The Lack Of Transparency By Boards... Some Might Call It Lying! Why The Trend?

                    Is failure to disclose the truth the same as lying?

The difference between a real choice and a false choice is often transparency.  If we are asked to vote, or are required to make a critical choice, "the facts of the matter" matter. 

If we aren't given accurate, nor sufficient information, the chance of choosing wrongly is greatly magnified. Or, was creating a false perception the real goal all along?  

With the SAFE merger vote, the members weren't told they all could join BECU for free - without giving away their thriving, locally-owned, locally-controlled CU. Wouldn't you have thought that was important information? No payouts, no payoffs, no merger costs required - all available for free! What's the choice here again?

With our local WakeMed non-profit hospital merger, the lack of transparency closely mirrors the "imaginary perks campaign" pursued by the SAFE Board. A widely touted promise of $2 billion in future investments by the acquirer, Atrium Health, is proving to be a fiction. The WakeMed CEO has now publicly admitted that most - if not all - of that $2 billion "perk" will be funded by WakeMed itself, not Atrium.  Lying or just a $2 billion oversight?

With SECU, our CEO Leigh Brady has yet to admit and refuses to explain why the SECU Board has voted to further restrict the self-nomination rights of SECU members [link]. Why the lack of transparency? Why not simply explain the reasons the Board voted for these bylaw amendments? What is there to hide - from the SECU membership? Is the truth that threatening? 

 ✔ All three are tax-exempt, non-profits created to fill a void in their local communities. Why can't they handle success, while remaining true to purpose ... and honest with the people who made that success possible?

 Getting too big for their fiduciary breeches? 

The Illusion Of Choice At Credit Unions... And Elsewhere.

              Was there a better choice? What if the answer is "Yes"?

Choice and false choice are two different and opposing ideas.  Choice involves weighing the pros and cons of several options based on personal goals, values, or circumstances.  A false choice is a deceptive tactic, which creates an illusion of choice, while restricting or misrepresenting available alternatives - or worse, implying there is only one choice!

Been trying to point out - probably unsuccessfully - that we live in a world, which increasing offers up to each of us, an illusion of choices, when in fact there are actually few... and often none. Perhaps this is acceptable in our "buyer beware", "anything goes" economy, with few prudential or consumer safeguards. The illusion of choice - or a false choice - seems, however, out of place in the cooperative, non-profit realm. Isn't that against the basic principles and core values of these institutions?

So, that's why we've been looking at WakeMed, SAFE Credit Union, and SECU as examples. With WakeMed clearly there is a better deal to be made for the citizens of Wake County.  Little dispute there. Public outcry by citizens and political leaders from both parties have challenged "the no other choice" arrogance.

With SAFE, the member-owners are being asked to vote to "self-destruct" in a merger they didn't want, with an out-of-state partner which appears financially inferior. The majority of SAFE members will not approve "this no choice merger". The SAFE board has stated it will appeal to the state regulator to overrule "the members choice"!

At SECU, the board and senior management have of late stripped away many rights of members to participate. The Board has even threatened to effectively bar "the members choice" to independently nominate board candidates. The Board - through a non-independent nominating committee - routinely presents the 3 million SECU members with "no choice" in board candidates. "Without choice" of candidates, is there an election?

✔ Choice is the cornerstone of democracy. Is it working?

  Is there a better choice?