Live!
Thu 23 Nov 2017
- The award-winning student news website of Imperial College

Know something you shouldn't? Tell us, using our quick, 100% anonymous tip-off form!

Live! - News

Guilds President Facing No-Confidence

Mar 12 2008 20:04
Ashley Brown
The Guilds President, Tristan Sherliker, is facing a motion of no-confidence after senior Guilds officers and volunteers ran out of patience.
Time may be running out...

Guilds President Tristan Sherliker is facing a vote of no-confidence, after a paper supported by 15 members of Guilds was submitted to the executive committee. An emergency meeting of Guilds Exec will meet next Wednesday lunchtime (19th March) to hear the case.

The paper claims Sherliker has been neglecting his duties, highlighting a number of occasions where he has failed to turn up to ICU meetings. Frequently absent from RWB and Council last term, he also failed to attend the budgeting round of CSB to help argue the case for Guilds, despite assuring the Vice President (Finance & Societies) that he would be there. Although CGCU achieved an increase in funding over last year, it may have received more money with an extra voice to argue for it. Senior officers, including the DPFS, have also criticised the CGCU President's refusal to complete budgets or follow event-booking rules while organising the Freshers' Ball in October.

Those bringing the paper have noted that the CGCU President raised a "considerable amount" of sponsorship over the summer, but has frequently been absent from the office and avoids answering emails or his phone. Despite this, the paper says he finds time to attend social functions organised by Imperial College and City of London Livery Companies. Sherliker maintains that - despite not communicating with the rest of the Guilds team - he is doing a lot of work for Guilds, such as two meetings he attended last week and a variety of papers he reads, as well as helping Guilds clubs in the Student Activities Centre.

The Guilds Management Committee, which the President chairs, has met only once per term rather than twice a week. It is this committee which handles the day-to-day running of the organisation, making it actually do things.

The President has also attracted the ire of Union Council, having failed to submit his report for the Autumn term on two separate occasions, with Monday being his last opportunity this term. Despite ten weeks to prepare this report, it had still not been submitted by today's deadline for papers.

The situation in Guilds has not been helped by an ineffective chair, who has failed to fulfil her role in ensuring the constitution is followed, or indeed by chairing meetings.

Email this Article | Share on Facebook | Print this Article

Discussion about “Guilds President Facing No-Confidence”

The comments below are unmoderated submissions by Live! readers. The Editor accepts no liability for their content, nor for any offence caused by them. Any complaints should be directed to the Editor.
Mar 12 2008 20:23
 

.... although it may be a case of too little too late.

Lets face it, even if he gets the chop it is too late in the year for anything new to happen.

Mar 12 2008 21:20
 

It was about time...

By the way, shouldn't people's CID numbers be removed from the PDF?

Mar 12 2008 22:44
 

Why? The CID number is no more sensitive than your College username... It's written on almost every form related to College and is printed on your swipe card.

You can also get hold of a CID from a name or username fairly easily!

Mar 13 2008 07:19
 

If this does go through, who will be the "care-taker" president?

5. RE   
Mar 13 2008 10:05
 

What is your justification for "ineffective chair"? That sounds rather subjective.

6.  
Mar 13 2008 10:08
 

I think a new live poll is in order...

Mar 13 2008 10:08
 

"failed to fulfil her role in ensuring the constitution is followed, or indeed by chairing meetings."

8. Alice   
Mar 13 2008 13:28
 

Who is chair?

And what it RWB? Or CSB for that matter?

Mar 13 2008 13:47
 

1. The paper does not question the effectiveness of the chair.

Alice:

2. The chair is Jen Roberts

3, RWB is Representation and Welfare Board

4. CSB is Clubs and Socs Board

10. Alice   
Mar 13 2008 18:27
 

Thank you

Mar 13 2008 19:59
 

CGCU does not consist of the president alone. The people who have written this paper haven't done a whole lot either and should be ashamed of themselves for this persecution.

Mar 13 2008 21:36
 

I think disgusted rasies and interesting point. I think theres more than meets the eye behind this one but saying that it may be justified. However, if I were advising Tristen I would suggest he asks a lot of questions about his exec. Although some have been exemplary.

13. cynic   
Mar 14 2008 08:50
 

Dear 11.disgusted

Well they seem to be able to write a no-confidence paper

Mar 14 2008 10:17
 

Gosh, all by themselves? Well then I take it all back!

Mar 14 2008 10:28
 

I think that some of the current CGCU exec are wanting to run for their positions again, and are looking to make tristan a scapegoat for their problems.

Lets face it the Milli hasn't organised any activities, but was running for VPA again. If tristan goes she can claim that it was all his fault for the c**ppy year. Maybe another no confidence should be put forward as well?

Mar 14 2008 11:34
 

So Milli 'hasn't organised any activities' this year?

Since the disappearance of Tristan from the office Milli has organised at least two AMAZING events:

  • Tri-Union Bar Night
  • CGCA Dinner

Which incidentally Tristan was happy to turn up to and take the limelight. You would be hard pressed to find enough seconders for that no confidence.

Mar 14 2008 12:05
 

An bar night organised in association with the RSM and RCSU, and a dinner for guilds hacks and alumni do not qualify for serving the needs of engineering students in my book.

Mar 14 2008 12:21
 

The team haven't been great, but they would have functioned superbly with direction and leadership.

Mar 14 2008 13:08
 

Vicious Circle is right. Two events, don't make me laugh. That brings guilds total events to what <8. I mean they get 10,000 ever year of which 2000+ goes to the exec to run 8 events.

Is it an efficient use of union resources?

20. cynic   
Mar 14 2008 13:44
 

Not an engineer is clearly not an engineer as the CGCA dinner is organised by..... THE CGCA you idiot.

And Tri-Union bar night was organised in cooperation with...TWO OTHER UNIONs.

To be frank only one officer has consistantly performed and delivered in the higher ranks of Guilds, the VPFS, Micheal Chan. The Hon Sec has done a resonable, albeit inconsistent amount.

21. and   
Mar 14 2008 13:52
 

and the president has done sweet FA -except take free lunches with the CGCA and College when they are offered.

Its funny how, people outside of guilds think they have the right to make aligations which are totally unfounded about the current exec - this is being dealt with by guilds - should it rise to council or court - - then feel free to make comment.

22. cynic   
Mar 14 2008 14:52
 

It is a constitutional right of all engineers at Imperial to question the effectiveness of CGCU officers

Mar 14 2008 17:33
 

who disagrees with you cynic? No one as i can see

It is not the right of scientists or miners to make unfounded alligations though - they have no clue as to what goes on in guilds

Scientists and Miners are quite welcome to make speculations as far as I can see, because they know about as much as the Engineers as what is going on in CGCU or what they have arranged etc etc....f**k all!

25. pedant   
Mar 15 2008 02:37
 

Erm,

Morons. The correct spelling is allegations. Not alligators.

Tristan would be very proud.

26. Miners   
Mar 15 2008 09:38
 

In response to post 23. I assume you meant "scientists or medics" as I would like to remind you that miners ARE guildsmen and some of us do take an active interest. I don't even want to go into your use of the word 'right'. Maybe like the right to equal representation or the right to access guilds events without discrimination or the right to be invited to Guilds Exec meetings. The list goes on.

If you want to find one of the many ways that Tristan has failed this year then you need only turn to the miners. However, this motion has been brought by his own exec. If you don't like it turn up and say so but don't insinuate that the motion has been brought by miners and scientists.

27. Danny   
Mar 15 2008 10:41
 

well said 26. though we are not Guildsmen....we are miners, we just so happen to fall within the same faculty as Guildsmen.

The only involvement miners have had in this motion is to comment on Tristan's behaviour regarding the RSM welfare issue....

28. Agreed   
Mar 15 2008 11:08
 

I know that the proposers both aggree with post 26. and Danny's last post (27) and they are currently accumulating many ammendments to the paper - one of which is based on Tristans refusal to represent the RSM.

Mar 15 2008 11:40
 

That is possibly the most important issue in all of this. The faulty unions? main job is to represent the students that are within their faculty. The idea that a department would be discriminated against is utterly atrocious but I feel (and maybe I?m wrong) that other officer within guilds could have taken him to ?task? about it. This isn?t not to criticise them unduly (it must have been tough with Tristan) but to point out that other should have realised this was going on (and maybe put a stop to it, or even mention it quietly to the DPEW).

Having said that I also would think it?s worth looking at other departments (not-traditional engineers) to see if they have been receiving a fair deal.

30. well   
Mar 15 2008 20:30
 

Thank you Dave

The DPEW is fully aware of the situation

Tristand has been taken to task on the matter - no avail

One of the reasons the no confidence is in place no doubt

31. David   
Mar 15 2008 21:47
 

Again, I assume you are refering to me. As I have said I generally don't post on live or else I would have defend myself at the start of the year. I have had more experience than most about the affects of a missing CGCU pres remember the Deloitte event I arranged for you.

32. cynic   
Mar 16 2008 08:26
 

Isn't it convenient the miners are piping up about welfare when they are trying to become a faculty union, again. This is all clearly bulls**t to make their case. In terms of pure welfare, for the past two years Guilds welfare officers have been absolutely terrible so IF the miners have had no welfare it is because Guilds has had no welfare representation proper. BUT Guilds has had EXCELLENT Academic Affairs Officers (Post and Undergrad) for at least the past two years - if the miners really did want representation all they need to do is email one of these, who arn't miner prejudice and make sure the relevant people get invited to the relevant meetings. What is the betting that they haven't done this? Secondly what is the betting they REFUSE to provide Guilds with the information for the officers to contact the right people? The miners are a f**king joke, they are pathetic and jealous.

Mar 17 2008 17:01
 

Some clarification:

I personally provided the contact details of the RSM Reps at the beginning of the year and followed up some time later by asking why they weren't being invited to meetings.

I was informed (after asking Tristan why he was in the bar rather than at the RWB meeting that he is constitutionally obliged to attend which was going on above his head) that he would not recognise the RSM Reps as they had not been elected through the Guilds e-voting system. For information: this is because RSM uses paper ballot and they do not tend to take part or even know about Guilds Elections.

The RSM Dep Rep positions did not appear on the elections ballot for the (now cancelled) Faculty Elections. Whether this is to allow RSM to conduct their own election is yet to be seen. I certainly haven't been informed that this is the case despite, again, asking.

Mar 18 2008 09:10
 

I know for a fact that last year the Materials DepRep was elected by the system on the "www.union.ic.ac.uk/vote" webpage.

Tristan is talking out of his a**e.

Mar 18 2008 09:24
 

Also, the RSM elections have already happened with no possibility of voting for DepSocs or DepReps.

Add your comment:

If you can see this, something is broken (either with your browser, or with our system). Please leave the box below empty, or your comment will be considered to be spam.
Live!

See Also

Live! Poll

How frequently would you like to see a CGCU magazine being published




Live!