General Supporters Panel Elections

[Sarge]

Please read:

6. Confidentiality
A major objective of the Supporters’ Panel is to improve the flow of information between the Club and its supporters, and to be open and transparent in its dealings. Nonetheless there are occasions when all or part of a discussion will need to be treated in confidence. The Supporters’ Panel accepts that for legal reasons (such as data protection and employment law) the Club will not be able to share certain information. These restrictions will, however, be the exception and not the rule, and the Club will explain clearly (and to the satisfaction of the Supporters’ Panel) why information cannot be provided or must be treated in confidence.
 Any matter offered by panel representatives or the Club on a confidential basis will not be disclosed beyond those present at the meeting except where non-disclosure puts an individual or group at risk of significant harm.
 Any comments in the minutes deemed as confidential are included as a “Part Two” section of the minutes and are redacted from the published version of the minutes.
 Individuals should not publish or discuss any details of the meeting before the minutes have been approved by the Chair and published on the webpage, unless specifically allowed for in the minutes, and should not at any time discuss or disclose any “Part Two” minutes outside of the Panel.

some of that's ^^ a bit concerning IMO

 

[Essexyellows]

And you omitted this:
4.1.1. The working group EMG shall manage the timing of the inaugural election.

So why the rush?

Especially considering the apparent desire to be "inclusive".

 

[werthersoriginal]

I'm not sure this forum is the "most diverse spectrum of fans", I'm often struck by how the posts on here contrast hugely in tone and opinion with those on twitter for instance.

Essex - questioning, interrogating and expressing opinions is absolutely fine. So is listening to people's responses.

The EMG is not setting out to filter applications, nor to discourage anyone with alternative views, but representatives are encouraged to be available to fellow fans (how that's done is open - for example could be in the stands, down the pub or via social media) in order to gather views and be a representative rather than simply putting forth their own view without understanding a wider position.

It is unfortunately quite possible that fewer than 11 candidates will come forward. It is an issue we heard from other clubs, and that I have found in other walks of life where getting people to actually step forward for voluntary roles is very difficult. I really hope that is not the case. As there will be annual elections for 1/3 of the panel there will be the possibility of getting additional reps in the next election period to bring numbers up to 11 if this happens.

This Panel has the potential to be really good for fans, I would encourage anyone who wants to see this work for the benefit of a wide range of fans to consider standing. Especially if you can credibly represent a minority group.

as i'm not on Twitter, what would you say is the main tone of comments there?

 

[Marked Ox]

Any reason why OxVox can't deal with the latter? They are already an elected panel of supporters who have volunteered to help feedback from club to fans and fans to club. They have the support of thousands. Could OxVox create a separate panel to deal with matchday and operational issues? I have worked with OxVox and the club in the past to improve the matchday experience and report a number of ground issues too whilst with the Ultras. Didn't seem an issue back then...

It could do, but as this is FSA backed and supported by OxVox why does it matter so much if it is or isn't under OxVox?

 

[OxfordYankee]

I can understand the club not wanting information made public at that particular point, but then why would the clubs want to make it known to a select few. If it’s because they want to wait until such a time to announce the confidential news, then why mention it to the council? Are they privileged? No they’re not.
If a fan raises a sensitive issue surely it can be made known with the fan being anonymous, unless off course the council can’t be trusted to keep the identity secret.

I’m generally against the idea. OxVox is weakened by this panel and therefore I can’t get behind it.

Regarding the highlighted section, let’s not be naive, a select few already do get to hear confidential information. They get that through official and unofficial channels, but they’re certainly not elected to anything. Most meetings between OxVox and the club have minutes which have been heavily redacted.

It’s not a new issue, but unlike the SP, OxVox can publicly withdraw its cooperation and inform the support of their concerns. Just as it should be.

 

[Manorlounger]

It's first of all, positive, to clearly see several of the new OUFCSP group on this thread. However.........

I still don't quite understand the 'confidentiality' stance, when this group is supposed to be dealing and helping find solutions to the mundane requests from the fanbase - after all you guys said it was a different remit to OxVox. I get the OxVox model, having to tread with confidentiality, due to the big ticket issues of the day, stadium, ownership etc but don't take the fanbase for fools by suggesting you too, won't be party to that information.

I still don't understand why Ashley Browne has taken it upon himself to set this new panel up, with constitutions, elections et al. His predecessors at Supporters Direct did that when they helped form and assist our Independent Supporters Trust for the past 15-20 years. Citing where a supporters panel sits in the pyramid of fan/club/board level engagement. Supporters Panels are near the bottom, OxVox are at 'structured dialogue' level and one removed from Board representation. I still haven't seen any reasoned response to that. Therefore, I still don't know why the need for both - especially as you can now hide behind 'confidentiality' to the people you claim to serve.

What have the Supporters Panel so far learned from the challenges of OxVox - membership numbers, communication, etc? IMO, you would have been better served supporting the Supporters Trust with your valuable time that you clearly will invest.

Whilst you are on the honeymoon period, how will the two exist when the OUFCSP start to move up the fan engagement pyramid model?

I also don't accept there is a crest of adulation from those within OxVox or the fanbase. I think there are people towing the PR line and not prepared to say what they think.

The point about confidentiality being that it was hoped and desired that the Supporters' Panel would not have to deal with anything of a confidential nature.
"A major objective of the Supporters’ Panel is to improve the flow of information between the Club and its supporters, and to be open and transparent in its dealings."
It is possible, of course, that something may arise in discussion that could be answered but only by the club telling the panel of something they wished to keep confidential. The working group recognised this and combined that with the need to protect the individual where necessary. It was also made abundantly clear that not telling the very supporters it was representing was not desirable and so needed to be justified by the club. Of course, if in your consideration, all the requests of the fanbase will be of the "mundane" variety, then that problem should hardly trouble anyone.
The Supporters' Panel have no intention of taking anyone as a fool, after all, they too are fans.

If you don't understand Ashley Browne's stance, why not ask him or have a look on the FSA website? It was, by the way, at the instigation of OUFC that the FSA gave their advice and encouragement to set up the Supporters' Panel, something they have done at many other clubs throughout the Premiership and EFL.

Comparing OxVox and the Supporters' Panel is perfectly fair and the working group sought to answer that as well, it wasn't easy. However this the text of an answer prepared for a presentation given last week:
OxVox is a democratic, membership-based organisation that deals mainly with the broader issues of the club's financial safety, governance, sustainability, ownership, stadium and its place in the wider community.
The OUSP is a group of representatives, elected by supporters, that will mainly focus on operational issues along with the matchday experience for each and every supporter.
One obvious difference is membership. There are no members or subscriptions to the Supporters' Panel. Communication will be via the designated club website page: https://www.oufc.co.uk/club/supporters-panel/ Twitter and, of course, direct from the representatives who will make themselves available to talk to the fanbase whenever possible.

I'm afraid that I don't recognise or understand your point about "when the OUFCSP start to move up the fan engagement pyramid model"
Is this what you are referring to? Supporter engagement FSA

With regard to a "PR" line, the working group was not once directed to follow any line. The individuals involved all spoke freely and without hindrance. Where we needed guidance, it was sought, there was no coercion from anybody. Are you insinuating that the club has directed our efforts? And to what end?
As to OxVox, I have only seen and heard positive reaction to the Supporters' Panel.

 

[OUFCGav]

Any reason why OxVox can't deal with the latter? They are already an elected panel of supporters who have volunteered to help feedback from club to fans and fans to club. They have the support of thousands. Could OxVox create a separate panel to deal with matchday and operational issues? I have worked with OxVox and the club in the past to improve the matchday experience and report a number of ground issues too whilst with the Ultras. Didn't seem an issue back then...

I believe (and am willing to be corrected) that OxVox is a membership organisation that represents its paid membership. As far as I'm aware that membership has not reached beyond 2000 even at the worst of times in its lifetime. Therefore that leaves a lot of potential supporters not represented. Yes, they could join OxVox, but they choose not to (I remember reading lots of criticism of OxVox and its elected committee at various points in the past), that is up to them.
The opportunity for the club to engage with a wider selection of its fanbase is surely a good thing (and OxVox are going to be representatives on it too).

Extrapolating out unknown outcomes from a set of T&Cs that are designed to cover all/unknown future issues can take you anywhere you want (Apple's T&C for example prohibit you from "development, design, manufacture, or production of nuclear, missile, or chemical or biological weapons."). Confidentiality clauses are common, OxVox's relationship with the club will have them, it enables open communication in the relationship - if they weren't there, much less would be said.

Re the need for nominees - most committees I have been around that are representations of wider groups ask for people to be nominated, OxVox included. If you can't interact with people to ask them to nominate you, are you really going to be able to interact with them to represent their views?

 

[Manorlounger]

I really really do not understand this "supporter panel". Why do I purchase an OxVox membership for a new panel to come in and do exactly what OxVox does?

A supporters panel is now trying to elect fans to speak to the club in various meetings for updates etc, is that not what OxVox has done for years?

Seems completely pointless in my opinion.

It is seen as a complimentary set up. It simply means that there is another supporter group prepared to take on the day to day, matchday stuff and leave the bigger, more serious issues to OxVox. I was just as sceptical at the outset but have come to understand that there is scope for both and advantages in both.
The Supporters' Panel is seeking to represent all ages and it was very much hoped that the younger fanbase would possibly want to get involved. Someone with your background with the Ultras would be very welcome. Please give it some thought.

 

[Essexyellows]

as i'm not on Twitter, what would you say is the main tone of comments there?

The sound of silence - 5 retweets, 2 likes, 1 quote. Primarily driven by 1 individual - probably a candidate.

 

[WuTang]

It could do, but as this is FSA backed and supported by OxVox why does it matter so much if it is or isn't under OxVox?

In my opinion it undermines OxVox and weakens their position. Hardly a positive step forward for renewals or sign ups.

 

[Marked Ox]

In my opinion it undermines OxVox and weakens their position. Hardly a positive step forward for renewals or sign ups.

I don't know if it does or doesn't undermine OxVox but I'll wait to find out when it is actually up and running.

 

[Horse]

My feeling is that the Supporters Liaison Officer isn’t currently fulfilling the role and an over the top committee is being put in to filter issues to him. I suspect that this is because the incumbent SLO is both the wrong person for the job, and there is a conflict of interest with his Operations job. Shouldn’t we be voting for a proper SLO instead?

 

[WuTang]

It is seen as a complimentary set up. It simply means that there is another supporter group prepared to take on the day to day, matchday stuff and leave the bigger, more serious issues to OxVox. I was just as sceptical at the outset but have come to understand that there is scope for both and advantages in both.
The Supporters' Panel is seeking to represent all ages and it was very much hoped that the younger fanbase would possibly want to get involved. Someone with your background with the Ultras would be very welcome. Please give it some thought.

I understand it's exciting getting closer to the club as fan. However as someone who spent years involved in a similar capacity, OxVox helped myself and others improve the matchday experience, relay to the club and back to us. They helped resolve issues with the stadium which involved the club and stadium company, they helped with new projects such as Yellow Army days, Ultimate Support days, new ideas with Farrs Catering etc. In fact I could probably create an endless list of times they helped with the exact things the supporters panel has been set up for, so that's the reason for "why the need?".
I would prefer a panel of trusted OxVox members over randomly selected fans to relay the meeting minutes and more importantly put new ideas and plans into action.

 

[Paul Cannell]

The key sentence in the confidentiality clause is this:
"These restrictions will, however, be the exception and not the rule, and the Club will explain clearly (and to the satisfaction of the Supporters’ Panel) why information cannot be provided or must be treated in confidence."
It is also in there to protect any fan who may wish/need to raise a sensitive issue but could suffer if their details were made public

If the club has the deciding say on what's confidential the Panel's just it's mouthpiece.

They won't. Any thing they want treated in confidence has to be justified to the Panel's satisfaction. The Panel has the final say and the Panel (not the club) produce the minutes.
"the club will explain clearly (and to the satisfaction of the Supporters’ Panel) why information cannot be provided or must be treated in confidence."

Make your mind up mate! The first quote from you (the 4 are ordered chronologically to give the context) says the club has the deciding say on what's confidential, once I explain the implications of that you try (and fail) to change your tune.

The preceding paragraph says 'The Supporters’ Panel accepts that for legal reasons (such as data protection and employment law) the Club will not be able to share certain information.' The final say has been given away prior to the justification - and reference to it can be removed from the minute, and no member of the Panel can mention it.

Not very open, not very transparent.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

I don't know if it does or doesn't undermine OxVox but I'll wait to find out when it is actually up and running.

I agree. I am very sceptical about this new panel (though *not* of the motives of those on here who are involved) - but let's wait and see.

Let's see how many apply to join it, how many people are actually bothered enough to vote, what issues it raises, how transparent the process actually is, how effective it is at getting the club to do something they weren't going to do anyway, how it works alongside OxVox etc.

 

[Manorlounger]

some of that's ^^ a bit concerning IMO

Which parts give you concern?

 

[Sarge]

the bit about the club restricting information and embargoing minutes , confidentiality clauses etc

It may be badly or misleadingly worded of course?

 

[Manorlounger]

Make your mind up mate! The first quote from you (the 4 are ordered chronologically to give the context) says the club has the deciding say on what's confidential, once I explain the implications of that you try (and fail) to change your tune.

The preceding paragraph says 'The Supporters’ Panel accepts that for legal reasons (such as data protection and employment law) the Club will not be able to share certain information.' The final say has been given away prior to the justification - and reference to it can be removed from the minute, and no member of the Panel can mention it.

Not very open, not very transparent.

Here is the confidential policy.

Confidentiality
A major objective of the Supporters’ Panel is to improve the flow of information between the Club and its supporters, and to be open and transparent in its dealings. Nonetheless there are occasions when all or part of a discussion will need to be treated in confidence. The Supporters’ Panel accepts that for legal reasons (such as data protection and employment law) the Club will not be able to share certain information. These restrictions will, however, be the exception and not the rule, and the Club will explain clearly (and to the satisfaction of the Supporters’ Panel) why information cannot be provided or must be treated in confidence.
 Any matter offered by panel representatives or the Club on a confidential basis will not be disclosed beyond those present at the meeting except where non-disclosure puts an individual or group at risk of significant harm.
 Any comments in the minutes deemed as confidential are included as a “Part Two” section of the minutes and are redacted from the published version of the minutes.
 Individuals should not publish or discuss any details of the meeting before the minutes have been approved by the Chair and published on the webpage, unless specifically allowed for in the minutes, and should not at any time discuss or disclose any “Part Two” minutes outside of the Panel.


It does not say "reference to it can be removed from the minute" It clearly states "redacted from the published version of the minutes" and further, "included as a “Part Two” section of the minutes" Included being the operative word.

You also chose to ignore this: "should not at any time discuss or disclose any “Part Two” minutes outside of the Panel." Outside of the panel, so not as: "no member of the Panel can mention it."


The working group did not want to have anything excluded but accepted that, on occasion and rarely and under protest from the panel, some information would unfortunately have to be deemed confidential. Whether that information came from the club or, from a supporter.
The panel will not be discussing employment contracts or player dealings, nor will it be involved in the finance side of the club, that is for OxVox. It can be surmised then that very little information from the club would fall into a confidential nature but, we wanted it to be prepared should that happen.

 

[Manorlounger]

the bit about the club restricting information and embargoing minutes , confidentiality clauses etc

It may be badly or misleadingly worded of course?

I think maybe the response I just posted to Mr Cannell above may answer your fears.

 

[Essexyellows]

I agree. I am very sceptical about this new panel (though *not* of the motives of those on here who are involved) - but let's wait and see.

Let's see how many apply to join it, how many people are actually bothered enough to vote, what issues it raises, how transparent the process actually is, how effective it is at getting the club to do something they weren't going to do anyway, how it works alongside OxVox etc.

The answers?
Less than or equal to 11.
That negates the need for a vote.
It will exist, whether voted for or not, in a truly representative & democratic manner.

The cabal will be closer to the SLO than the supporters and provide an effective filter for irksome individuals who ask awkward questions.

And folk can throw rotten veg at me later but hey, I`ll take the risk.