What Would You Do? Clubs and - Page 1

In a schutzhund version of John Quinones' program, here is a hypothetical:

Individual X is caught trespassing on Club A's field on a non-training day.  The next day, a training day, X shows up and proceeds to piss off Club A members by attempting to direct the training, give "tips and pointers" and generally act like X owns the place.   Club A members are offended, but several are new and unsure whether X is just a long-term member they have never seen.   X is taken to task by a long-time Club A member.

X enters Club A trial a month later and engages in behavior that leads to Club A issuing a letter that X is not welcome there and no entry for future events will be accepted.  X is told that X may spectate at Club A trials in the future, so long as X is not disruptive, offensive, etc. 

X writes a letter of complaint about being "banned" from Club A that is sent to officers of multiple schutzhund organizations.   The organization heads all consider it a club matter and the club's prerogative.  End of matter.



A year later, X approaches Club B  (where X had years before been a long-time member and officer) and asks to join.  Club B's membership becomes divided  over the issue of X's membership and some members approach Club A about its experience with X.  Club A states that it does not want to be involved in another club's internal membership matters and declines to provide X-related correspondence.   Club A also states that its experience with X has, or should have, no bearing on Club B's decision on membership.


So, what would you do, if you were Club A or B?   How would you handle the matter differently than either club? 
What would you do, if you were X? 

Well, If I were personnel manager, I think when Club B  asked Club A for references on person X, Club A Officer should cooperate to the extent that they can verify he was a member from date to date, and if his accounts were paid on a timely basis. Any other matters of a personal nature I would decline to answer, but suggest that Club B should ask person X for a list of persons they can interview for personal/character references. Club A members of course are of their own minds and speak as they wish, if they happen to be on person X's reference list.

X obviously caused problems at Club "A". I'm assuming he did at Club "B" because they are divided over allowing him/her membership.

I wouldn't personally want him in. But can you allow that person in on a 6 month "trial basis"? If he screws up he is gone.

Also does the club have an official policy on new membership? If so I suggest they follow it. Or change it if necessary.

If someone has always been a problem in the past, it's not going to change IMO.

If I was an officer in club "A" I would be reluctant to discuss past members personal behavior, because of a possible lawsuit.

Very sticky situation here

I think the key question for Club A to answer is "would you allow this person in as a member" or something of that sort.  When a company terminates an employee for bad behavior or something negative I believe they can only answer the question "would  you hire this person again" to the inquiries of a future company considering hiring that  person.  I believe that skirts any possible lawsuit without divulging the particulars. 

A probationary membership is certainly the way to go and then if X continues the pattern of behavior it's a simple thing to dump him/her.  In some clubs all the members must vote unanimously to bring in a new member so that's also an out if Club B has reservations about his/her membership.

Interesting question.

Judy

Club A should have the decency of telling Club B the truth about X, It is then for Club B to decide if they want to take X back as a member
However X has behaved like a Prat and should send Club A a letter of apology for his bad behaviour, and assure Club B in a letter Posted saying that he will abide by the rules of the club and be a genuine helpful member in the future if they allow him back as a member
Steve1

Ninja:

In this scenario, X was never a member of Club A, merely a person first caught trespassing on the club field, then later an entrant in the club's trial . 




quote by beetree: What X needs to realize is even if he bully's his way into an organization he will probably continue to have the same issue of alienation of members, unless he figures out a beneficial change. Not likely though. The fight could be the game!

Beetree:  You are absolutely correct, IMO.  The divisiveness over an individual's membership would not go away, simply because X is allowed to become a probationary member.   Clubs have split over such divisiveness, because who ever "lost" the argument stews about it during that entire probationary period; it becomes a pot stirred more frequently than risotto. Similarly, if X is rejected, there is a faction that is also stewing over their "loss." 

If I  were a member of Club B, even if I thought X might possibly bring something to the table in terms of training,
I would consider the fact that X has already had a negative and destructive effect on the club and do what is in the best interest of the club: sending X on down the road--at least for the time being.  No matter how you slice it, Club B has already been damaged by X's presence.   Club B members need to remove the problem  and try to heal the wound, stat, or risk a difference of opinion over one person becoming a full-blown split over one individual. 

If I  were X, I would not want to join  Club B, where I was not wanted by a portion of the membership at the outset, to the point that those members attempt to involve yet another club, at which I am not welcome.  That would amount to picking off the scab at Club A by again being a pain in Club A's ass because of Club B's requests for documents.  I would go join a training group of  disaffected former Club B members.  IMO, X would then have to be given credit for recognizing that Club B is in a "lose-lose" situation that I can remedy by taking myself out of the equation.  THAT may earn X some  respect and credibility down the line, if X were to try to join Club B several months down the line.


JudyK:  In this scenario, Club B has no bylaws clearly addressing the  membership issue.  Consequently, members can fight over "what the bylaws mean/should mean."    I was once a member of a club that became so divisive  that every member had a copy of  "Roberts' Rules " in their vehicle at training.    That crap was only eliminated when the club, thankfully and mercifully, split.  

Basically, the only "reference" you will get from a prior employer is dates of employment, salary and position.  Almost anything else, including re-hiring eligibility, can get you in hot water.

I personally think that Person X is trying to divide the club. Person X already knows that they are not welcome. Unfortunately, person Y gets added into the equation, who is friends with person X outside of the club. Person Y was almost threatening other members of club B to vote and allow person X in. I personally think that persons X and Y need to go and train each other. :)

Mystere, I suspect that this type of scenario is more common than people realize with a few variables thrown in.  And I doubt that X will change his ways. 

Let us know how it is resolved. 

Judy