Friday, July 28, 2023

SECU This Board - New Elections Procedures - Dismissing The SECU Bylaws

https://quotefancy.com/media/wallpaper/3840x2160/2085974-Theodore-Roosevelt-Quote-No-man-is-above-the-law-and-no-man-is.jpg

 ✅ As noted in yesterday's post [link to 7/27/2023], three major concerns were discussed with the Administrator of Credit Unions about the SECU Board's apparent indifference to N.C. State laws, Credit Union Division rules and regulations, and the SECU bylaws, which require state agency approval. 

You may not be aware - but hopefully are happy to learn! - that North Carolina credit unions are heavily regulated and closely supervised. That's a good thing, because loosey-goosey compliance, inattentive leadership, and weak management can adversely and severely impact millions of trusting individuals in North Carolina. The laws, regulations and bylaws are there for a good reason. Obeying them is not optional.

The discussion with the Administrator suggested informally alerting SECU of the non-compliance and asking for prompt correction. That approach apparently worked, as SECU immediately began republishing financial statements for members, as required by the law. While we wait to hear back from the Administrator on the other two issues, let me give you a heads-up on the critical problem #2 - the New Election Procedures ("unanimously" adopted by the SECU Board in April, 2023 - that's right just 3 months ago).

SECU Board New Election Procedures [here's your link] - There are many inanities, much hubris, and lots of ridiculously silly overreach in this document - which seems to accurately reflect "this Board's" opinion of itself and its low level of respect for the membership. But, we'll look at some of that "stuff" later if we have time. For now focus on the following:

"6. Self-nominations. Self-nominations may be made only by those who sought, but did not receive, nomination by the Nominating Committee. For a self-nomination to be valid and be included on the ballot, the member must have submitted a completed Candidate Package for consideration by the Nominating Committee by the deadline in the current year Election Procedures Schedule."

The Credit Union Division approved SECU Bylaws state specifically that the only qualification for an SECU member to serve on the SECU Board is that the member be 18 years old and willing to serve - period! In fact, in the New Election Procedures "this Board" clearly acknowledges that truth. Here's the direct quote:

"PREREQUISITES: Must be a member of SECU (18 years of age or older), be capable of attaining the knowledge and abilities described above, and have sufficient volunteer time to devote to the duties of the position."

So stick with me here because it's really simple if you take it slowly. While the Nominating Committee (or "this Board") may have the right to invent all sorts of hurdles and faux "requirements" they wish to use in screening the slate of candidates "they" will choose to nominate, neither the Nominating Committee (nor "this Board") have the authority to prohibit any member 18 years or older from self-nominating - which is the only prerequisite as "this Board" clearly acknowledges. 

Requiring any eligible member who wishes to self-nominate to be screened by the Nominating Committee (BTW, just invented this year by "this Board"!) is in clear violation of the SECU Bylaws. Even "this Board" is - and should be - required to follow the SECU Bylaws.

The SECU Board election cycle is already underway. If the legitimacy of this election (and the reputation of SECU) can be salvaged, quick action is required. 

Let's hope to hear soon how this mistake and breach in trust has been "informally" resolved in the best interest of 2.7 million folks all across North Carolina.

You would think with 3 lawyers on "this Board"... oh never mind.

35 comments:

  1. I think shady tactics like that, should make people suspicious of other activities. What are they protecting ? Certainly not the members.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... what are they protecting and where are they going with all this. Also who's behind this sudden shift to dishonesty. We may never find the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

      Delete
    2. who really are the "insiders" ....?

      Delete
  2. This actions of this board are absolutely disgusting! Shame on them! Shame, shame, shame!

    ReplyDelete
  3. What kind of “quick action “ is required at this time? Also, should those who are self- nominating and having to be interviewed consider protesting these illegal requirements by refusing to show up? Could they possibly forfeit their chances of being on the ballot by not being given the petitions for the required 500 signatures? How does one go about getting 500 signatures in just 10 days?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The nominating committee will say we interviewed all the candidates and these three were the best. Wonder who the three will be?

      Delete
    2. It's really just 5 business days. The petition must be requested after the applicant has been notified the applicant was not selected.(this happens on a Friday). This board has one business day to respond. That's Monday. Doesn't say when on Monday, could be 5:30PM. Has to be returned the following Monday, doesn't say when, could be 8 AM. The rules are being made up as the board election goes along. But you can't use regular paper to get the signatures. It must be on this "official nominating petition". Which this board will not release. Even though the only requirement to run for the board is 18, a member and willing to serve. Don't mind getting 500 signatures, but it would be great to get started.

      Delete
  4. "... because loosey-goosey compliance, inattentive leadership, and weak management can adversely and severely impact millions of trusting individuals ..." right, we'll leave that kind of management to NCUA (National Credit Union Administration)!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. may I add insider shenanigans!

      Delete
    2. None of this catastrophe could have happened without the aid of those insiders. Don't ever forget who they are.

      Delete
  5. What “quick actions” are now required? Also, should someone who is self-nominating refuse to go for an “illegal” interview? Would this possibly jeopardize their receipt of the required petition for 500 signatures? How does one go about getting those signatures in just 10 days?


    ReplyDelete
  6. these folks have ruined peoples careers ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... and they are working on ruining state employees finances ... more casualties in their wake.

      Delete
  7. Pretty soon, you’ll have to have a certain amount of money in the credit union to even be able to vote.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "SECU I'm a Member/Owner" remember those stickers that were in the branch. How will the "new" stickers read ...

      Delete
  8. Chris Ayers is an embarrassment to the State. Beyond comical, a really bad joke. Quit Mr. Ayers, you've proved your incompetence. We are all convinced of your leadership abilities

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris Ayers, Chairman? The biggest Loser. No wonder SECU is losing it's credibility all over the state. He should have hung on a little longer to Hayes coat tails and left the state with him.

      Delete
  9. It's like I'm watching a B movie ... except I'm living it!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Alice Garland =Chris Ayers clone. Or is it vice versa? She is the next board chair. If she is “selected” by the nominating committee..

    ReplyDelete
  11. Just wanted to point out that our ridiculous pin the tail on the schedule ends at the end of august and here it is end of July and the very competent folks in charge at MSS still haven't even told us what our schedules will be changing to!! Keep up the great work!

    And speaking of schedules, those same competent and very honest folks in charge over at MSS told us that we had to do away with 4 on 4 off because the new phone system was incompatible with it for some reason and yet lending department has been on the new phone system for a couple weeks now. So how are they keeping 4 on 4 off??? Hmmmm somebody must have lied. Go figure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The 4on4off needs to be reinstated for MSS and kept for the LCC. There is no need to rid a great working schedule. That’s why people want to work here, you know?

      Delete
    2. currently over 1100 members waiting MSS side. App is down and because of the callback feature, even if the app comes back up right now, whatever large amount of those calls are about the app will still get called back even though they most likely won't need to speak to rep anymore once the app is back. This is not sustainable.

      Delete
    3. Oh but nothing had been done since 1983. There will be some glitches in the updating such horrid ancient software. Just give it some time. We will work on it Monday when we are back in the office at 8:30.

      Delete
    4. A friend working just told me they just hit 1600 waiting. 2 hour wait on the callbacks. They offered overtime today apparently. Right, I'm going to come work overtime on my 1 day off weekend. Sign me right up. My one day off which is also my one Saturday I get off every other week. No thanks. If this were 4 on 4 off still, I'd do it but I'm not sacrificing my 1 day weekend to get pummeled by understandably angry members over something that is in no way my fault.

      Delete
    5. And now imagine your working the other half of the schedule right now. Your last day off was this past Wednesday so between this past Thursday and this upcoming Wednesday, you're already working 50 total hours in 7 calendar days (no overtime though because of how our work week is defined). They're offering OT for tomorrow (Sunday) so let's say you do a full 10 hour shift (sacrificing your one out of every other Sundays off too). Between last Thursday and this upcoming Wednesday (7 calendar days) you will have worked 60 total hours just to receive 40 hours of regular pay and 10 hours of OT pay, at the end of which, you are rewarded with a one day weekend (this upcoming Thursday). Nope.

      Delete
    6. I am so sorry MSS is going through this. And really no job openings to transfer to. I hope the branches are not next for this scheduling fiasco.

      Delete
    7. Tell me again how good this person over Member Experience is suppose to be? Or better yet, how about listening to what we members have experienced since this bunch has been trying to run (or ruin) our credit union? Give us back the employees who knew how to provide us with good service! We are sick of this new SECU!

      Delete
    8. The call center was doing great before Jim Hayes, Jared Benish, Emma Hayes and the rest of the clown show arrived. Everything was better! Somewhat of a utopia. Pay could have been better back in the day, but I’ll take the work environment we had over this bull****.

      Delete
    9. Ms Brady could fix this tomorrow, but sadly she's apparently is STILL joined at the hip of Gym Hayes...

      Delete
  12. How many skilled call center employees have we lost due to these changes? You cannot blame them and it will be impossible to replace that experience with the way it is now. It does make a huge difference in member service to have knowledgeable people who feel appreciated answering calls.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't you think this call center disaster is part of the overall scheme? Let's just move it to India where it's cheaper. there sure haven't been any moves to fix things. Have the call center employees been asked what is needed? The members haven't. This board thinks wait times for member calls of 45minutes to 2 hours are perfectly acceptable. Doing nothing about it. And where is Leigh Brady? She over there pitching in? trying to get things sorted out? go Team!!

      Delete
    2. How many more SECU Disasters is it going to take for people to admit their New/New at SECU is not working? Those in charge need to hang their heads in shame, turn the operations of our credit union back over to the employees who knew how to serve us.

      Delete
    3. at 10:00 am - if that is the case, there is even more reason for our state regulators to get involved. These jobs need to be kept in North Carolina. That is the problem now, too many outsiders throwing out failing ideas with no regards to the damage being done to members and their families within the membership field. It's time for This Board to go and take all those who have sabotaged SECU with them.

      Delete
  13. The CU is one disaster away from collapsing ... let's pray we don't have one!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Oh but this board has hired 2 yes 2 crises managers! APCO (remember who else hired APCO?) and Ms Fitzpatrick. Looks like they need to hire a crises manager for every board member! Oh yeah and The puppet doll Ms Brady.

    ReplyDelete