Submitted by Cat Eyes

.

Clorinda Alleyne, CEO, Public Workers’ Co-operative Credit Union Limited
  1. How is it that the CEO of this credit union makes almost $20,000 per month, inclusive of allowances. More than the Prime Minister of this country?  More than what some executives of private sector banks and insurance companies earn; more than some executives who have to perform and are appraised on performance. She also receives leave passage – the type that longstanding civil servants receive- holiday with passage paid for by the members. They have smartly sat down and crafted an exceptional salaries and benefits package for Alleyne who adds no value to the institution if you were to review her performance. Her salary is almost 6 thousand dollars more than her deputy the Legal Counsel. Those gaps in salary ranges are highly unusual. The CEO of the PW credit union has no financial qualifications, save for the credit union courses, and was a less than stellar attorney before joining the organisation as its Legal Counsel, yet through the machinations of Paul, and certainly not on ability or skill she is the head of this organisation.
  2. The CEO has a chauffeur who is paid out of the organisation’s coffers. The reasoning was that she was suffering from dizziness so she could  not drive. For five years or more this has been occurring. It was suggested that the driver, who is a messenger at the credit union, be paid the overtime for chauffeuring her, out of her salary. He also picked up her children from schools that are within walking distance of the credit union..
  3. For over three years Paul Maxwell, who was laid off from Cable and Wireless and worked nowhere, spent most of his time at the organisation and drove to and from the Credit Union in the car assigned to Alleyne, while she was driven around in another vehicle. The organisation’s car was in the possession of a non-executive director for over a year – being serviced etc. with members’ money – and nothing was done about it.
  4. When Caswell’s trip was cancelled, we the members lost approximately $10 thousand dollars in non-refundable expenses which were paid. His trip was cancelled out of spite, and we all know who was behind it. They have absolutely no regard for how our money is spent, as long as their end is achieved. So ” … cancel his trip, who the hell cares if the members’ money is pitched into Maxwell Pond as long as he does not go anywhere we are happy.”
  5. For the past decade some very bright and independent minds have left the institution because of the actions of the “musical chairs” Board. The management  staff complement then becomes a compliant, mentally sterile, ethically devoid group of trip hunters who take the lavish salaries, the healthy profit sharing and say “yes sir, yes sir, three bags full” and grin all the way to the salary counter. Petrified to object to anything.

My recommendation is that the whole Board face a no-confidence motion. Also, people like Cedric Murrell, who have proven to be major disappointments in the manner in which they have condoned this behaviour as members of the Supervisory Committee, should be permanently off.

The function of the Registrar of Cooperatives has functioned in this case just as the Supervisor of Insurance functioned with CLICO. THEY DID NOT FUNCTION!!! Couple their inaction with a complacent, greedy membership which seems to have no concept of what a credit union should be and no comprehension of their responsibility as members, and we have problems.

In moving forward, members would have to petition/agitate for Paul Maxwell to be forbidden to serve on any decision-making entities related to the credit union. They are currently making plans to establish a new company that will be providing services to smaller credit unions, and another unemployed clique member, Dean St. Hill, is tipped to head that company. Paperwork is with the Registrar. Members need to put their foot down.

It is unfortunate that this matter had to be aired here. But that is what happens when people feel they have no voice in the forum that should listen and act. I certainly hope it does not undermine public confidence in the institution, which by and large is a great one. But this development is a result of a lapse in the vigilance we all knew used to be the hallmark of successful credit unions.

Get to the AGM, demand answers- do not allow Paul and company to use by laws to block discussion (and threats of legal action from the bully Alleyne). Organise, and do like them and get a lawyer to go with the group if you can. And when you get your answers, petition, move motions, do whatever you can to bring the freewheeling by that group to an end. Take back your credit union.

329 responses to “Barbados Public Workers Cooperative Credit Union Members Urged To Take Back Their Credit Union From The Few Who Have Hijacked It”


  1. @ Caswell – I have to persist with this because you are making some very serious charges and you turned this particular matter over to the police. Why are you arguing that the use of credit cards for entertainment by directors constitutes remuneration to directors? We have heard your side of the argument but it seems to me that there is another side.

    Would it have been okay if the directors paid out of their own pocket and were then reimbursed by cheque?

  2. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Just only asking
    Your post at 8:58: You understood me correctly.

    Brutus
    You asked, “Should we assume that the lawyer who supported the Board’s interpretation is also corrupt?”
    Your question should be, Why would the credit union that has two lawyers on their payroll seek a legal opinion from an outside lawyer on such a simple matter? And when the non lawyers on the board disagreed with the legal opinion that the credit union paid for, why would they go to a fourth lawyer to get the opinion that they wanted. If he had disagreed, would they have continued until they found one that agreed with them, all at the credit union’s expense.

  3. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Brutus
    Again, you seem not to understand what a credit union is. Individual directors do not have authority to spend and then seek reimbursement without prior approval. In any event that was the case. However you try to twist what they did, it still amounted to embezzlement.


  4. @ Tina Roach
    By your own admission “I dun say that I aint know nuttin bout nuh credit union so who putting forward the arguments need to convince people like me. Yes its an Ossie Moore sitaution !”

    Unfortunately for you, no one needs to convince you of anything at this time. Hopefully you won’t take this the wrong way but if you actually are a member and you don’t know why you are a member, that is an issue for you. This is not the time for remedial classes in Credit Unionism for you or anyone else. Any time after the 19th or 20th June I am sure many members will be more than willing to assist you. Right NOW, there much bigger, more pressing and potentially financially detrimental issues for THOUSANDS more people who actually know why they are in this credit union to be dealt with. I hope the members who understand clearly the gravity of this situation ignore the distractions (like Tina Roach and others) and stick to the facts.
    Finding a way to come together before Saturday and coming up with a strategy and only deal with what is going on is most CRITICAL.


  5. @Sargeant

    Simply trying to get Brutus to understand Caswell’s point.

    Brutus is seeing this situation with the credit cards as he would if he was working for a Broad street company without understanding that a different sent of rules apply in the credit union world.


  6. @Cat Eyes – you are saying then that the credit cards were NOT used for credit union business? That is a very simple concept for me to understand and does not require divine intervention.

    However are you saying that there is no such thing as local entertainment? This seems to be Caswell’s point at 9.25 pm above when he says “There is no legitimate business in the credit union where a director of Public Workers Credit Union can take out a credit card to use locally”.

    If you say that the Board members do not even have to fill out vouchers in connection with their use of the cards then this is a different matter. I think it is reasonable for the board to have guidelines on what the cards may be used for, and spending limits. But based on what has been said so far I maintain that the cards can be properly used without violating the Act or violating good business practice, even for a credit union. Of course they can also be misused.

    Can you and I disagree on this without you finding me to be corrupt or a thief and calling in the police?


  7. @Caswell – re your comment at 10:10 pm – section 68(1) of the Act says that directors and committee members may be reimbursed for expenses incurred by reason of the performance of their duties and functions as directors or members of committees.


  8. @Brutus: “….section 68(1) of the Act says that directors and committee members may be reimbursed for expenses

    Language is such a subtle thing. Isn’t it?

    Definition of “may be”: Adverb: “Perhaps; possibly.” Noun: “A mere possibility or probability.

    Hmmmm…..


  9. @ Brutus

    While much of what you have queried is reasonable, I have a couple of queries of my own for you.
    Since much of what you have said is based on the fact that they already HAVE be issued with cards, my queries are:
    1. SHOULD THEY HAVE BEEN ISSUED WITH CREDIT CARDS IN THE FIRST PLACE?
    2. Who gives prior approval for what they spend OUR money on? Do you?
    3. Shouldn’t the credit cards have limits?
    4. Shouldn’t they have to fill out vouchers explaining the expenditure? etc.
    You would note, with any argument, you need to START AT THE BEGINNING.
    The current system leaves it to the conscience, good judgment and integrity of the card holder. Clearly not a wise move.


  10. @BajanV

    See comments in bold to points raised by you.

    Since much of what you have said is based on the fact that they already HAVE be issued with cards, my queries are:
    1. SHOULD THEY HAVE BEEN ISSUED WITH CREDIT CARDS IN THE FIRST PLACE?

    How can you blame the Directors if the Registrar of Cooperative who we understand this matter was drawn to her attention, fails to act?
    Also if we have more than one legal interpretation of the act regulating this matter should we so easily dismiss the case on the other side, to Brutus’ point.

    2. Who gives prior approval for what they spend OUR money on? Do you?

    Call BU simplistic but are we to believe we have Directors of the credit union who would use the credit cards to spend for items not related to credit union business and then claim such expenses as such?

    3. Shouldn’t the credit cards have limits?

    Again call BU simplistic but don’t credit cards have limits?

    4. Shouldn’t they have to fill out vouchers explaining the expenditure? etc

    see point #2.


  11. @BajanV – I absolutely agree with you that controls are necessary. My only concern is that people are being accused of embezzlement over what might simply be different interpretations of the law.


  12. @ Brutus
    Reimbursed means that, having spent your own money in the interest of the credit union, and upon providing proof that such expenses were legit and reasonable, such expenses may be repaid to the spender by the credit union.

    The use of a credit card (in the name of the Credit Union) up front can in no way be construed as a ‘reimbursement’.

    The idea is that these people are expected to be VOLUNTEERS not parasites…

    @ Caswell
    Can you not see after all these years that you continue to be a voice fighting in the wilderness? Very few of your ‘members’ seem to know or care about ‘co-operative’ philosophy. Sometimes the bushman even wondered about you….based on some of your past legendary battles…

    Have you considered addressing some of these concerns by CO-OP EDUCATION rather than by battle? When you were on the various committees it would have been a great platform from which to preach the gospel of co-operatives rather than try to be a one man Zorro… After your 25 years with PWCCUL you have a surprisingly large number of ‘depositors and borrowers’ and very few members it would seem. Big Fail!!?

  13. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Brutus
    You actually mean Section 68 (2) but you are missing the point. The subsection speaks to reimbursement. How can you be reimbursed up front. More importantly, those expenses must have been incurred in the performance of their duties as directors. Since you know so much could you detail the duties that were performed every month to the tune of $2,000 for one director in particular, and then produce receipts to justify the expenditure. The board fired the Internal Auditor when she raised these same concerns.

    The Board had no authority to fire the Internal Auditor, but they did anyway.
    By-law 51. The Internal Auditor shall report to the Supervisory Committee.
    By-law 52. The Internal Auditor shall only be disciplined or dismissed on the majority vote of each elected committee.
    Neither of the other two committees voted or was even consulted on the matter. The Board was advised by a lawyer that even though they had no authority to fire the Internal Auditor all they had to do would be pay her compensation for wrongful dismissal and she could not take them to court. To make sure that she did not take them to court: they paid her 10 times the amount for which she qualified. Why not? After all it is not their money.

  14. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Bush Tea
    You asked. “Have you considered addressing some of these concerns by CO-OP EDUCATION rather than by battle?
    Yes, in the early days I was one of the trainers, but now the board refuses to comply with the law and train members. They prefer to keep members in ignorance so that they can do what they like. As a result, we end up with people like Brutus who writes prolifically about things that he has no knowledge of.


  15. @Caswell – thanks for the correction.

    I can agree with you on the point about reimbursement, but because it is not reimbursement under 68(2) does not make it remuneration under 68(1). I can not detail what the expenditures were for nor provide receipts.

    If the argument is that the cards were used for personal expenses then I can accept that, but that would have to be proven and not assumed. If the argument is that it is not known what the cards were used for then embezzlement has not been proven. I do agree though that the directors should be required to provide receipts for the items charged to the cards, and there should be guidelines for use of the cards. I see the cards simply as a convenience and not as a problem in themselves.


  16. @Caswell Franklyn: “The Board was advised by a lawyer that even though they had no authority to fire the Internal Auditor all they had to do would be pay her compensation for wrongful dismissal and she could not take them to court. To make sure that she did not take them to court: they paid her 10 times the amount for which she qualified. Why not? After all it is not their money.

    Sounds a bit like Judas Iscariot…

    Is betrayal only an ancient crime?

    Exactly how many “pieces of silver” were paid?

    (And, importantly, the “Board” is likely more implicit than the payee.)


  17. This man seems to be trying hard to make a case for directors to entertain themselves with the members’ money. I really would like to see a list of these entertainment activities and the business reasons for the activities. He seems to think that entertainment for the sake of entertainment is okay, so eat drink and be merry because this is monopoly money.

  18. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Christopher
    I think that I did not make myself clear. She did not negotiate a package: she was literally escorted to the door and put out of the building for questioning unauthorised expenditure of board members.

    In Barbados, if you are fired wrongfully, you have no case to take to court if the employer pays adequate compensation up front. In order to make sure that the compensation was adequate, the board overpaid in order to make sure that the Internal Auditor could not take them to court.. I hope that I am clear this time.


  19. @Caswell Franklyn: “In order to make sure that the compensation was adequate, the board overpaid in order to make sure that the Internal Auditor could not take them to court.. I hope that I am clear this time.

    Painfully.

    But, being me, I must still ask…

    Is it not still the option of the payee to not accept the payment, and to take the issue to court if they consider the matter to be more important than a simple payout (pieces of silver)?

    Others will be asking this question as well….


  20. We say that Board members (and others in society) should be independently-minded. Yet when I raise a number of questions that go against the consensus view of the discussion there seems to be an unwillingness (with a few exceptions) to look with an open mind at alternative views of the matter. This is why people keep quiet at Board meetings, and this is why Boards (and other bodies) make bad decisions.


  21. @Brutus…

    There seems to be those who don’t like to face the truth.

    But, then, there are those who do like to do so.

    May the best person win….

  22. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Christopher
    If you refuse the money and go to court and the court determines that you were entitled to less: you will end up having to pay the lawyers out of the reduced sum that the court would award.

    Brutus
    At one stage, I thought that you were just playing devil’s advocate. It is not that you go against the consensus view, your views demonstrate a total unfamilarity with the topic of credit unions/ co-operatives. They say that a little learning is a dangerous thing, but trust me, ignorance is far worse.


  23. @Caswell Franklyn: “If you refuse the money and go to court and the court determines that you were entitled to less: you will end up having to pay the lawyers out of the reduced sum that the court would award.

    You misunderstand me.

    Imagine you can go to court to prove a point.

    Imagine you have the knowledge to represent yourself.

    Imagine you can document how much money you were promised or given to keep your mouth shut, or to say certain things.

    Imagine you’re not afraid.

    Imagine….


  24. @Caswell – you are right, that is why I ask so many questions rather than making assumptions or just accepting what I am told.

  25. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Christopher
    Imagine that you were fired from your job and the employer is required by operation of the law to pay you $2,000, but instead pays you $20,000. Are you going to go to court and say you only owe me $2,000?
    The court is not concerned that you have a point to prove. If the employer tells the court that he acknowledges that he wrongfully terminated the worker, the court would only be concerned about the quantum of damages. The court would not provide you with a soap box to air your views; you have Brass Tacks for that.

  26. Just thinking about it Avatar
    Just thinking about it

    What doth the one man union protest about this time ? A reject of the Credit Union Movement now stakes claim to having a union of one man,Franklyn in anything a union must mean more than one, in marriage it is union of two persons, in your case you are pontificating as if your are a voice of authority, you like you looking to do a Roger Smith Move if you can get more than one member in your Union and get some money passing thru you gone clear with it, that is what you lurking round for ?..


  27. @Caswell Franklyn: “Imagine that you were fired from your job and the employer is required by operation of the law to pay you $2,000, but instead pays you $20,000. Are you going to go to court and say you only owe me $2,000?

    No. I wouldn’t go the court.

    But nor would I cash that $20,000 check because I know it contains conditions of silence…

    There are times when one’s morals are more important than cash.


  28. The Chairman of a meeting controls the meeting and possesses a significant amount of power in the meeting room. Directors usually control shareholders’ meetings through the Chairman. While the relevant legislation may limit the business conducted at a shareholders’ meeting to that outlined in the notice, further control may be exerted by the Chairman by unreasonably limiting or not allowing discussion on some items. For example, the Chairman may move to limit questions regarding directors’ entertainment expenses. Subject to the relevant rules/by-laws, concerned members need to first work to appoint a Chairman that will be sympathetic and allow full, though relevant, discussion and questions from the members. Caswell, what are the rules governing the appointment of the Chairman of a BPWCCUL members’ meeting?

  29. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    A. Freeman
    From the time that I attended my first credit union meeting in 1981, the President has always chaired the meetings of members. However, as far as I am aware, there is nothing in the Act, Regulations or By-laws that has prescribed that requirement.

  30. Just thinking about it Avatar
    Just thinking about it

    What doth the one man union protest about this time ? A reject of the Credit Union Movement now stakes claim to having a union of one man,Franklyn in anything a union must mean more than one, in marriage it is union of two persons, in your case you are pontificating as if your are a voice of authority, you like you looking to do a Roger Smith Move if you can get more than one member in your Union and get some money passing thru you gone clear with it, that is what you lurking round for ?


  31. I have been following this for quite some time and I must say that Caswell has succeeded in mixing loads of fiction with lots of quotes from various pieces of law and very little truth to create the equivalent of an emotional molotov cocktail which is aimed at destroying a credit union that has been there for its members for 40 years.

    As a member I went to get the AUDITED financial reports and I am shocked because the financials bear no resemblance to what has been discussed over the past days.

    Ernst and Young has signed off an unqualified audit for the organisation.

    The main financial highlights include a $6.069M net income. This is down from last year but the loan provision has been increased by nearly $2M which I think you would expect in the current economic environment. Note 6 details the operating expenses and ENTERTAINMENT is a whopping $55K compared to $58k last year.

    People talked about PEARLS and BPWCCUL’s total expense/average asset ratio is 3.9% where PEARLS says anything less than 5% is excellent. We could split hairs in terms of what specific line expenses could be reduced or increased but this is well inline with the world’s best credit unions.

    The assets have increased from $671M last year to $842M this year a 25% increase – way beyond PEARLS definition of excellence (inflation+10%) I would guess that includes the CMFC acquisition.

    The credit union also has net loans of $712M which is 84% of its assets in loans. PEARLS says excellence is achieved anywhere around 70-80%. It is therefore using its resources to lend money to people not to INVEST in risky schemes or in Equities or anything else.

    In terms of solvency BPWCCUL has a solvency ratio of 123% where PEARLS says excellence is achieved at 111%. (This is the ratio of total assets / total shares and deposits)

    In a nutshell we could all get down in the mud and dirty ourselves and tarnish the name of an incredibly successful Barbadian institution or we can be responsible and get the facts – not the facts according to Caswell. The facts as presented in the financial report which is available.

    Now having said all that sure the Board needs to answer some searching questions – I will be there at the AGM and I will have lots of questions but getting rid of the board and all the other pie-in-the-sky stuff being conjured up especially by Caswell is more than a little over-the-top.

    As for the people talking about pulling out money – sure you can go ahead and pull it out. You’ll just have to settle for a lower rate as the CU’s are offering some of the best rates. They can afford to do that because they are lending out their money not keeping it in bank accounts or in short term investments. And with a deposit base of $673M I’m sure you’ll hurt more than the organisation.

    Let’s get real people. Come to the meeting, armed with your questions, demand answers, elect the best people to serve (we need more women on the board!!! so give them some support), say no to the recycling of Directors who have served for 15 years plus and lets have a good meeting.


  32. @Green Giant

    To be fair a lot of the comment about the credit union speaks to it moving away from a core philosophy and not* its financial performance which many acknowledge has been good.

    You also should acknowledge that because a company has a strong balance sheet it does not absolve those officers charged with running the company business from the breaches which have been highlighted in contravention of the by-laws of the company..

  33. smooth chocolate Avatar
    smooth chocolate

    @just thinking about
    @green giant

    stop being so jealous of Caswell. Not everyone are born leaders…u are not…he is. not everyone has intelligence…u are not..he is. both ur comments add nothing to the debate while Caswell is seeking to inform. go and watch Sesame Street please…i want to be informed


  34. Thanks for the info Green Giant.

    For those who are interested, here is a link to some sample policies published by the Kansas Credit Union Association. It includes a sample Expense Reimbursement Policy which covers many of the things we have been discussing here. It encourages the use of credit cards for legitimate credit union business expenses including entertainment, but emphasizes the need for proper documentation and approval.

    http://www.kcua.coop/Sample_Policies_AF_137.html

  35. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Green Giant
    Your slip is showing. Outside of a very small core of people, no one at the credit union knows anything about the World Council of Credit Union’s standards called PEARLS. That is because the credit union does not train its members as required by law any more. As a result only a small core group are equipped with the tool to operate a credit union. I happen to be one of that small core group with the knowledge, but I refuse to be corrupt so I am not well loved. I use the knowledge that I acquire over many years of training and experience to defend the credit union.

    PEARLS is no magic bullet, the results can be manipulated. According to PEARLS, 100% of the non-performing loans should be written off after 12 months to give a true indication of the organization’s health. That is, delinquency under 12 months be less than or equal to 5% of the loan portfolio. Redo the numbers with that in mind and tell us what is the true position of the credit union. Public Workers Credit Union does not operate using the world standard know as PEARLS. The take out a few to mislead people by giving the impression that all is well.

    David
    I am sending you a copy of the PEARLS ratios under separate cover so that you can post them for the BU family.

  36. just only asking Avatar
    just only asking

    @@Green Giant

    Audited Finanacial Statements do not tell all, futher the big companies that collasped in america were audited. Auditors get their revunue from campanies, and sometimes even the qualifying statements are cleverly worded when they have concerns. Aiditors are mosly concerned with GAAP and sometimes would discover infellicities or miss some, because in some instance they take a sample of transactions to audit..

    I could recall as a young man working with an insurance company there was a young lady who was milking the comany for years and the said comapany was audited by one of the prestigious accounting firm year after and did not discover how she was manipulating the accounts, and freshman off the street picked up she was manipulating th system.

  37. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Brutus
    You poor fellow! Kansas and Barbados operate under different laws. It does not follow that what is legal in Kansas is also legal in Barbados. As a matter of fact, there are two different types of credit union systems operating in the USA: there are Federal credit unions and state chartered credit unions and policies differ. Also policies differ from state to state.

    You are just trying to deliberately confuse the issue: I wonder why. Are you benefitting from the largesse at the credit union

  38. just only asking Avatar
    just only asking

    @caswell

    If members believe that the chairman is abusing his power, what can they do . Under the rules of meeting if the bye laws or whatever you call them are silent on that matter.

    can the meeting overide the chairman, can they call for an adjourment, ect. i KNOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT the meeting has power so asvise.


  39. Brutus | June 5, 2011 at 6:26 AM |

    I don’t know much about credit union management, but I know there is a financial performance monitoring system known as PEARLS. I would advise members to ask the Board is the credit union is under-performing with respect to any of the PEARLS ratios and benchmarks, and if so what is the Board’s plan for these areas.

    If there is nothing in PEARLS that covers things like expenses for salaries and travel by directors, then members should ask the Board how they decide the overall reasonableness of these amounts and how they compare to expenses in other credit unions of similar size.
    __________________________________________________

    Wow, in my ignorance I seem to have blundered onto something that might be important! Maybe a little learning can sometimes be a good thing 🙂


  40. @David

    David, a lot of what has been written is simply speculative at best or downright wrong wrong wrong. The 9 principles of Cu’s are:

    Democratic Control
    Open and Voluntary Membership
    Non-Discrimination

    Service to Members
    Distribution to Members
    Building Financial Stability – A prime concern of the credit union is to build the financial strength, including adequate reserves and internal controls that will ensure continued service to membership.

    On-going Education of members, officers and employees.
    Cooperation Among Cooperatives
    Social Responsibility

    These are at: http://www.woccu.org/bestpractices/operations then click on “operating principles”. You can determine if these principles are being breached.

    You are also far more intelligent than some of your questions suggest so please don’t suggest that I’m trying to absolve directors from anything. There are two issues. The institution – which we must seek to protect and the directors and their alleged transgressions which may breach by-laws etc.

    In the example I cited, entertainment was less than $60k in a 850 million dollar institution – thats a fact. Whether it is in breach of all the mombo jumbo law that Mr. Franklyn quotes is one for the law courts. The fact that he seems to have done everything possible to bring this to those courts without traction suggests to me that while Mr. Franklyn is enthusiastic, well-intentioned etc. he’s also WRONG!! Just because someone believes strongly that they are right does not mean they are. Sorry but that’s life.

    @Smooth Chocolate
    I could not be jealous of Mr. Franklyn if I tried. Here is the one person in Barbados that has no credibility. In life, it is good to be an idealist and to champion these ideals. At some stage one generally becomes pragmatic and sometime perhaps while you’re a teenager you work out that if you see your Dad using your mum’s cream you won’t exactly call the police. You also determine the scale of issues and respond appropriately.

    In Mr. Franklyn’s case he needs to grow up. If he wants to be a lawyer do like every other lawyer and invest the time to do it. Otherwise stop pretending to be something you’re not. Stop pretending.

    He has worked for all sorts of organisations, Government, NUPW etc. In every case it seems he’s had some kind of grouse. He needs to leave organisations before he bites the hand that’s feeding him. Its a basic principle. But I forget – he has no principles. That’s why he would refer to things that happened while he was a director in possible breach of these same laws he’s quoting.

    We can also ask him for full disclosure about every trip he’s made while he was an insider of the credit union. He didn’t seem to have any issues then but there were no blogs then so maybe he did have issues but no outlet. He should also disclose what needs to be disclosed about his World Cup involvement and other quasi-illegal schemes he’s been involved with over the years. He’s lucky not to be behind bars.

    So Smooth Chocolate, I am capable of jealousy but incapable of being jealous of that sorry individual who just needs to grow up.


  41. Just to play devil’s advocate again, Green Giant mentioned that the solvency ratio of the BPWCUL is much higher than required. This might support the case for higher dividends or higher interest rebates (patronage refunds). I would be interested in informed views on this, including from Caswell and Green Giant.

  42. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Just only asking
    The cchairman has only those powers that the meeting allow him to have. He can be overruled at any time by the required majority.

    Also, members can adjourn a meeting at any time, by simply proposing and seconding a motion to that effect, once that is done the chairman must put it to the floor and once a simple majority votes for the motion the meeting is adjourned.


  43. @Caswell – re your post at 9:50 am. You are determined to pick a fight even where what I posted supports much of your position. If credit union principles vary across jurisdictions then which principles are you and Bush Tea using?

    In any event, the opening two paragraphs of the expense policy seem to mirror what might be seen as the spirit of S.68 of our legislation.

  44. just only asking Avatar
    just only asking

    @catseye

    I understand the principles of BPWCCUL better than most of these bloggers, i have been a member since 1974 and was (very active during its infancy) and is very active in the discussions during the agm, and will be more active this time, i have more to protect than any of you on this blog including you, so dont you go including me with those wo dont understand the the issues.

    I remeber paying money to Olive Trotman when she visited department with that suitcase.


  45. Here is the link to PEARLS which list key ratios used by the credit union to manage its business:

    http://www.woccu.org/bestpractices/pearls/pearlsratios

    P – Protection Goals (Excellence)
    1. Loan Losses Allowances / Delinq. >12 Mo. 100%
    2. Net Loan Loss Allowances / WOCCU Allowance Required for Delinq. 1-12 Mo. 35%
    3. Complete Loan Charge-off of Delinq. > 12 Mo. Yes
    4. Annual Loan Charge-offs / Average Loan Portfolio Minimized
    5. Accum. Charge-offs Recovered / Accum. Charge-offs > 75%
    6. Solvency (Net Value of Assets/Total Shares & Deposits) ≥ 111%

    E – Effective Financial Structure
    Goals (Excellence)
    1. Net Loans / Total Assets 70-80%
    2. Liquid Investments / Total Assets ≤ 16%
    3. Financial Investments / Total Assets ≤ 2%
    4. Non-financial Investments / Total Assets 0%
    5. Savings Deposits / Total Assets 70-80%
    6. External Credit / Total Assets 0-5%
    7. Member Share Capital / Total Assets ≤ 20%
    8. Institutional Capital / Total Assets ≥ 10%
    9. Net Institutional Capital / Total Assets ≥ 10%

    A – Asset Quality
    Goals (Excellence)
    1. Total Loan Delinquency / Gross Loan Portfolio ≤ 5%
    2. Non-earning Assets / Total Assets ≤ 5%
    3. Net Zero Cost Funds / Non-earning Assets ≥ 200%

    R – Rates of Return and Costs
    Goals (Excellence)
    1. Net Loan Income / Average Net Loan Portfolio Entrepreneurial Rate
    2. Liquid Inv. Income / Avg. Liquid Investments Market Rates
    3. Fin. Investment Income / Avg. Fin. Investments Market Rates
    4. Non-fin. Inv. Income / Avg. Non-fin. Investments ≥ R1
    5. Fin. Costs: Savings Deposits / Avg. Savings Deposits Market Rates > Inflation
    6. Fin. Costs: External Credit / Avg. External Credit Market Rates
    7. Fin. Costs: Member Shares / Avg. Member Shares Market Rates, > R5
    8. Gross Margin / Average Assets ˆE9=10%
    9. Operating Expenses / Average Assets ≤ 5%
    10. Provisions for Risk Assets / Average Assets ˆP1=100%, ˆP2=35%
    11. Other Income or Expense / Average Assets Minimized
    12. Net Income / Average Assets (ROA)
    ˆE9=10%

    L – Liquidity
    Goals (Excellence)
    1. Liquid Assets – ST Payables / Total Deposits 15-20%
    2. Liquidity Reserves / Total Savings Deposits 10%
    3. Non-earning Liquid Assets / Total Assets Inflation + 10%

    ˆ Amount Needed


  46. @Brutus
    You may be correct but there are limits on how large a dividend can be paid. Additionally with the size of both the loan portfolio and the deposit portfolio, even small movements like 0.5% can quickly erode the net income position.

    Generally these sound like big numbers but in the context of BPWCCUL’s size and scale of operations it could be argued that it does not actually earn enough annually.

    Someone mentioned earlier that CU’s don’t need capital they work off human capital – not so the same PEARLS requires a 10% capital ratio. The credit union is actually below that so they need to fix that. In this year’s financials it looks like their capital is $68M while their total assets are $842M – which is just about 8%.

    This year it seems they are about 16M to 17M off that target. Personally it does not worry me as a member but if we use PEARLS as a standard it is off base and below that standard.

    I sincerely hope to see all of you at the meeting. I will be there early – up front row 2 or 3 armed with my questions. As I said earlier the board has a lot of questions to answer and answer they must but why in heaven would you wish to adjourn the meeting? We need answers not an adjournment. We can use this forum to put together our questions so we have a coordinated approach on these matters.

    I am very willing to help with formulating questions, determining strategy for the meeting etc. but will not be a part of disrupting the meeting for narrow personal gain – which is what Mr. Franklyn would wish so he could declare “I was right”. This is not a game and if Mr. Franklyn wishes, he can create a credit union game like monopoly – I would buy it and he could use it to destroy and build up credit unions safely. He’s tried it with BPW and now he’s headed to COB where he’s been up to his old tricks until he saw another opportunity to wreak havoc with BPW again.


  47. Earlier Cat Eyes alluded to a company which BPWCC is currently working to establish, the objective is to support the small credit unions?

    Has the members been informed about this initiative?


  48. @David
    Thanks for posting those ratios. I’m not much of a finance person so could someone who is, calculate all the ratios? Some are relatively simple, others more complicated. Better yet we should through this blog alert the management and board that we expect a report on these ratios prepared for the AGM!!!


  49. @Green Giant

    it seems Brutus maybe the best one here qualified to attempt such if he is up to it.

    BU is prepared to feature a presentation dealing with PEARLS and how BPWC stacks up in a separate blog.

    Such a blog would serve to inform those members attending the meeting coming weekend.

  50. smooth chocolate Avatar
    smooth chocolate

    I think Caswell is wasting his time trying to explain so simple a conditioned. Bush Tea would have to be a retard or spent too much time in the jungle, if he cannot understand yet that the issue is not the spending of credit card money on personal or credit union business. the issue is that in ONLY THE MEMBERS OF THE CREDIT UNION could authorized/approve for them to have CREDIT CARDS. It is against the credit union laws for them to issue and approve themselves credit cards. simple example. ur grandmother gave u $300 to hold. u took $100. and bought groceries for the house, which u and ur grandmother share. but even so, looking at the groceries, they consist of many items which is of benefit to u only. the fact that u bought groceries does not mitigate from the fact that the money was never urs to begin with. u embezzelled the money, plain and simple. in this case with the credit union, they might as well had put their had in the people’s money and taken out the amount spent on the credit cards, since the members have to pay for the credit card bills, then in essence that’s what they did. they embezelled our funds.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading