Ructions: Difference between revisions

From YSTV History Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
(30 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
In the summer of 2004, YSTV went through much upheaval when the newly elected Station Director was subjected to a vote of no-confidence just weeks after his election. The series of events became known by some as 'Ructions' after an initial email regarding the dispute which triggered the problems was sent with the title "Prepare for ructions". The story goes something like this...
In the summer of 2004, YSTV went through much upheaval when the newly elected [[Station Director]] was subjected to a vote of no-confidence just weeks after his election. The series of events became known by some as 'Ructions' after an initial email regarding the dispute which triggered the problems was sent with the title "Prepare for ructions". The story goes something like this...


'''IMPORTANT:''' The initial writing of this article was done by Rowan de Pomerai. I probably know more about the string of events than just about anyone else, however it will rightly be pointed out that since this all lead to me becoming station director, my impartiality could be doubted. I have done my very best to ensure that this article is a statement of facts and nothing more, however I do invite others who were there at the time to correct or contradict me if they feel appropriate.
Note: The initial text of this article was written by two active members of YSTV during this period, however the subject matter is highly charged.  Becuase of this we have waited until all the main players in this saga have left the University of York. The article has been reviewed by as many as possible of the people who were members at the time, and every effort has been made to ensure that this article is a statement of facts and nothing more, however others who were there at the time are invited to correct or contradict where they feel appropriate. The intention is certainly not to discredit or criticise anyone as a person, merely to describe the events of the time as they affected YSTV, including some of the underlying problems.


'''ARTICLE LOCK:''' It's going to take me a little while to write this I think, so until that time, I have locked the article. Admins may edit it, but I didn't want to open it up to general editing until I've finished. To avoid too many people reading this until it's finished, I have not linked to this page from anywhere else, and I urge you not to either.
==Background==
Leading up to the YSTV committee elections in 2004 three friends, all fairly new to YSTV, were considering standing for important roles. They were [[Jen Ayerst]], [[James Flinders]] and [[Rowan de Pomerai]]. Rowan briefly thought about standing for Production Director, Studio Manager or Station Director. As Jen stood for [[Production Director]], Rowan went for [[Studio Manager]] and James for [[Station Director]]. Jen's production interests made this the logical position for her, and while Rowan considered the leader role, he decided against on the basis that (a) James wanted to run and wasn't so keen on Studio Manager, and (b) he could run for it in his third year if he desired.  All three were successfully elected to these posts. James unfortunately was in Canada for {{unsure|some time}} following the AGM, and so Rowan, as new Studio Manager, was left as acting [[Station Director]]. Not a lot of note happened during this time in YSTV itself. Generally YSTV was doing well, having increased its membership considerably thanks to the efforts of the [[Gang of Four]], having had its most successful [[NaSTA]] ever and having made the place look better due to the recent [[YSTV Clean-Up]], which had also brought people together.


==The 2004 Committee Elections==
==Problems In YSTV==
Leading up to the YSTV committee elections in 2004, there were 3 friends, all fairly new to YSTV, who were considering team leader or station director roles. They were [[Jen Ayerst]], [[James Flinders]] and [[Rowan de Pomerai]]. Rowan briefly thought about standing for Production Director, Studio Manager or Station Director. As Jen stood for [[Production Director]], Rowan went for [[Studio Manager]] and James for [[Station Director]]. Jen's production interests made this the logical position for her, and while Rowan considered SD, he decided against on the basis that (a) James wanted to run and wasn't so keen on Studio Manager, and (b) he could run for SD in his 3rd year if he desired.
===URY In Bars===
The first problems came due to the debate over the playout of [[URY]] in campus bars, long an ambition of the radio station. Whilst out of the country, James had been in contact with Tim Bateson and [[Matt Fullerton]] of URY (who was not an active member of YSTV at this point) about proposed plans for URY to be broadcast in campus bars using [[Rediffusion]]. James had responded on behalf of YSTV stating that "it would be unfair for URY to be allowed to broadcast in campus bars", not unreasonably suggesting that it would cut off YSTV's main distribution medium.[[Richard Ash]] contacted a number of active members forwarding on the previous correspondence. Richard also sent a message to URY pointing out that the initial response had been without internal consultation, something that any major decision such as this would require.  Whilst few would doubt James had good intentions, his methods were seen as somewhat undemocratic and not in the spirit a democratic society.  Richard later apologised if he had overstepped the mark in regards to his authority as a new [[Technical Director]], although few thought this was the case.


All 3 were successfully elected to these posts. James unfortunately was in Canada for {{unsure|some time}} following the AGM, and so Rowan, as new Studio Manager, was left as acting SD. Not a lot of note happened during this time in YSTV itself, it was just business as usual. Generally YSTV was doing well, having increased its membership considerably thanks to the efforts of the [[Gang of Four]], and the recent [[YSTV Clean-Up]] which had made the place look better and brought the team together.
===YSTV Corporate Style===
Another move was to suggest the introduction of a 'YSTV Corporate Style' on emails, initially sent to team leaders. This was poorly received by most due to appearing slightly patronising, even if presumably well-intentioned, and also due to it being apparently in response to YSTV's "poor image" on campus - something that was certainly debatable if not also bad for station morale.  In addition there were concerns that voluntary members of a society were being told to do something without consultation or debate and also worries about multiple references to YSTV's structure as if it were a hirearchy of command to be followed to the letter (such as "listing officers in order of seniority").  Finally there were instructions on basic punctuation and grammar, something that few if any members had problems with.  Once again it wasn't doubted that the intention was simply to improve the image of the station (which had certainly had its problems in preceding years), just that the methods used were misguided and at odds with the casual and team-oriented style of YSTV organisation and management.


==URY In Bars==
===The Constitution===
The first problems came due to the debate over the playout of [[URY]] in campus bars. Whilst out of the country, James had been in contact with Tim Bateson and [[Matt Fullerton]] of URY (Matt was not an active member of YSTV at this point) about proposed plans for URY to be broadcast in campus bars using [[Rediffusion]]. James had responded on behalf of YSTV stating that ''it would be unfair for URY to be allowed to broadcast in campus bars'', suggesting that it would cut off YSTV's main distribution medium.
James responded to the criticism about his handling of the URY in bars issue with another email to the "people" list, using the constitution to defend his actions.  It was his opinion that the document did not include any guidance as to how the society should make decisions, or forbid him from doing so alone should he see fit. At the time (and probably the case through most of YSTV's history) the constitution existed as a set of guidelines and some protection against negligence on the part of the officership. To use it as a means-to-an-end or as justification for one's actions was not a common action, and the use of the constitution in this manner was not well received.  When this was brought up he mentioned an example of a decision he made to relinquish the shared office in Vanbrugh college, which he took after consulation with senior officers but made the eventual decision himself. He said he saw decisions like this as part of his remit and that he would continue to make decisions like this in the society's interest.  This was seen as not only confrontational but unncessarily defensive given that such "disputes" in recent history of YSTV would normally be settled over a pint in Goodricke bar, not by using the constitution as a defence.


[[Richard Ash]] sent an email to Rowan, Jen, [[Jonathan Bufton|Jonathan]] and [[Dave Baker|Dave]] stating that ''James Flinders didn't seem to think the rest of you needed to see the attached email'' [the one sent by James to Matt and Tim] ''I think you do.'' He stated at this time that ''As yet I have not contacted James, partly because I would like the rest of you to have a chance to comment first, also because I would like us to do it face to face not in email.''
It was at this point real concerns began to emerge about the choice the society had made for [[Station Director]], given that the issues highlighted were unlikely to go away.  [[Richard Ash]] and [[Rowan de Pomerai]] both voiced their concerns directly via email, with Rowan in particular concerned about how defensive he was becoming and the lack of consultation from him over major issues.  In response James repeatedly stated it was his job to uphold the constitution - something that had rarely troubled previous [[Station Directors]] who had been more concerned with making telly and attracting new members.  Richard subsequently proposed an ammendment to the constitution to clarify matters as a result of the earlier uncertainty over the [[Station Director]] role. His intention appeared to be simply to avoid problems in the future however it may have been seen as a direct response to the arguments taking place at the time. This was proposed and failed because of questions over the wording of the amendment. It was agreed to correct these and return to the matter as most agreed some clarification was needed in the constitution on this matter, but other events overtook it, and the matter never needed to be re-visited.  


Richard also sent a message to Matt and Tim pointing out that James ''doesn't seem to have consulted anyone else in YSTV'', and asked that they wait until the issue had been taken to a station meeting and stating that he could not ''preempt that decision in either direction''.  
===Leadership Style===
In reponse to some of the criticism he was receiving James stated that he felt that his position involved more than just "sending e-mails and chairing meetings", however some other officers felt that essentially the [[Station Director]] job is indeed centred mainly around communication and people management rather than making the big decisions. This sentiment became a running joke in later years, with 2006/07 [[Station Director]] [[Matthew Tole]] saying "I have none of the power, but all of the responsbility".  This disagreement was perhaps the crux of the issues which eventually led to the no confidence vote, which is a shame as such disagreements appear to have been few and far between in recent YSTV history, with most debates focussing on how to improve the reach, image or output of the station rather than how it is run.


Richard's feeling was that a decision of this magnitude should not be taken by any single YSTV member (Station Director or not), and that giving a specific response without consulting a station meeting was wrong of James.
There were also concerns over how the station was being "run" after James' election.  As alluded to above far more emphasis was being placed on the mechanics and politics of the constituion than previously, the station meetings became argumentative and tense (and lengthy, as described below) and the general feeling was that the place was becoming much more politicised than previously.  This may not have been necessarily due to the approach James took, but certainly seemed more than a coincidence.  It was also suspected that he viewed the role more as if chairing one of the campus political groups than that of a student media society, and this was seen in his great prescence and emphasis on meetings and email but not that often in the station itself getting involved in productions.


The general feeling expressed by those who Richard emailed was that URY in bars would have to be carefully negotiated, but was not ''necessarily'' a point-blank no. However the key issue with regards to this article was James acting on behalf of a supposedly democratic society without proper consultation. Few would doubt he had good intentions, but many were angered about his methods.
===Meeting Length===
One suggestion James made was that meetings should be shorter. He suggested that some people had been put off by the sometimes lengthy technical discussions that took place and never returned.  This was certainly a valid point although perhaps no different to what always happens when new members decide how heavily they wish to be involved. Station meetings in May/June 2004 certainly were sometimes quite long, however this was immediately after the election of a large number of new officers who all had their ideas on how to run the society, and after a couple of terms of fairly short meetings where the [[Gang of Four]] were largely running the station alone. There was also no evidence that the length of meetings was doing anything to put off the core of active members who has been with the station all year.  However, suggestions such as stand-up meetings or a rigid 30 minute time limit were rejected by many as too strong a reaction, and contributed (perhaps unfairly) to the image that the new [[Station Director]] was not taking enough issues to the membership and instead taking key decisions himself.    


==YSTV Corporate Style==
==Vote of No-Confidence==
James' next controversial move was to suggest the introduction of a 'YSTV Corporate Style'. He initially sent an email about this to some officers ({{unsure|the team leaders I think}}) saying:
(Repeatedly referred to as a vote of confidence by James, presumably due to his politics background where this term is used. However in YSTV's constitution, and in the meeting where the vote was held, it was referred to as a vote of No Confidence - i.e. a 'for' vote was to remove James and an 'against' vote was for him to retain his position.)
 
''Here's an e-mail explaining the new corporate style. What do you think. It would include two basic templates (one for officers, one for non-officers). Is it okay? I tried to make it funny. Not sure if it worked.''
 
The email was widely regarded by those to whom it was sent as misguided and patronising. For example, it started by saying ''YSTV has a poor image amongst other societies and students'' - this was not regarded as a great way to inspire confidence and morale. The message continued:
 
''In order to combat this, and to show these people what a fun & funky society we really are, I've decided to introduce a corporate e-mail style. From now on, use the style for all e-mails you send that are YSTV-related.''
 
Apart from the suggestion that a 'corporate style' doesn't sit well with a 'fun and funky' image, many felt that '''telling''' the members to use a certain style was overly heavy handed, and not a good way to address the voluntary members of the society. Multiple references to YSTV's organisational structure as a hirearchy of command were seen as against the team ethos of the society, for example the email said that when addressing multiple officers, the sender should list them in order of seniority, with the ''most important person first''. Further, the email gave instructions which were seen by some as patronising, verging on rude. Examples include:
 
* Explaining how to separate paragraphs with blank lines
* Stating there should ''NEVER be double line spaces''
* Telling people how to write their signature: ''...we want your title, not your life story...''
* Explaining use of capitalisation
 
It is important to note here that most would agree that James' intention was indeed to improve YSTV's image, however (within the knowledge of this article's author) every person who read this message thought it at worst insulting and at best misguided. It seemed to many to be obviously misaligned with the casual and team-oriented style of YSTV organisation and management.


==The Constitution==
===Build-Up===
James responded to the criticism about his handling of the URY in bars issue with a people email, which explained:
By around week 6 of the summer term some members were talking about leaving the society to avoid the politics and in-fighting or because they didn't like the way the station was being run. The following day, James sent an email to officers asking if he had their support. By his own figures, 7 out of 11 people said he had their full confidence, with the rest preferring not to respond.  However the definition of "full confidence" was debated as there had not yet been a single incident that warranted such a statement, with the style of leadership more a general concern.  It also put officers in an uncessarily uncomfortable position by having to proclaim their support or feel they were "dissenting" and thereby causing problems themselves.  In short it was not something that was really in the spirit of YSTV. 


''Some people have made it clear that they do not think it was my place to make such a decision. I had checked in the constitution, which makes no reference whatsoever to how we should make decisions. Neither does our policy document or the YUSU constitution.''
===Decision To Call A Vote===
The decision had not come easily, and was always a last resort.  Much private debate (mainly via group MSN conversation) centred around this decision and the likely implications.  Calling a vote which would subsequently fail would be disastrous. It would split the station in two and undermine James just as the new academic year with the associated recruitment drive was looming. Finding a consensus was important, yet asking people how they would vote in a hypothetical poll was difficult.  There was much debate about who would propose a vote given the likely atmosphere should the vote fail, so [[Ed Jellard]] volunteered to do this at least in part because he would not be in York the following year and in any case was gradually moving towards spending more time in Ents over YSTV, but still felt strongly about what was happening to the society in which he had spent most of the previous two years.  It was seconded by Richard Ash.  There was also the question of who would take over as Station Director should the vote succeed, and over the need to ideally get this procedure started before the summer break due to the need to present a united image to the freshers arriving in October. Once those proposing the vote had satisfied themselves that it was the right thing to do, they submitted the request.


He argued that a decision needed to be made quickly and that it was his place to make it. Some agreed, some did not. However the use of the constitution to justify his actions was not perhaps the greatest move with regard to keeping other members and officers on side. At the time (as I suspect is the case through most of YSTV's history) the constitution was essentially there as a set of guidelines and some protection against negligence on the part of the officership. To use it as a weapon or as justification for one's actions was not a common action, and was seen by some as overly defensive. James clearly felt attacked, as is evidenced by the following paragraph:
===The Vote Itself===
An EGM was called to discuss and take the vote of no-confidence on Thursday 10th June 2004 following transmission of [[YSTV Week]]. It took place in G/020 and was attended by virtually everyone who was involved in the station in some form, as well as some others (see later).


''When first in the job, I was asked if we wanted to keep our office in Vanbrugh. I didn't go through a station meeting. I asked senior officers what they thought, but took the decision myself - that we didn't need it. If other issues which are part of my remit come up, I will do the same. I have to do what's right for YSTV, which I have done and will always do. I haven't broken our policy, our constitution or YUSU's constitution. I haven't done anything wrong.''
An impartial chair was needed, and as such [[Chris Thornton]] was chosen as he would soon be leaving the society, and had been away from York and out of contact with the station on an industrial placement since January and so had no knowledge of the disputes at all.  It was widely regarded that he did a good job, keeping things in order and keeping things moving whilst ensuring everyone got their fair say. The only criticism which has been levelled at him was in regard to a discourse he gave at the end of the meeting, where he expressed his justifiable disappointment at the state in which he had found YSTV on his return, however many felt that he implied everyone had all immediately turned to in-fighting without proper justification. It was pointed out that had he seen YSTV earlier in the term, he would have seen a happy and united society working together on a variety of projects. However, overall, he was a wise choice of chair.


Once again, certain wording irritated some members (referring to a YSTV officership as a 'job'), while getting on the defensive (''I haven't done anything wrong'') simply brought the question of whether he had or had not acted wrongly to a new audience of people who were not previously aware of the issue but who read people emails.  
Without minutes of the meeting to publish it would be unfair to attempt to recall the specifics of what was discussed many years later, however considering its subject matter the meeting was satisfactory if lengthy. Generally the discussion was formal, avoided personal insult, and provided a reasoned discussion on recent behaviour and James' actions since becoming Station Director.  The discussion did get heated when reference was made to the legitimacy of some of the attendees. [[Jen Ayerst]] pointed out that two members (in fact housemates of James) had turned up to the meeting having not been seen around YSTV recently, and it was implied that they had turned up simply to help swing the vote his way, and that they had not seen his actions from a YSTV perspective.  One of these people suggested that people did not realise the amount of effort that James put in to YSTV, and that he worked a lot at home on YSTV-related matters. The response to this was that James' effort was not in question, rather his leadership style and decisions.


Richard replied to this email and said he felt James was seeming ''seeming arrogant and control freakish, not to mention completely unrepntant[sic]''. Rowan meanwhile contacted James, saying:
The vote was not unanimous, but there was a clear majority and the motion was passed. James stood down as Station Director, and [[Chris Thornton]] suggested that previous [[Station Director]] [[Dave Baker]] should stand in temporarily. Dave was also largely uninvolved in the debate partly because James was due to live with him the following academic year, so he was seen as a fair choice of interim leader. It was widely regarded that most attendees of the meeting behaved well, including those who did not agree with each other, and that all sides were well-argued.


''As your 'deputy' at YSTV, but far more importantly as your friend, I feel it's worth saying something to you about your email of this morning... I understand that you wanted to clarify and that you wanted to defend your position, but you came across to me as very defensive (almost aggressive-defensive) which seems odd considering no-one was really attacking you (to my knowledge at least), merely expressing concern at your actions... The more worrying bit of this paragraph was "On normal issues, it would be the station meeting that would make a decision. But this is not an everyday issue. A decision had to made." The fact is that this is a long term issue... As you yourself said, this is a matter affecting the whole society, so surely you would think it sensible to consult as many people in the society as possible?!''
==The Aftermath==
Dave kept the post over the summer holidays. On the first day of the following term an election was held, with Rowan having been nominated. He stated in the meeting that if he were to take on the post he would need the support of the officership. He aimed to ensure that YSTV pulled together as a team again, and was duly elected. He served as Station Director for the rest of 2004/5, which was widely seen to be a very successful for year for the station, culminating in the winning of Highly Commended [[Best Broadcaster]] at [[NaSTA 2005]] in Loughborough.


In responses to Rowan, James repeatedly stated that he saw his job first and foremost as upholding the constitution, and appeared to put this as almost a single priority, irrespective of other duties such as working with and speaking to other members. His perspective on the seriousness of certain issues was certainly out of line with Rowan's own; ''But if a decision needs to be taken, and the constitution says I have to take it, then I will. I'm the one who would go to prison if things go wrong.'' Rowan did not see how URY's audio being in campus bars would cause anyone to go to prison.
James left the society, although to his credit he attended the [[YUMAs]] the following week. He went on to become chair of Halifax College, and returned to YSTV the following year in this position as a panellist on [[Bona Dicta]]. Finally he stood unsuccessfully for YUSU President in March 2007 before graduating from York that summer.
 
==Leadership Style==
James was clearly (and understandably) upset by some of the criticism which was coming at him at this point. He felt that his job was to do more than ''just send e-mails and chair meetings'', however some other officers felt that essentially the Director job is indeed centred mainly around communication and people management rather than making the big decisions. This sentiment actually became a bit of a running joke in the coming years, with 2006/07 Station Director [[Matthew Tole]] being quoted as saying ''I have none of the power, but all of the responsbility''.
 
It could perhaps be said that this is the crux of all the issues which led to the eventual removal of James as Station Director - disagreements over the leadership style within YSTV. This is a shame, and seems to be {{unsure|unique within YSTV's history}} for such strong disagreements to have occurred.
 
==Criticism of Richard Ash==
As one of the more vocal critics of James' leadership, it is unsurprising that James fought back a bit at Richard. He felt that Richard had himself overstepped the mark in his dealings with URY over the audio in bars discussion. As with the criticism of James, it is all subjective and could be argued either way. However in this case, there was much less feeling in YSTV that Richard had done anything wrong. This may be to do with people's opinions about what Richard said, however it was probably further helped by the fact that Richard, unlike James, was prepared to apologise for potentially annoying people, and ensure that he worked with others to resolve the issue. He sent an email to people@ystv saying:
 
''As I seem to have offended some people, in particular James Flinders, in what I've done with URY before becoming technical director, I just want to
apologise if I seemed to have oversteped the mark. I only intended the verbal discussions I had to reflect my views as a member on the technical merits of the ideas, and not to be those of the society or even a reflection of the wider implications of the scheme. If they have been perceived as such, I'm sorry and as I am now an officer of the society will treat this sort of issue with much more caution, as I could be seen to represent a level of authority I do not have.''
 
This may have been seen as over-the-top at other times in YSTV, however in the climate at that time, it was an effort to keep everyone happy, and seemed to help.
 
==Constitutional Ammendment==
Following James' comments about the constitution being unclear on the decision making process (and the disagreement by some with his interpretatation was that he should make major decisions), Richard proposed an ammendment to the constitution to clarify matters. His intention appeared to be simply to avoid problems in the future (''my aim is to clarify the future not to try and rake over the past''), however it may have been seen by James and others as a direct response to the arguments taking place at the time. This was proposed and {{unsure|passed}}, as most agreed some clarification was needed in the constitution on this matter.
 
==Vote of No-Confidence==
A vote of no-confidence in James as Station Director was mentioned first by James himself at a station meeting in {{unsure|week 6}}. At this point, the suggestion was not a serious one in most minds, however, as time went on and people became more upset with James' running of YSTV, the question of a vote became more and more serious.


By that meeting, some members (such as [[Ed Jellard]]) were talking about leaving the society to avoid the politics and fighting and/or because they didn't like the way the station was being run. The following day, James sent an email to the team leaders asking if he had their support. By his own figures, 7 out of 11 people said he had their full confidence, 2 people said that they'd prefer not to talk in an e-mail, 1 person said they were undecided and 1 officer didn't get the e-mail in time. However the definition of "full confidence" was debated, as Rowan, for one, had said that James had his support on a personal level, but that there were some issues with his leadership syle, and that he would always act in the best interests of YSTV. However, it is clear that there was not a resounding cry of no-confidence at this point.
The period between the AGM and EGM of No-Confidence was just four week and three days, however it's fair to say it felt like longer for those involved. It is hoped that future members, who have either heard the tale from those who were there or by reading this account, will learn from the mistakes made on all sides during that period, and avoid the politicised in-fighting that made Summer 2004 such an uncomfortable period.

Latest revision as of 18:12, 24 November 2007

In the summer of 2004, YSTV went through much upheaval when the newly elected Station Director was subjected to a vote of no-confidence just weeks after his election. The series of events became known by some as 'Ructions' after an initial email regarding the dispute which triggered the problems was sent with the title "Prepare for ructions". The story goes something like this...

Note: The initial text of this article was written by two active members of YSTV during this period, however the subject matter is highly charged. Becuase of this we have waited until all the main players in this saga have left the University of York. The article has been reviewed by as many as possible of the people who were members at the time, and every effort has been made to ensure that this article is a statement of facts and nothing more, however others who were there at the time are invited to correct or contradict where they feel appropriate. The intention is certainly not to discredit or criticise anyone as a person, merely to describe the events of the time as they affected YSTV, including some of the underlying problems.

Background

Leading up to the YSTV committee elections in 2004 three friends, all fairly new to YSTV, were considering standing for important roles. They were Jen Ayerst, James Flinders and Rowan de Pomerai. Rowan briefly thought about standing for Production Director, Studio Manager or Station Director. As Jen stood for Production Director, Rowan went for Studio Manager and James for Station Director. Jen's production interests made this the logical position for her, and while Rowan considered the leader role, he decided against on the basis that (a) James wanted to run and wasn't so keen on Studio Manager, and (b) he could run for it in his third year if he desired. All three were successfully elected to these posts. James unfortunately was in Canada for some timeUnverified or incomplete information following the AGM, and so Rowan, as new Studio Manager, was left as acting Station Director. Not a lot of note happened during this time in YSTV itself. Generally YSTV was doing well, having increased its membership considerably thanks to the efforts of the Gang of Four, having had its most successful NaSTA ever and having made the place look better due to the recent YSTV Clean-Up, which had also brought people together.

Problems In YSTV

URY In Bars

The first problems came due to the debate over the playout of URY in campus bars, long an ambition of the radio station. Whilst out of the country, James had been in contact with Tim Bateson and Matt Fullerton of URY (who was not an active member of YSTV at this point) about proposed plans for URY to be broadcast in campus bars using Rediffusion. James had responded on behalf of YSTV stating that "it would be unfair for URY to be allowed to broadcast in campus bars", not unreasonably suggesting that it would cut off YSTV's main distribution medium.Richard Ash contacted a number of active members forwarding on the previous correspondence. Richard also sent a message to URY pointing out that the initial response had been without internal consultation, something that any major decision such as this would require. Whilst few would doubt James had good intentions, his methods were seen as somewhat undemocratic and not in the spirit a democratic society. Richard later apologised if he had overstepped the mark in regards to his authority as a new Technical Director, although few thought this was the case.

YSTV Corporate Style

Another move was to suggest the introduction of a 'YSTV Corporate Style' on emails, initially sent to team leaders. This was poorly received by most due to appearing slightly patronising, even if presumably well-intentioned, and also due to it being apparently in response to YSTV's "poor image" on campus - something that was certainly debatable if not also bad for station morale. In addition there were concerns that voluntary members of a society were being told to do something without consultation or debate and also worries about multiple references to YSTV's structure as if it were a hirearchy of command to be followed to the letter (such as "listing officers in order of seniority"). Finally there were instructions on basic punctuation and grammar, something that few if any members had problems with. Once again it wasn't doubted that the intention was simply to improve the image of the station (which had certainly had its problems in preceding years), just that the methods used were misguided and at odds with the casual and team-oriented style of YSTV organisation and management.

The Constitution

James responded to the criticism about his handling of the URY in bars issue with another email to the "people" list, using the constitution to defend his actions. It was his opinion that the document did not include any guidance as to how the society should make decisions, or forbid him from doing so alone should he see fit. At the time (and probably the case through most of YSTV's history) the constitution existed as a set of guidelines and some protection against negligence on the part of the officership. To use it as a means-to-an-end or as justification for one's actions was not a common action, and the use of the constitution in this manner was not well received. When this was brought up he mentioned an example of a decision he made to relinquish the shared office in Vanbrugh college, which he took after consulation with senior officers but made the eventual decision himself. He said he saw decisions like this as part of his remit and that he would continue to make decisions like this in the society's interest. This was seen as not only confrontational but unncessarily defensive given that such "disputes" in recent history of YSTV would normally be settled over a pint in Goodricke bar, not by using the constitution as a defence.

It was at this point real concerns began to emerge about the choice the society had made for Station Director, given that the issues highlighted were unlikely to go away. Richard Ash and Rowan de Pomerai both voiced their concerns directly via email, with Rowan in particular concerned about how defensive he was becoming and the lack of consultation from him over major issues. In response James repeatedly stated it was his job to uphold the constitution - something that had rarely troubled previous Station Directors who had been more concerned with making telly and attracting new members. Richard subsequently proposed an ammendment to the constitution to clarify matters as a result of the earlier uncertainty over the Station Director role. His intention appeared to be simply to avoid problems in the future however it may have been seen as a direct response to the arguments taking place at the time. This was proposed and failed because of questions over the wording of the amendment. It was agreed to correct these and return to the matter as most agreed some clarification was needed in the constitution on this matter, but other events overtook it, and the matter never needed to be re-visited.

Leadership Style

In reponse to some of the criticism he was receiving James stated that he felt that his position involved more than just "sending e-mails and chairing meetings", however some other officers felt that essentially the Station Director job is indeed centred mainly around communication and people management rather than making the big decisions. This sentiment became a running joke in later years, with 2006/07 Station Director Matthew Tole saying "I have none of the power, but all of the responsbility". This disagreement was perhaps the crux of the issues which eventually led to the no confidence vote, which is a shame as such disagreements appear to have been few and far between in recent YSTV history, with most debates focussing on how to improve the reach, image or output of the station rather than how it is run.

There were also concerns over how the station was being "run" after James' election. As alluded to above far more emphasis was being placed on the mechanics and politics of the constituion than previously, the station meetings became argumentative and tense (and lengthy, as described below) and the general feeling was that the place was becoming much more politicised than previously. This may not have been necessarily due to the approach James took, but certainly seemed more than a coincidence. It was also suspected that he viewed the role more as if chairing one of the campus political groups than that of a student media society, and this was seen in his great prescence and emphasis on meetings and email but not that often in the station itself getting involved in productions.

Meeting Length

One suggestion James made was that meetings should be shorter. He suggested that some people had been put off by the sometimes lengthy technical discussions that took place and never returned. This was certainly a valid point although perhaps no different to what always happens when new members decide how heavily they wish to be involved. Station meetings in May/June 2004 certainly were sometimes quite long, however this was immediately after the election of a large number of new officers who all had their ideas on how to run the society, and after a couple of terms of fairly short meetings where the Gang of Four were largely running the station alone. There was also no evidence that the length of meetings was doing anything to put off the core of active members who has been with the station all year. However, suggestions such as stand-up meetings or a rigid 30 minute time limit were rejected by many as too strong a reaction, and contributed (perhaps unfairly) to the image that the new Station Director was not taking enough issues to the membership and instead taking key decisions himself.

Vote of No-Confidence

(Repeatedly referred to as a vote of confidence by James, presumably due to his politics background where this term is used. However in YSTV's constitution, and in the meeting where the vote was held, it was referred to as a vote of No Confidence - i.e. a 'for' vote was to remove James and an 'against' vote was for him to retain his position.)

Build-Up

By around week 6 of the summer term some members were talking about leaving the society to avoid the politics and in-fighting or because they didn't like the way the station was being run. The following day, James sent an email to officers asking if he had their support. By his own figures, 7 out of 11 people said he had their full confidence, with the rest preferring not to respond. However the definition of "full confidence" was debated as there had not yet been a single incident that warranted such a statement, with the style of leadership more a general concern. It also put officers in an uncessarily uncomfortable position by having to proclaim their support or feel they were "dissenting" and thereby causing problems themselves. In short it was not something that was really in the spirit of YSTV.

Decision To Call A Vote

The decision had not come easily, and was always a last resort. Much private debate (mainly via group MSN conversation) centred around this decision and the likely implications. Calling a vote which would subsequently fail would be disastrous. It would split the station in two and undermine James just as the new academic year with the associated recruitment drive was looming. Finding a consensus was important, yet asking people how they would vote in a hypothetical poll was difficult. There was much debate about who would propose a vote given the likely atmosphere should the vote fail, so Ed Jellard volunteered to do this at least in part because he would not be in York the following year and in any case was gradually moving towards spending more time in Ents over YSTV, but still felt strongly about what was happening to the society in which he had spent most of the previous two years. It was seconded by Richard Ash. There was also the question of who would take over as Station Director should the vote succeed, and over the need to ideally get this procedure started before the summer break due to the need to present a united image to the freshers arriving in October. Once those proposing the vote had satisfied themselves that it was the right thing to do, they submitted the request.

The Vote Itself

An EGM was called to discuss and take the vote of no-confidence on Thursday 10th June 2004 following transmission of YSTV Week. It took place in G/020 and was attended by virtually everyone who was involved in the station in some form, as well as some others (see later).

An impartial chair was needed, and as such Chris Thornton was chosen as he would soon be leaving the society, and had been away from York and out of contact with the station on an industrial placement since January and so had no knowledge of the disputes at all. It was widely regarded that he did a good job, keeping things in order and keeping things moving whilst ensuring everyone got their fair say. The only criticism which has been levelled at him was in regard to a discourse he gave at the end of the meeting, where he expressed his justifiable disappointment at the state in which he had found YSTV on his return, however many felt that he implied everyone had all immediately turned to in-fighting without proper justification. It was pointed out that had he seen YSTV earlier in the term, he would have seen a happy and united society working together on a variety of projects. However, overall, he was a wise choice of chair.

Without minutes of the meeting to publish it would be unfair to attempt to recall the specifics of what was discussed many years later, however considering its subject matter the meeting was satisfactory if lengthy. Generally the discussion was formal, avoided personal insult, and provided a reasoned discussion on recent behaviour and James' actions since becoming Station Director. The discussion did get heated when reference was made to the legitimacy of some of the attendees. Jen Ayerst pointed out that two members (in fact housemates of James) had turned up to the meeting having not been seen around YSTV recently, and it was implied that they had turned up simply to help swing the vote his way, and that they had not seen his actions from a YSTV perspective. One of these people suggested that people did not realise the amount of effort that James put in to YSTV, and that he worked a lot at home on YSTV-related matters. The response to this was that James' effort was not in question, rather his leadership style and decisions.

The vote was not unanimous, but there was a clear majority and the motion was passed. James stood down as Station Director, and Chris Thornton suggested that previous Station Director Dave Baker should stand in temporarily. Dave was also largely uninvolved in the debate partly because James was due to live with him the following academic year, so he was seen as a fair choice of interim leader. It was widely regarded that most attendees of the meeting behaved well, including those who did not agree with each other, and that all sides were well-argued.

The Aftermath

Dave kept the post over the summer holidays. On the first day of the following term an election was held, with Rowan having been nominated. He stated in the meeting that if he were to take on the post he would need the support of the officership. He aimed to ensure that YSTV pulled together as a team again, and was duly elected. He served as Station Director for the rest of 2004/5, which was widely seen to be a very successful for year for the station, culminating in the winning of Highly Commended Best Broadcaster at NaSTA 2005 in Loughborough.

James left the society, although to his credit he attended the YUMAs the following week. He went on to become chair of Halifax College, and returned to YSTV the following year in this position as a panellist on Bona Dicta. Finally he stood unsuccessfully for YUSU President in March 2007 before graduating from York that summer.

The period between the AGM and EGM of No-Confidence was just four week and three days, however it's fair to say it felt like longer for those involved. It is hoped that future members, who have either heard the tale from those who were there or by reading this account, will learn from the mistakes made on all sides during that period, and avoid the politicised in-fighting that made Summer 2004 such an uncomfortable period.