Ructions

URGENT NOTE: This page is still being heavily edited by the authors. Everyone else, please leave it alone until this message has been removed.

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 writing of this article was done by Rowan de Pomerai, then it was heavily edited by Jonathan Bufton. We probably know more about the string of events than just about anyone else, however the subject matter is highly charged. 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 I do invite others who were there at the time to correct or contradict us if they feel appropriate. The intention is certainly not to discredit James Flinders or to criticise him as a person, merely to describe the events of the time as the affected YSTV, including some of the underlying problems.

Background

Leading up to the YSTV committee elections in 2004 there were three 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.

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 SD. 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 and having made the place look better due to the recent YSTV Clean-Up, which has 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 sorted out 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 to James 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 later 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.

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, more a general concern of the style of leadership. 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 vote 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.

The obvious replacement was Rowan, as it was known that he had considered standing for Station Director in the first place. He was uneasy about this, both because he had his own reasons for not standing originally, and also because he did not want to be seen to be attempting to pull power from James. He had been involved with the criticism of James, and although perhaps not the most vocal, was certainly linked to it. He was asked by a number of people whether he would stand as SD if James were removed, and refused to commit, as he did not want to pour fuel on the fire. However, many assumed that he would fill the role if it became vacant, and as history proves, they were right.

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. It took place in G020.

Chair

An impartial chair was needed, and most of the officers could in some way be deemed partial in this discussion. As such, Chris Thornton was chosen, as he would soon be leaving the society, and had been away from York on an industrial placement since January.

It was widely regarded that he did a good job, keeping things in order and keeping things moving, while 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 regarding the state of YSTV. He expressed his justifiable disappointment at the state in which he had found YSTV on his return, however many felt that he implied we had all 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 (including the much-hyped YSTV Clean-Up). However, overall, he was a wise choice of chair.

Behaviour In The Meeting

To discuss the meeting in too much depth would inevitably introduce both bias and the limitations of memory. (It was well over 3 years ago!) However generally the meeting went extremely well considering its subject matter. Generally the discussion was formal, avoided touching heavily on personal insult, and provided a reasoned discussion on James' recent behaviour and his suitability for the post of Station Director.

The discussion did get particularly heated and a touch personal when reference was made to the legitimacy of some of the attendees. While everyone had been checked against the membership list, JenUnverified or incomplete information pointed out that 2Unverified or incomplete information members had turned up to the meeting having not been seen around YSTV before. They were friends of James and it was suggested that they had turned up simply to help swing the vote his way, and that their opinions were not based on true fact of the matter as they had not seen James' actions from a YSTV perspective. For example one (who was a housemate of James) 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 of course anonymous, and was not unanimous. However there was a clear majority and the motion was passed. James stood down as Station Director, and Dave Baker stood in temporarily, as he was the previous SD. It was widely regarded that most attendees of the meeting behaved admirably, even those who did not agree with each other. Matthew David Platts and Rowan were seen shaking hands and agreeing that the discussion had been fair even though the pair had different opinions on the outcome.

The Aftermath

As previously mentioned, Dave took over as Station Director on a temporary basis, and kept the post over the summer holidays. On the first day of the following term, an election was held, with Rowan having been nominated. Who did the nomination?Unverified or incomplete information His election speech pointed out that there were reasons he hadn't stood in the first place, and 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 until the next AGM in 2005.

James left the society, and went on to become chair of Halifax College.