SCA Code of Conduct

[PeterC]

The SCA has just published a new code of conduct which can be found online at http://www.canoescotland.org/Portals/0/ ... 202014.pdf

While most of it is absolutely fine and makes good sense there are two clauses that I find challenging:

 Respect the opinions and decisions of those in a position of leadership and/or responsibility.

Obviously those due respect are entitled to that however leadership should not of itself confer a right not to be challenged when others feel that actions taken are wrong. Does anyone really in this day and age believe that leadership should confer immunity from challenge?

 Shall not publish or cause to be published any criticism of the decision-making of the SCA or any SCA appointed body to deal with any dispute or disciplinary matter.

This does not provide clarity as it could clearly and perhaps will be interpreted as precluding any criticism whatsoever of the SCA. Surely as a company that takes responsibility for the governance of paddle sports in Scotland and which all competing athletes resident in Scotland MUST be members of, with no alternative, it should be welcoming healthy and constructive debate and interest in driving sport forward.

I would note that as far as I understand it the policy has been distributed and agreed by the Board of Directors of the SCA but has not been the subject of consultation and discussion with the broader membership.

Maybe this posting of itself contravenes the Policy however I do think that this is something that all should be aware of and consider and that highlighting it may help better shape other approaches to code of conduct across the wider slalom community.

There are other bits that seem somewhat nonsensical e.g. imposing financial penalties on members that are not employees, referring to confidential information and the ability of the SCA to authorise disclosure when it does not specify that this should be information that is confidential to the SCA and not others.

[John Sturgess]

Peter

To get an idea of how silly it is, try substituting 'Alex Salmond' for 'The SCA': you end up with something worryingly Stalinist!

Even if it only applied to employees of the SCA, it would contravene what the UK Government has been doing recently to protect whistle-blowers, particularly in the NHS.

[Jem]

I wonder who wrote this policy? It is very interesting seeing the control the writer views the SCA should have over it's members and I suspect demonstrates a wider problem with how the writer values the membership . As someone who lives in a democratic nation, we are entitled to freedom of speech. What we don't have is freedom of choice to join anyone other than the SCA.

I also don't understand why the SCA has a complete set of separate policies. As a Canoeing governing body, why doesn't the SCA save it's time and use the same policies and procedures as the BCU or indeed other governing bodies in Scotland or SportsScotland.

I naively thought the SCA was all about promoting and developing canoeing in Scotland. A rough measure of whether the SCA was achieving this would be how SCA memberships levels are increasing. If membership levels are dropping, as I suspect they are, maybe the SCA should divert it's limited resources to strategic measures to promote and develop canoeing across Scotland e.g. Pinkston.

[Sven]

Goodness was this really put in place with no membership consultation?

If I were a SCA member I would be pointing the Scottish Board to the Institute of Directors code of conduct, specifically article 3 and if any of the Scottish directors were unhappy with the "decision", to article 6

[PeterC]

I understand that membership of the SCA is indeed declining. A significant number of the slalom community who have no choice are losing faith in the SCA control of the sport and some have been looking for alternatives. It is most concerning that there seems little recognition amongst those responsible for the SCA that there is any issue and it is not as a result of any lack of bringing it to their attention.

[Seedy Paddler]

But surely when you consider bullets 1 & 2 :

 Respect the rights, dignity and worth of others without regard to their age, sex, gender identity, disability, marital or civil partnership status, pregnancy or maternity, religion, race, ethnic origin, nationality, colour, socioeconomic status or sexual orientation.
 Treat others with respect so that they are able to enjoy their sport without the threat of intimidation, victimisation, harassment or abuse.

Along with bullet point 10

Shall not do anything which adversely affects the sport in Scotland or the SCA.

And the should NOTs bullet 3

Misrepresent or withhold information relating to SCA activities, systems or services (unless lawfully bound by a duty of confidentiality not to disclose such information), or take advantage of the lack of relevant knowledge or inexperience of others.

Then with the absence of any Membership consultation, clarification and endorsement and with draconian threats on disciplinary matters for breach they have themselves breached that very code. Lack of respect for the General Membership (volunteer lead?; valuing volunteers??). There is clear intimidation should a member wish to challenge a decision or opinion. Perhaps we should draft a motion and circulate at Tully to call an GM to suspend the Code of Conduct at least until such time as it is properly consulted on and endorsed by the majority of the Membership.

I fully agree with a need for respect but that is a two way street, we need staff and leaders that will engage with the membership, explain decisions and strategy in an open and transparent method. It may only take some minor changes to the current document to clarify intent and extent of the meaning within the bullets but as it stands I don't recognise it as a valuable addition to the documentation. The SCA as a public body within the UK (even in an Independent Scotland) is mandated by the European Act on Human Rights. An attempt to remove my right of free speech and ability to challenge leadership is in clear breach of this act and hence the Code of Conduct is not legally enforceable unless the Directors wish to find themselves in the courts.

CD