Guest Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 I am the leader of a charity run pre school, we have a new committee with the wife as chair and husband as treasurer. They appear to be running it as a directorship not committee, ' I'm all for committee but ' to quote a recent email comment. The decisions made so far haven't been great, we have changed accountant to save money however a member of the pre school team who is working with us after running her own pre school is having to train them how to do the wages. She has rushed a decision through via email/text/Facebook, with only her own views,on putting somebody else's logo on the children's tops as they want to give us £160 a year but want something in return. She also seems to be crediting other people's fundraising to herself when in fact she has done very little fundraising since March. Can you give me some advice on whether I am being too sensitive and over reacting or should I say something at the next committee meeting and if so how. My worry is without the committee having a say how do we know the right decisions are being made. Also can they both vote on their own proposals ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finleysmaid Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 I would say you neeed to check the constitution. It may need you to remind them of the rules of operation . They are unlikely to have a quorum with only two of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
korkycat Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 If they are running to Preschool Learning Alliance constitution I think only one family member can be on committee. korkycat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lsp Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 Another area to think about - who are the signatories for bank accounts. Wouldn't be good practice to have same family????? Could cause problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cait Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 I agree, they shouldn't both be signatories - to protect themselves from any suspicion, if nothing else! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts