Update on my case, and on exactly how much Girlguiding is spending of their money

[KatieAlcock]

As a charity. On fighting a volunteer concerned about safeguarding who doesn't believe in inner gender essence.

The explanation is in the next post because it's long and tedious but the answer is "at least £35,000 and probably more like £100,000".

Thats awful mind 💐

@RufustheRowlingReindeer is this a policy that we can't have two threads on the same subject?

https://www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/running-your-unit/finance-insurance-and-property/subscriptions/how-we-use-the-annual-subscription/

saxa how else do girlguiding get their money. We have a annual census and every volunteer and girl is asked to pay a yearly subscription to GGUK.
On their website It clearly says they use it for legal purposes including 'support to make or deal with complaints'. Therefore I'm fairly sure the money my girls give to GGUK is being used for this.
They are a charity, where else would the money come from?

IsAnybodyListening, I hear you loud and clear. Heartbroken for the little girl you were. You are right; this is absolutely the crux of it. Girls and women NEED our spaces, and anyone asking us to give them up is not “being kind.”

Katie, you are a . Will seek out the way to help.

Listen I admire the OP taking a stand in what she believes in.

But without fully knowing information (because at the end of the day only those at the top do) it seems unfair to spread such what is essentially a rumour. Start a case to protect girls, brilliant - but don’t destroy what they have either.

Thank you Katie for doing this. As a leader, I love working with the girls and my wonderful fellow leaders, but head office often feels widely out of synch with reality and I do often question whether I want to work with such an establishment, but my own girls have got so much out of guiding. I just try to focus on the girls and try to block out the other stuff.

[quote KatieAlcock]@RufustheRowlingReindeer is this a policy that we can't have two threads on the same subject?[/quote]
They said they were discussing something at head office and would get back to us

There doesn’t seem to be a set policy on how many threads

Message from MNHQ: We've temporarily closed this thread as there are a few things we need to discuss at HQ. We will update as soon as we can - please bear with us

@Saxa23

Listen I admire the OP taking a stand in what she believes in.

But without fully knowing information (because at the end of the day only those at the top do) it seems unfair to spread such what is essentially a rumour. Start a case to protect girls, brilliant - but don’t destroy what they have either.

So if it's not coming from the charitable funding of members and donors, the other option is someone else is paying for it?

Frankly I'd rather it was from subs than some lobby group, which I hope is not the case.

@hellotoday27

Thank you Katie for doing this. As a leader, I love working with the girls and my wonderful fellow leaders, but head office often feels widely out of synch with reality and I do often question whether I want to work with such an establishment, but my own girls have got so much out of guiding. I just try to focus on the girls and try to block out the other stuff.

That’s exactly what many members do. They don’t believe a lot of what Hq do but they carry on doing the bits they do believe in. Because at the heart of it all they are providing something special to the girls. (What could be, and likely is) misinformation will only affect the ability to provide this.

Subs are also spent on sites owned and supported by GG - can you even begin to imagine the struggle the are having right now to even stay open? People won’t be travelling there anytime soon. Staff will lose their jobs.

They don’t need this kind of message.

It's just, you've gone from an emphatic "it doesn't come from subs!" to "look, no-one really knows but let's not start rumours".

I don't mind GGUK spending subs on world centers. They are an asset which benefit girls. I've been to many of them and gained a lot from the experience. I don't even mind subs and census being used to defend legal cases such a compensation for accident and injury. I do object to funds being used to pay "excessive" and unnecessary fees.

@HoneysuckIejasmine

It's just, you've gone from an emphatic "it doesn't come from subs!" to "look, no-one really knows but let's not start rumours".

But putting across the message that everyone’s subs were, isn’t on. If it were to be true, it’s been a tiny percentage surely. Subs support much more, like the sites I mentioned above, and the retail sites.

To be absolutely fair honey I’m either here nor there with regards to the case, I’ve said it before but let’s not tear GG down when it’s a policy OP is challenging, not GG as a whole.

At the end of the day, Girl Guides is meant to be single sex, it’s currently not.....have they told their trustees, insurance companies etc? This is a fiasco waiting to blow up, they know it & are being belligerently dishonest

Well I think it's rather obvious that the entirety of subs aren't going on legal fees. Of course not. but the point is, that's £33k+ that now isn't going on the girls, the running costs, the centers.

You've now swung from "it's not subs" to "it's only a little bit of subs". I think we probably agree on the statement I made in my previous post. I'm just unsure why you think you can say blanket statements about where funding is not coming from, and not then say where it is.

I think what you meant to say was what you've now admitted - it probably is from subs but as a portion of income it's small (and won't disadvantage members in a measurable way.)

Well done for getting through your day in court. I donated to your action and would happily do so again if required. I can only imagine how intimidating it must have felt and you have stood your ground with grace.

Thank you Honey You beat me to it with that reply.

That’s probably fair to say Honey, maybe I am just pissed at such a statement made by op can be damaging when it hits something like the DM, exaggerated even more so , and then Flossies mum and pals kick off at her leader and decides she’s not paying subs.
OP can fight her case without it. Totally.

Donated. I withdrew my daughter from GG because of the change in their rules. Thankyou for standing up for XX girls.

saxa23 I don't know what your agenda is, but unless you know of magical porridge pot churning out legal funds at GGUK headquarters, the money for this litigation is coming out of census money. Please don't insult the intelligence of people like me - a Unit Leader and a solicitor - unless you have knowledge to the contrary that you are willing to share.

Katie, I've just discussed your update with DH (seriously shit hot litigation lawyer). We both deal with litigants in person on a regular basis, and find it astonishing that GGUK would argue the direct/indirect discrimination point on your claim form, filed when you were unrepresented, when the particulars make it clear that your claim is for indirect discrimination. However, I imagine that whoever is dealing with this on the other side is taking instructions from insurers. I wonder if they are worried about a floodgate of similar cases and are trying anything to nip yours in the bud.

What level of court is this case being taken to / heard by? Is it the High Court?

but let’s not tear GG down when it’s a policy OP is challenging, not GG as a whole.

GG members aren't trying to tear guiding down. But they as members are entitled to know how the funds are spent.

Presumably as members they are also entitled to question policy if they don't agree with it. Or maybe Not, judging by the current case.

Running a charity is hard. GG do an amazing job. Doesn't mean people shouldn't ask questions. If that causes problems for GG I would suggest the fault lies there, not with the members.

At the end of the day, Girl Guides is meant to be single sex, it’s currently not.....have they told their trustees, insurance companies etc? This is a fiasco waiting to blow up, they know it & are being belligerently dishonest

So agree happydappy

And anyone know why the other thread has gone? When I posted on it recently - saying THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU to Katie, it all looked pretty amicable with a mix of people applauding Katie, others who didnt know about it and some who disagreed and felt it was anti trans (which of course it isn't, just pro safeguarding and inclusive of those who need single sex).

So why did it vanish? And do we still have a situation at Mumsnet that non-regular posters can just challenge and posts vanish?? IF so, this feels very bizarre. What did they need to look at???????

actually my suspicion is that it vanished because if was too popular - it was trending which is how I caught it .... and this led to a pile on of complaints from those wanting it to vanish without trace

Or am I just being too cynical??