regain control of WIRES.
is fed.
The hard working general member’s efforts to raise funds is wasted on these members.
One would hope that, in Wires, most are concerned about the welfare of animals entrusted to their care- more than their personal EGOS!
30 out of 100 members quit WIRES Central West at the beginning of the year. They were the active members, sick of the bullying [EDIT] and poisonous dysfunction of the group. Yet even now, WIRES CW denigrates members of other animal rescue groups to vets and NPWS [EDIT]
Care and oversight of native wildlife is non-existent, and members are being advised to carry out the most inappropriate methods of ’care’ and rescue. WIRES’ reputation is mud with the community, with the vets, with the police.
Joey Eastern Greys are being euthanised automatically - as has been happening for years - because the committee is dead against any active pursuit of release sites.
Trying to reform and help the branch, stepping the fine line to not ’offend’ the bullies, is impossible and only ends up in despair.
Good on you Spartacus.
When will WIRES management get it through its skull that its not what they do that’s the problem, it is the way that you do it. I know of numerous cases where WIRES has looked into an allegation behind closed doors, apparently to protect "confidentiality" and "privacy". They then spit out a finding without showing anyone else, especially not the poor sod copping the complaint, just what evidence they have or what specifically is in the the complaint. No accountability. Have they read Kafka? Then when someone points out the inherent injustice they hide behind the first available device that will make them look reasonable, avoiding the real issue - justice. Its not that they investigate: Its that they do it in such a way that no one else can check their work. A law unto themselves.
What I can say Guest from information I received, which is not confidential, is that the then Chair received notice of the alleged act of cruelty within 2 months of the date and should have then immediately referred it to the RSPCA to be considered as the RSPCA has the jurisdiction and a fair and proper legal process to investigate. This would have been the correct procedure and have given the person concerned, as well as other members accused of wrongdoing, (who were never told what that were alleged to have done!) a fair and independent and open hearing. Instead, these volunteer members were all dealt with behind closed doors without any opportunity to hear what was alleged and to find out whether anyone in fact had said anything against them. They were not allowed to question what was said nor given the opportunity to defend themselves. To this day a report which deals with named members has never been released to those members to read to find out what was said against them.
There was obviously no wrongdoing found as no notification was given to the appropriate legal body eg DECCW or RSPCA as required under Clause 2.16 (f) of the WIRES Constitution..
Thiird part of response to Guest.
Is this the way to treat volunteer members with respect and give them support?Good on you Reform WIRES for providing members with the opportunity to discuss these issues on an independent forum. I hope that members wanting reform will come up with suggestions as to how this can be achieved
At the end of the day it WAS a witch hunt, they wanted the accused gone rain hail or shine and used publically donated money to do so, money that could have gone towards training or helping branches purchase equipment.
And as to animal cruelty you prove there has not been any one in the organization that at some time has not performed the same proceedure, granted the attempt may have been timed badly but the proceedure is performed all the time and thats a fact and not always done by a vet.