[committee] [ucc] Formal notice of dispute (html version)

[Tom Almeida]

Dear all,

In response to a number of comments made on UCC platforms, I would like to
encourage anyone reading this to please consider seeking professional
support if you are experiencing difficulties in relation to mental health.

Below are a list of free emergency support services which I recommend you
use if you believe that you or someone you know is at risk:

    Mental Health Emergency Response Line Perth
        Metro - 1300 555 788
        Peel - 1800 676 822
        TTY - 1800 720 101
    Rurallink - 1800 552 002 (A/H and weekends)
    Suicide Call Back Service - 1300 659 467 (suicidecallbackservice.org.au)
    Lifeline - 13 11 14 (lifeline.org.au)

Here are also some information services related to mental health:

    Beyond Blue - 1300 22 4636 - www.beyondblue.org.au
    Black Dog Institute - www.blackdoginstitute.org.au
    SANE - 1300 18 7263 - www.sane.org

The university also offers a number of mental health services:

    Student Assist - 6488 2292 - www.uwastudentguild.com/assist/welfare
    UniAccess - 6488 2423 - www.student.uwa.edu.au/life/health/uniaccess

Kind regards,
Tom Almeida [THA]
UCC Treasurer

On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 1:31 AM Melissa Star <melissa at netexperts.com.au>
wrote:

> BOB and Committee,
>
> Tl;dr one page version from my previous e-mail:
>
>
> The Cease and Desist Request Yesterday
>
> * BOB told me on Facebook yesterday that he needed my address to send a
> cease and desist letter (normally a prelude to litigation).
>
> * He refused to tell me what to cease and desist. But later other UCC
> members on discord who I thought were sympathetic to BOB suggested that I
> should not say anything about past UCC issues on the Internet, and that any
> responsible lawyer would be angry at me for doing so.
>
> * The next day (today) he launched a formal complaint against Felix as per
> this email.
>
> * COMMITTEE - do you believe it is fair to judge someone while those who
> could defend them do so with the proverbial sword of Damacles hanging over
> their head?
>
>
> Transphobia and Consequences
>
> * Transphobia can be defined narrowly as calling transwomen "sir" and
> objecting to their use of female bathrooms, or deciding not to treat them
> equally in ways that seriously impact their lives.
>
> * However, consider the definition from www.plannedparenthood.org:
>
> Transphobia is the fear, hatred, disbelief, or mistrust of people who
> are transgender, thought to be transgender, or whose gender expression
> doesn’t conform to traditional gender roles.
> Transphobia can prevent transgender and gender nonconforming people from
> living full lives free from harm.
>
> * BOB told me on the day I was elected as secretary that he does not
> trust me, and would not ever allow me to join wheel that I honestly
> believed was necessary to fulfil my role as club secretary without
> breaching the Associations Act. No serious effort was made to meet my
> request for an alternative solution that made me comfortable in regards to
> my compliance.
>
> * In regards to everything that is discussed below in BOB's complaint this
> is a causal event based on the definition under Western Australian law.
> None of this would have happened "but for" BOB's distrust and subsequent
> actions that I genuinely believed were intended to prevent me from acting
> as club secretary in accordance with the act. Moreover, it was a
> significant and substantial cause of the subsequent events.
>
> Allegations etc
>
> * Throwing someone out of a club based on rumours in unfair but that is
> NOT what happened or was intended to happen.
>
> * Not investigating allegations of financial misconduct or insurance fraud
> did not seem to be to be a safe course of action, especially as a law
> student.
>
> * These type of investigations are often conducted in secret, with the
> accused later given plenty of time to defend themselves.
>
> * Regardless of any procedural faults in the investigation, from what I
> have read here it achieved its purpose and BOB was cleared of financial
> misconduct, and given an apology and allowed to keep his position within
> UCC.
>
> Revenge and Spite
>
> * Regardless of who placed the anonymous agenda items, BOB's incredible
> hour long effort to either get them voted on or the OGM terminated should
> arguably mean he now 'owns them'.
>
> * If you don't agree with that, consider that he then told me on Facebook
> that 'now the shoe in on the other foot' which caused me incredible
> distress.
>
> * Comparing the planned punishments for me and for Felix, it was proposed
> that he be removed as president but remain a member of the club, but I (who
> was new to the club, subordinate to him, and acting under his guidance)
> should be banned indefinitely (in effect permanently) from even entering
> the club room.
>
> * Assuming that this is a reasonable way to punish procedural or due
> process flaws in an investigation, was the increased harshness towards me
> transphobia? Or if not, why was a punishment so stereotypical of what is
> done towards transgender people used? It's kind of like burning someone at
> the stake and insisting that you really aren't doing it because she's a
> witch.
>
> Unfair and biased evidence
>
> * The account presented by BOB below is NOT the whole truth, and does not
> in my opinion present an accurate or objective assessment of the
> sitatuation.
>
> * It glosses over my grievances with BOB, the fact that I chose not to
> file a formal complaint, and the fact that if Felix resigns that will be
> the third committee member to be pushed out this year as a direct
> consequence of BOB's disapproval.
>
> * BOB's argument stands on the allegations against him being
> unsubstantiated, but how can these allegations be substantiated if
> threatens to sends witnesses letters to cease and desist, and agenda items
> appear to ban them from the club for life.
>
>
>
> On 4 Aug 2019, at 6:59 pm, bob <bob at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> Third time's the charm...outlook didn't want to play nicely with html.
>
> Dear Committee,
>
> I would like to lodge a formal complaint under section 22.2 of the club’s
> constitution. I have been the subject of persistent and ongoing prejudice
> and bullying from Felix Von Perger since March 8 this year (the day of the
> AGM). I believe Felix went into his presidency with an agenda to remove me
> from wheel and/or the club. A number of the following events happened in
> closed forums, however certain individuals and members of committee thought
> the discussions were not above board and so shared them with me at the
> time. I have not previously made this information public because I
> recognise that UCC is a learning environment and that people make mistakes,
> and instead opted to speak to Felix at the time and urge him to change his
> actions. However, Felix has persisted with his bullying since March 18, and
> I feel I have no choice but to make this public. I have condensed this as
> much as practicable for the sake of expediency, however if anyone wants
> more details of incidents, I am happy to answer them.
>
> 8/3/19
>
> • Background: Incident with Melissa on the day of the AGM. On that day I
> tried to help Melissa with handover by giving her a list of things that
> needed to be done at handover, some of which required assistance from
> wheel, however she took it to mean that I disapproved of her
> becoming secretary. The interaction also put me in the unfortunate position
> of saying “no” to Melissa – both to being immediately put on wheel, and to
> fully unfirewalling her co-located machine. The details of this interaction
> are long and contended by Melissa, however the crux of it is that I
> was subsequently labelled by Melissa as transphobic, and she went to Felix
> and offered to resign later that day.
> • Felix manipulated Melissa into not resigning by threatening to resign
> himself if Melissa did
> • Rather than speaking to me, or making any attempt to defuse the issue,
> Felix spoke with Melissa and let her know about a number of rumours that he
> had heard, including that I had committed insurance fraud, bank fraud,
> had copied clubroom keys without permission, and had unethically locked the
> account of Tom Almeida for reinstalling a windows machine. These
> conversations were quoted at the March 29 meeting by Melissa, and
> subsequently confirmed by Felix at the same meeting. This hearsay and
> allegations are all false and I reject them completely, however they shaped
> all subsequent interactions between Melissa and myself. To quote Melissa at
> the March 29th meeting: “What I'm going to say is this. I went to [FVP], I
> told [FVP] that I wanted to resign. I did not say anything that anyone
> should be removed from anything. [FVP] then responded that this was his
> nightmare, that he really did not want me to resign, that he might consider
> resigning too if I resign, and then told me a bunch of stuff about these
> various allegations, and about, that he thinks you (bob) should be removed,
> and at first, I disagreed with him, but then after what he told me, I began
> to concur”. There are various other quotes in the March 29 minutes which
> detail the assorted allegations and I encourage all members who wish to be
> informed on the issue to read those minutes in full.
> 9/3/19
>
> • Felix called an unofficial exec-only meeting to discuss how to remove me
> from wheel. The following excerpt is from his email to exec at approx. 2pm:
> “Apologies for the short notice. I believe I have contacted everyone
> individually about these issues, and I would like to schedule a meeting
> for the current exec to come to an agreement about what plan of action
> we should take, and how we should best broach these issues with the rest
> of committee.
>
> Note that this is potentially sensitive information so it would be much
> appreciated if this could be kept in confidence. I have invited the IPP
> (Andrew Gozzard) and IPPP (Chris Forbes) to this meeting so that we can
> get some context on Bob's behaviour and input on how to deal with him
> and the rest of the wheel group.
>
> It would be very much appreciated if everyone could fill in this form
> [REDACTED] with your availabilities for the next
> week. I will get back to you with the final meeting time and date.
>
> There's a rudimentary agenda at
> [REDACTED],
> feel free to add whatever else you think is worth discussing in the
> context of the Bob / Wheel issues.”
>
> • The agenda in the “REDACTED” link contained the following text, where
> Melissa called for cancelling my membership. She subsequently claimed at
> the March 29 meeting that she had made no such calls:
> “- Bob is a problem
>   - Repeated abuse of Wheel powers / breach of ethics
>     - Email to Tom Almeida “Windows Reinstall”, 21/05/2018, threatening
> account locking
>     - (MSX) Report re my experience of Bob’s behaviour, including
> interference with my projects and his attempt to prevent me from taking my
> role on committee.
>     - Suggested solution: removal from wheel and cancelling membership
> - Wheel culture is toxic
>   - Schedule wheel meetings more often
>   - Make wheel reapplications a thing
>   - Afford more control to the democratically elected executive/committee
> over the administration of the computer systems
> - (MSX) Legally committee must maintain root control of UCC systems, and
> of the clubroom, potential severe consequences to us if we don’t.
> - (MSX) Perception on campus of UCC as an unfriendly place and “wheel” as
> a dark shadow committee. Need for cultural change.”
>
> • Later that day on the committee-only discord channel, Felix gloated
> about being able to kick me off wheel:
> "[6:36 PM] frekk: Ah yes btw we get to be the committee to kick Bob off
> wheel. More to come at our first actual meeting!"
>
> 12/3/19
>
> • Provided for context: Melissa lets slip that an exec-only meeting is
> happening, which is quickly followed by condemnation of this on the wheel@
> and committee-only@ mailing lists
> 14/3/19
>
> • Exec-only meeting happened unofficially. I believe the whole committee
> was invited to this meeting after the wheel uproar. Note that at the time I
> was aware of this unofficial meeting, was unable to attend it, was having
> my membership of both the club and wheel discussed in a closed forum, and
> had no opportunity to defend myself at this point. I was extremely
> stressed, unable to sleep, and unable to focus on my work, and this
> continued until March 29.
> • Subsequent to this meeting, Felix emailed committee and suggested ways
> to remove me from wheel without any due process:
> “Hi committee,
>
> In light of the discussions at the meeting on Wednesday (earlier today...?
> or yesterday... :P), I would like to suggest that we implement a system of
> regular wheel applications, in a similar manner to what we [should] do with
> door members.
>
> In particular, regarding the issues raised with Bob, this may provide a
> less "hostile" way for us to remove Bob from wheel with the same effect.
> Given the circumstances, I do not believe kicking out Bob individually,
> which regardless of our reasoning may be seen as us making an example to
> the rest of wheel, is the most tactical way to go about this. I do not
> believe there are many, if any, other (active) wheel members who are
> similarly problematic, and as such if we did kick Bob out to make an
> example then I think it would have many consequences which are undesirable
> (such as potentially losing many of our other active wheel members).
>
> However, if a system of wheel reapplications cannot be decided upon and
> enacted in the short term, then I would see a necessary intermediary step
> being the removal of Bob from wheel as soon as is reasonable in the eyes of
> committee (preferably effective immediately).
>
> Regarding the potential reapplication process, I do not believe that it is
> disrespectful to ask current or prospective wheel members to justify why
> they should have administrative access to club systems and what benefit
> they bring to the club. Such access is not a right nor an entitlement, but
> a power granted by committee that comes with great responsibility and only
> given to those who can be trusted. As such, I would propose an open-ended
> application process whereby current / new members simply explain why they
> should be on wheel, with only a small number of criteria provided (such as
> "benefit to the club", "benefit to yourself / what you want to learn",
> "trustworthiness", etc) so the applicant at least has some idea what we are
> looking for.
>
> Regarding "the short term", I believe that we should aim to discuss,
> decide upon and vote in a wheel reapplication system ASAP (ie. this Friday)
> such that applications can be submitted from the date of the meeting until,
> say, one month from then. At that point, committee will review
> the applicants and vote to re-add members to wheel as appropriate, to be
> determined by committee. In the meantime, current wheel members could
> retain their privileges, however it would be a good opportunity to work out
> and discuss further strategies in an open and transparent manner to improve
> the application/reapplication system. This extra time will also allow us to
> come up with strategies to deal with wheel members upon their removal (such
> as to deal with the possibility of Bob going rogue). I am sure
> contributions to discussions about such will be many and "juicy" (for
> lack of a better word) given the relatively controversial nature of a wheel
> application/reapplication system in general. Not only will this provide
> food for thought but will likely be very amusing (hahaha).”
>
> • At the March 29 meeting, Melissa referenced Felix’s allusions to me
> possibly going rogue as another item on her list of complaints.
> 18/3/19
>
> • Myself, [NTU] and [LE@] have a sit-down meeting with Felix and urge him
> to be open and fair in his dealings with me. I consider this meeting to
> satisfy the requirements under 22.1 of the constitution regarding dispute
> resolution: “The parties to a dispute must attempt to resolve the dispute
> between themselves within 14 days after the dispute has come to the
> attention of each party.”
> 26/3/19
>
> • Felix proposes annual wheel purges (see wheel@ and committee@ lists).
> 29/3/19
>
> • This was the day of a committee meeting. Leading up to the meeting, I
> was aware that the issue has not been resolved, but that it had continued
> to be discussed behind closed doors. I had been held in suspense for nearly
> three weeks at this point, and basically had to be on standby to attend any
> of the intervening meetings.
> • There was no agenda item pertaining to the complaints/issues that had
> been raised regarding the day of the AGM, no formal notification that my
> membership would be discussed (again I was relying on club insiders to let
> me know).
> • This meeting was scheduled at 3pm – during work hours for me. I was only
> able to make it at 3:50pm.
> • This meeting was three hours long, in which I was forced to defend
> myself against spurious accusations which had sprung from Felix’s initial
> rumour spreading.
> • During the meeting, Felix moved to give me a formal warning before I was
> able to speak to the allegations, and other committee members had to point
> out that they had not yet heard from me
> • I strongly urge all members who wish to be informed about this issue to
> read the March 29 meeting transcription in full, however, here are a few
> relevant quotes:
> “- [BOB] I'm going to rewind a little bit. I believe I am here to answer
> to a complaint. I have not been told what that complaint is.
> - [FVP] Right, well, unfortunately you missed that part of the meeting.”
>
> “- [BOB] I want to actually get a clarification of what the issue is
> /cutoff
> - [MSX] And I'd like the other issues that you ([FVP]) told me from
> before, being the issues from 2010
>         - To be talked about and not have my name on them because they
> were told to me
> - [FVP] Yes. I was going to get onto that. [MPT] can you finish up then
> please.”
>
> “- [JGM] (to [FVP]) based on what you just said, it sounds like you've got
> a strong bias towards believing [BOB] is guilty - And I am questioning the
> chairing of this meeting, including as such ignoring instances where people
> are interrupting and not being held accountable for this. I'd like
> that minuted”
>
> • At the end of the meeting, I believe I had addressed the concerns of all
> parties, including those regarding allegations of fraud and transphobia.
> The committee voted unanimously to apologise to me for their overall
> treatment of me, and it was generally agreed that the events on the day
> of the AGM were a comedy of misunderstandings.
> 2/4/19
>
> • I provided a dump of all my communications regarding the 2010 insurance
> claim to committee and requested an audit. I have had confirmation from the
> Treasurer today that he is satisfied with it all.
> • At the same time I presented a scan of the welcome letter from Westpac,
> dated 12 days *before* the hail storm. Turns out we were 100% legally
> setting up a bank account with Westpac so that we could accept paypal
> payments.
> 30/4/19
>
> • Felix motions to require a full review of all group memberships at an
> OGM and the motion is passed.
> 28/6/19
>
> • With less than one days’ notice to committee, Felix attended a meeting
> with the Guild president to respond to a complaint that had been made
> against the club. At that meeting, Felix states “non-students aren't the
> problem, problem members are the problem”.
> • Following this meeting Felix made the following entries in his report
> into his report for the upcoming meeting, which was then sent out with the
> 4-day meeting notice:
> “- Had meeting with Guild President this morning, forwarded minutes to
> committee@
> - lol bob”
>
> • When asked what the “lol bob” statement meant via IRC, Felix refused to
> answer. I asked Felix several times what the statement was across multiple
> days before he removed it from his report. He finally insisted that if I
> wanted an answer, I would have to add it as an agenda item for the upcoming
> meeting. I did so.
> 5/7/19
>
> • Committee meeting. Regarding the “lol bob” statement in his report,
> Felix responds that “It was irrelevant and not appropriate, and a bad meme.
> No further explanation necessary.”
> • Felix made no apology to me for a statement that he acknowledges was
> inappropriate and had yet again kept me on tenterhooks for a week.
> I am honestly not sure where to go from here. Felix’s bullying and rumour
> spreading has led to minor disagreements being blown monumentally out of
> proportion, and the ongoing fallout from it has been damaging to all
> parties and the club. I think that anyone who knows me knows that I am
> not transphobic, and even some people who think I’m an ass have attested to
> that. I feel that if Felix had a shred of decency left, he would step down
> from the President role, as he has very clearly abused his position. If
> that were to happen then I would consider this dispute settled.
>
> I believe Felix went into his presidency with the attitude that I am too
> involved in the club and am holding onto the reigns too tightly, and hence
> jumped on an opportunity to get rid of me. I come into the club once a week
> in the evenings and am active on the mailing lists. I admit that it is hard
> to not keep an eye on something that I have put so much work into, however
> this year the effort spent defending my work has far surpassed the original
> effort I put in. I am tired of the revolving door of student politics and
> thus have been looking to move on from UCC. I would like to be able to
> do this while remaining a distant member, however I am reluctant to step
> back while my name is being dragged through the mud.
>
> Sincerely, Andrew (Bob) Adamson
>
> _______________________________________________
> List Archives: http://lists.ucc.asn.au/pipermail/ucc
>
> Unsubscribe here:
> https://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/mailman/options/ucc/melissa%40melissastar.com.au
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List Archives: http://lists.ucc.asn.au/pipermail/committee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/pipermail/committee/attachments/20190810/df6dc638/attachment-0001.htm