Don't ask for my advice and then literally shout at me

[Coffeetree]

Just feeling at a loss and could do with advice.

I'm a trustee for a charity and also a solicitor. So I advise around policies and any questions that come up in our operations, legal questions etc.

Often the operations team will ask whether we can do some extra thing for our service users and my answer is sometimes no, because it's outside our remit and we're not insured for it. And then the team and I will work out what we can do.

For the past few months the team has been pushing to do something which is unlawful, in an effort to help people. Basically cutting corners on health and safety. They have good intentions, but we're not insured for it, we don't have the qualifications, we can refer elsewhere, sorry but no. Let's say, for instance if we were a children's educational charity and they wanted to open an unregulated creche in someone's garden. (That's not actually it, just an example.)

It's been going on for a while. We had a meeting last week and I actually found it really upsetting. Basically the team saying "Yeah but whyyyy" and complaining about needless red tape. One of them was literally shouting. I'd done everything I could to explain in simple terms and try to find alternatives but they had their backs up. There was even language along the lines of, "Well we care about children even if the board doesn't ".

I've told the other trustees I'm taking a step back. I don't want to leave the charity but this is not what I signed up for. This isn't normal, right?

Frustrating yes

But it just doesn’t sound like being involved with this charity is right for you.

and as for the why not - if the benefits outweigh the risk ie no risk anyone would come to any harm and their charitable status not at risk, but people could genuinely benefit, then I would be inclined to side with the charity

I've told the other trustees I'm taking a step back.

and what will that mean in practise?

They have good intentions, but we're not insured for it, we don't have the qualifications, we can refer elsewhere, sorry but no.

I think the OP has made it quite clear that there is risk.

Thanks for responding.

It is something that could potentially be harmless, like an unregulated creche in someone's garden. And could also result in harm (for example, no DBS checks or oversight in the creche, no insurance, no first aid). So of course I advise against.

I do so thoughtfully, explaining the aw and potential risk.

So obviously it's up to the trustees as a whole how to proceed but I'm often asked to " Explain to the team" so it becomes personalised.

I’m afraid sort of thing is probably not uncommon.

Both a Dbro and a SiL of mine were involved at a high (volunteer) level for some years with separate, completely different, charitable organisations.

Both eventually resigned because of the endless arguing, complaining and general bitching.

Such a shame - it would all seem so unnecessary,

Ok so if harm is a possibility

then I would actually resign

“step back” is confusing and wishy washy

and as a trustee… what is your liability?

Honestly I don't know. There's a meeting tonight for which I've given apologies and I might take a week or so as a break.

and as a trustee… what is your liability?

Exactly, you have given your professional advice and they are ignoring it, don't put yourself at risk, walk away.

I agree.

Either resign and state your reasons in writing or call for a vote and ensure you reasons for voting against are minuted.

As a trustee you have liabilities which you will know as a solicitor.

Oh come on op

this is pathetic

you have ducked out of a meeting and you’re going to give it a week

either resign on the basis they are being reckless

or continue doing your job knowing that your advice may be ignored

either way - determine your liability and don’t just sit on the fence feeling pissed off

Well we're definitely not doing the risky thing!

All of us trustees are in agreement.

I need the trustees to present thes decisions as joint decisions rather than just "Coffeetree says no".

So your issue is actually with your fellow trustees?

Sorry if unclear, the trustees and I are entirely in agreement and the risky thing won't happen! Otherwise I'd have already quit.

What I'm tired of is the feeling of being a punching bag for the ops team.

Yes, I think you're right, the issue is with the other trustees. I think I need to chat with them and make it clear that it's a unified front as it were. I think sometimes it's a bit easier for them to say, "Coffeetree says no"
.
That's good advice actually.

And perhaps op… you need to be more clear

as on the basis of this thread, not so much!

Enjoy your day.

I agree that you need a united front but I have been in a similar position when at work. My approach was to say clearly " I have explained why my professional advice is not to do this and the trustees have agreed with the advice. You can yell at me, or all of us, you can argue, you can complain. This charity/department/ service is not doing this, anyone who wants to do it will have to go elsewhere to do so. Now moving on.Unless anyone has new information, not opinions, this discussion in over and will not be repeated." If you wish, you might add "I have been asked to explain the situation and have done so, I have nothing more to say." Act like a punchbag and you will be treated like one.

Excellent advice from @godmum56 and make sure it's all minuted

Good advice

I'm glad the trustees are all in agreement.

What is the managerial hierarchy of the organisation? Because I'm thinking the charity isn't getting the operational managerial steer it needs. Basically the trustees need to sit down with the senior manager and make it absolutely clear that this questioning of the trustees decisions stops now - question asked and answered. It is not up to the trustees to manage the operational team - that's the job of the senior manager. They are responsible for acting as a conduit between trustees and staff, otherwise why have a senior manager if you are being pulled into explaining your decisions constantly - as I say - question asked and answered.

Small charities can be very intense and personal - I know - been there and got several t-shirts. And sometimes boundaries are eroded between roles which is a nightmare to get back on track. Yours wouldn't be the first small charity to go under because of a disagreement between trustees and staff sadly - and the charity's senior manager needs to be ware of this. It's difficult enough to get skilled individuals to give of their time for a charitable cause without disagreements between staff, managers and trustees.

Thanks, very helpful perspective.

Thanks again, after some reflection I've gone to the chair and said if we've got a minuted decision from the trustees that we're not going to do something, then why are we revisiting it?