I've had a lot of people, asking "what's next?" for the club, assuming if there is an election or the board step down. I invariably get around to talking about structural separation, and I think it's difficult for people to understand how that might play out. So just for reference sake, I created a Structural Separation proposal, as to how you might run the Parramatta Eels NRL board, under that kind of environment. I am simply dropping this in here, because I've already walked three people through this kind of scenario in the past two days, so it's here for reference for those who are interested.
Background: The Parramatta Leagues Club and Parramatta Eels are facing pressure on two fronts, with the NRL demanding more stability at a board-level, while there is ongoing pressure for privatisation. The solution is to operate the Parramatta Eels as you would an independent wholly-owned subsidiary, with little operational links between the two and only basic fiduciary oversight from the Leagues Club board. The proposed structure is a result of my long-time interest and campaigning for constitutional reform, however, I would recommend that any reform be accompanied by professional constitutional reform advice and the opportunity for member submission.
General rationale: Structural separation provides the best of both worlds. By running it independently you free it from the issues inherent with a body regulated under the Registered Clubs act, allowing the organisation to design a structure that ensures it has the best possible mix of skills to ensure its success.
Proposed Structure: My proposed structure would source directors on three fronts.
-
Up to two directors from the Leagues Club (subject to complying with the skills matrix) to provide oversight and input from the funding body. These directors would come from the pool of seven PLC directors and should be those with the best NRL skills matrix fit, which would be decided by vote. These should not be the chairman or deputy chairman.
-
Two directors elected by the NRL membership. This returns a vote to the entire NRL membership, which would have a positive effect on the membership efforts of the club. Should revert back to the old PDRL eligibility rules but should allow online voting, with the broader voting pool meaning you can’t “stack” votes..
-
Non-elected directors. These directors would be appointed by the NRL board, with the PLC directors having the casting vote in the event of a stalemate and these should turn over .
I would vary the terms to provide for maximum stability. I understand the club has committed to triennial elections. I believe this is a strong fit with the above model, as it means that in any year there is no “overthrow” of the board. I would run the NRL elections every three year, via online mechanisms. Non-elected directors would serve up to a maximum of six years with their positions considered every three years. I believe the non-elected directors must require NRL approval. Candidates can only run for one of the Leagues club or NRL elections every three years. A Leagues Club director must stand down to run for the NRL election.
Related reforms:
Pre-qualification criteria
The NRL board should have pre-qualification criteria to ensure the NRL membership votes are not simply reduced to popularity contests and that qualified directors apply. This should include board-related qualifications, such as those obtained from the Australian Institute of Company Directors.
Skills Matrix
The NRL board should tick off core a set of core skills, such as:
1) Legal expertise
2) Finance expertise
3) Media/communications/marketing/events expertise
4) Rugby League playing/coaching/administration
5) Board-level experience at a company of equivalent size or larger
6) Executive management experience at a company of equivalent size or larger
Where the elected directors do not tick off these core skills, non-elected directors must be appointed on the basis of completing the skills matrix. Where there is a skills void, caused by a departure or election, the Leagues Club board must attempt to address that skills void from its rank. In the cause of a skills void caused by election, then any incoming director must match the missing skills matrix. In an event, where this impossible, then the board may appoint an additional non-elected director to fill the skills void.
This skills level matrix would inevitably flow down to Leagues Club elections, as directors that fit the skills matrix could be identified as NRL qualified and would likely attract more votes, benefitting both organisations. The skills matrix also ensures that board can’t ever be just dominated by popular football players.
Mandated chairman and deputy chair
To avoid politics, I would mandate that the chairman and deputy chair are not decided arbitrarily and a constituted process is used instead. This may include being the longest serving director or perhaps the highest polling Leagues club voted director.
Disallow of electioneering
Disallow tickets or endorsements by sitting board members. Generic advertising of board members credentials (ie no custom point of voting material) or mailing to membership. Information evening. Possibly no public comments from candidates (or maybe no negative electioneering?). This helps to ensure when candidates join the board it doesn’t come with the baggage of toxic electioneering.
Leagues Club safeguards
In extreme circumstances, the Leagues Club may replace any directors where:
-
Directors have been found to breach NRL code of conduct
The League Club may dissolve the board where the board has demonstrated fiscal irresponsibility, calling a new NRL election.
Protection of NRL funding
NRL funding should be constitutionally protected and represent a minimum percentage of turnover. ie up to a minimum of 2 per cent, and subject to no more than 20 per cent reduction in any year, unless agreed upon by the NRL board. Junior funding should be protected.
How might this implemented in terms of timing?
- Initially have four PLC directors sitting on the Eels board and three independent directors (appointed immediately)
- Hold NRL elections in off-season. First NRL could be either this year or next (might want to wait to allow for stability). Leagues Club directors may choose to step down and run for NRL membership.
Replies
Seems like a solid framework Phil. But I doubt that these idiots will budge. They are in it for themselves.
Oh, I do realise that. I just want to help people to see that there can be a different way forward, and that it's not current board vs old boards vs privatisation. You can re-structure the entire joint, constitute so you get people with great skills and expertise, and still not let go of the democratic soul of the club.
Thanks.
All of the NRL part of it, you could do tomorrow if the Leagues Club board wanted to.
This conversation needs to start happening at a much wider level, and for people to realise it's not actually rocket science when you take the time to read it. Everyone can and should grasp the problems and potential solutions.
And if not enough people with the required skills run for election then what?
So you've got two elections. So you'd only need two people from the Leagues Club election to have the required skills. If not, as it says, then the Leagues Club board would forego it's two representatives and would need to appoint more independent directors. I'm sure you'd get two people to run for the NRL election that meet the skills matrix.
Yes, there is no requirement for any cross-over. However, I've tried to come up with a model that would be acceptable to the Leagues Club as the funding entity. I think two directors plus the majority say in the independent directors should suffice their need to have representation.
This all seems sound. However, I and I expect many others, are reading it without the experience or knowledge of how best to structure a large sporting club.
I would take look at and take advice from other more successful but similar organisations. I like the idea of maintaining 'the democratic soul of the club'. I like the constitutional elements that embed stability.
No matter what the structure however, there needs to be people with expertise and integrity to lead the club.
Outside of Parra, there clearly needs to be reform of the broken NRL cap and TPA system and of the manner in which the NRL conducts its scrutiny of clubs.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next