New CEO of Edinburgh Rape Crisis

Here's an informative blog, how the centre changed from being a woman's centre to one including boys and young men, and all trans people -

edinburghrapecrisis.wixsite.com/ercc/post/lgbt-history-month-ercc-s-lgbt-history-and-journey-towards-silver-chartermark

So is there something we can do about this?

If anyone has any sound ideas about who to write to with our concerns, I’m right there. Sadly I’m not in Scotland, and I’ll hold my hands up to not knowing all that much about the charitable sector.

2 directors left in October 2020
2 directors left in February 2021
2 directors and the secretary left in April 2021

This would shout red flags to ofsted in a school if it were the equivalent of Senior leaders.

I do absolutely agree with this. When I read it, I actually couldn't help wonder if it was trying to find a tactful way to be able to refer to men aswell, not just trans women, to avoid whataboutery.

The first full "newsletter/ training info" leaflet Operation Encompass put out on email had a huge piece about physical and coercive abuse of men. Which, although this absolutely does happen and should't happen, I felt was a bit rich, borderline offensive, for the first mailshot given that the majority of domestic abuse victims are women and children.

The message communicated doesn't reflect reality for victims.

An utter disgrace.

Some boards are very weak though and do little to hold the ceo to account.

This is a very important point. The same can also be true of school governors in respect of the head teacher.

Previous thread, CharlieParley wrote,
(extract)
"... the inaugural Scottish LGBTI Awards honoured Mridul with the Outstanding Campaigner Award in September 2015. www.equality-network.org/scottish-lgbti-awards/winners/

As you can see from the acceptance speech, Mridul was out as trans at this point and from the work Mridul did, it's clear that this job is also not the job in question. (It's a bit rambling the speech, but it gives an insight into where Mridul's passion for campaigning for migrants and refugees comes from. It's the part of the speech that starts at 1:30 minutes into the video with this "I have been more traumatised being a migrant, let's say, than being trans.")
www.facebook.com/watch/?v=10153715084087378

The photos of the event suggest that Mridul has known some of the most important players in Scottish politics for at least five years, and is known to them as a capable and hardworking campaigner. That relationship is likely much longer than that - here for instance is Mridul giving evidence to the Scottish Parliament's Justice Committee on the proposed Bill on Forced Marriage in November 2013.

There is only one more employer Mridul worked for in the Women's sector and that is Shakti Women's Aid, an Edinburgh charity who focus on supporting women, children and young people with a BAME background who have experienced domestic violence.

Their front page today features the following statement:
Women only need apply under paragraph 1 of Schedule 9 of the Equality Act 2010.

Mridul first worked for Shakti Women's Aid from December 2005 to March 2007 as Information and Education Officer and then again as Information and Education Officer and Children and Young People's Services Supervisor from September 2008 to April 2017.

As you can see, this employment precedes the Equality Act being made law, and although the Sex Discrimination Act that was in place beforehand did allow for a Genuine Occupational Requirement to be female, the Gender Recognition Act 2004 actually overrode this (back then the women tasked with safeguarding women's rights in the Labour Government worked very hard to sabotage this vital protection for women and girls for the benefit of males who identify as trans.)

It's therefore much more plausible that Shakti in 2005 is where the situation is claimed to have happened where the employer did not realise Mridul is trans." (continues)
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4068462-womens-officer-Mridul?pg=2

Boards usually plan for up to a third of their members to be due for election at any one time, it would be unusual / bad planning for two thirds to go, though it could happen for reasons that weren't necessarily bad.

Whilst you do have to jump through hoops for funding, these are usually in relation to organisational systems and project plans. This would include staffing, but wouldn't usually look at the background of board members unless something else threw up concerns. I've known local authorities to step in to try to sort out boards gone bad occasionally.

Board members are nearly always unpaid, they may be called directors, trustees, committee members. Some may be doing very little other than attending a meeting once a quarter, though really to fulfill your obligations you need to do much more than this. Some boards are very weak though and do little to hold the ceo to account.

I think where I'm going with this is that 'capturing' doesn't necessarily mean getting everyone on board with the thinking, it's about where the funding's coming from. It doesn't make things any less shit but I still find it helpful.

“The policies and atitudes which enabled Wadhwa's appointment as CEO will have been embedded by Wadhwa.”

The ultimate in job satisfaction...

With regards Rape Crisis, it will have been captured by trans ideology/intersectional feminist inclusion policies some time ago.

Mridul Wadhwa worked as training and volunteer coordinator for Rape Crisis Scotland from June 2014 to August 2018, delivering training across the country and campaigning for inclusion and equality.

The policies and atitudes which enabled Wadhwa's appointment as CEO will have been embedded by Wadhwa.

And thanks Biscuits - I realise I might be going off on a flight of fancy but I just remember being quite shocked at how ruthless some small charities have to be just to survive. They're not nice, fluffy organisations - they can't afford to be.

Sorry R0 cross post. That's what I'm thinking.

And thanks R0. I'm getting confused now as to whether a director is a board member or staff? Either way that sounds high for what I presume is a small organisation.

I've had a bit of involvement with small charities and I've seen how you're forever scrapping for funding and that, if you don't follow the money, you've basically had it. I can quite see how you might have to make a change of direction and how not everyone will be on board.

Its also possible that with a significant contraversial decision by the board of trustees, those who took the opposing position would leave.

It’s not really flosime. The directors arent paid, they’re trustees and the company Secretary is usually a trustee

Most charities have a time limit to how long you can be a trustee usually up to 3 terms of 3 or 5 years. It’s not uncommon for a whole load to go at once

Interestingly the Scottish register of charities doesn’t seem to contain as much info as the charity commission about organisations governing documents

Thanks Tabby I've had a bit of involvement with bidding for project funding and you had to jump through all kinds of hoops to even get a look in. Does it work differently for grant funding?

I'm still interested in R0's point about recruiting (and presumably replacing) 6 directors and a secretary in April - so a month before they announced this appointment. Is it overreaching to think that's a high turnover for a small organisation, and kind of curious, even in these strange times?

2 directors left in October 2020
2 directors left in February 2021
2 directors and the secretary left in April 2021

These positions were filled April 2021
find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC291742/filing-history?page=1

Grant makers tend to look at how many trustees and ensure they're not related, they'd also check that filing with companies house and the charity commission was in order but they don't have the capacity to dig much further. Local authority funders might get more involved. However, the grant making process can take 6+ months, so their current funding would have been made before the changeover.

I'm still interested in R0's point about recruiting (and presumably replacing) 6 directors and a secretary in April - so a month before they announced this appointment. Is it overreaching to think that's a high turnover for a small organisation, and kind of curious, even in these strange times?

And also Hereward's point about nearly all their funding over the last year being from grants. Presumably to get these grants you have to bid and show you meet certain critieria?

Or that some people are feart to say no to some people?

This centre knew that this would contraversial. They knew that a lot of people wouldn't like it and would make that known. That as a TW this appointment would attract press coverage etc.

This surely would make victims think twice about going there? Just because of all this noise? Which is nothing to do with their core purpose. Which they should be avoiding distraction from.

It demonstrates that those with responsibility within the organisation do not understand Safeguarding, nor do they have sufficient awareness and priority of the needs of service users. This makes them not fit for purpose.

[quote PlanDeRaccordement]@stumbledin
Part of their role will be to comment on issues eg the appointment of a self identifying trans woman to a rape crisis centre offering women only services.

Is what I was responding to. I thought that was a reference to MWs appointment at ERCC? Or did Rape Crisis in England also just appoint a self-identifying transwoman as CEO? Wow. Mind blown.[/quote]
No, they didn't.

@DdraigGoch, since posting about MW and the SNP, I've since seen posts reminding me what I'd forgotten, that MW has since resigned from the SNP over the five little words furore (Scottish Parliament shamed into agreeing women can ask for a female forensic examiner when reporting rape or sexual assault and female will mean biological female, not someone whose gender identity is female). MW now in the Green Party, apparently. What a surprise. Scottish Greens appear to be the most toxic of the lot on this issue.