Col Tilton Reinstated to BoG!

[Kipper]

This just in... the MARB has ruled, and Col Tilton is back on the Board of Governors!   :clap: :clap: :clap:

[MSG Mac]

Who is he replacing? Ned Lee or Rich Anderson?

[Turk]

...and long overdue, IMHO.   :clap:

Despite all the political nonsense these days in CAP's top echelon, both the MARB and the BoG have kept their integrity.

And now, she'll have the "pleasure" of having to introduce him at the National Boards in San Diego next week. LOL! 

[Kipper]

Who is he replacing? Ned Lee or Rich Anderson?

Ned Lee, I believe.

[MSG Mac]

Where was the decision reported. I just checked the MARB and there was nothing new there?

[NCRblues]

Where is this information posted? I can not find any evidence of this (so far)

[FW]

Wow! That was fast.  The letter went out to Col Tilton and, those concerned, just a few hours ago.  The report will not be officially presented on e-services until after it is presented to the BoG in December.   However, I'm pretty sure the National Board will get a copy of the personnel action in the next day or so.

[davidsinn]

Wow! That was fast.  The letter went out to Col Tilton and, those concerned, just a few hours ago.  The report will not be officially presented on e-services until after it is presented to the BoG in December.   However, I'm pretty sure the National Board will get a copy of the personnel action in the next day or so.

Scuttlebutt is the only thing that travels faster than light.

[Offutteer]

I don't understand it, if it's true.

How can the MARB decide to reinstate a BOG member?  According to the CAP Constitution:
    1.    The CAP Members at Large of the BOG "may be removed from office by a 2/3 vote of the National Executive Committee."
    2.   Adverse actions are defined "as demotion in grade; removal from command of a region, wing, group, squadron or flight; suspension of membership in excess of 60 days; or termination or non-renewal of membership." 
    3.   If you remove a current member of the BOG to reinstate Col Tilton, that person could then go to the MARB and bring up the lack of due process and start this process all over again.

December can't come fast enough.

[FW]

It's true.

Without going into detail, the MARB may, "at its sole discretion"  hear any case not meeting the standards listed if, "in its sole discretion", feels the case is of significant importance to CAP (CAPR 35-8). 
The removal of a BoG member has been deemed "important to CAP".  The MARB heard the appeal and made a decision.  Case is now closed.   There is no appeal, within CAP, of a MARB decision. 

The members will get the report after the December BoG meeting.  It will give you the reasons for the decision.  However, I'm sure the scuttlebut will make it out before....

[BillB]

Why does CAP need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on communications equipment. Information travels faster by member-to-member. The fastest communications method is tell something to a cadet. Within 18 hours it will be all over the cadet network.  Guess this applies to Senior members also

[NCRblues]

So, was Mr. Tiltion removed by 2/3rds vote of the NEC?

If so, did the MARB not overstep themselves?

Now will Ned get to go to the MARB?  .... is this a never ending circle?

[RiverAux]

Seems a little sketchy to me.  Are BoG members therefore considered "members" of the CAP?  I haven't really looked into this much, but I don't see where MARB has any jurisdiction over BoG. 

[lordmonar]

CAPR 35-8 gives the MARB extraordinary powers.  Basically they can hear anything they want to and their ruling is final.

[FW]

The MARB does not have jurisdiction over anyone.  It has jurisdiction over "Adverse Membership Actions".  These actions are defined by the CAP constitution and bylaws.  However, CAPR 35-8 allows the MARB to go above the definitions "IF" it feels the appeal is of significant importance to CAP that the resolution of the appeal is in the corporations interest. 
The MARB was created to protect member rights for wrongful adverse actions taken against them.
The MARB has the authority to sustain, change, modify or reverse any action it decides to hear.
If the MARB decides to reverse a decision, it means the original action was wrong.  In a removal of command (in this case; removal as an at large member of the BoG),  the wronged party is reinstated and the party who was wrongfully placed in the position is removed.  This is considered final and no further action may be taken by any party within CAP
Col Tilton is a member of CAP and, as such, sought relief from the action taken against him.  The MARB considered this as an adverse action and decided to hear his appeal.  The BoG did not remove Col Tilton, the NEC did.
The MARB is completely "outside the chain of command". 


Proceedings brought before the MARB are published in eservices.

[NCRblues]

Makes sense FW, but, if the NEC voted to remove him, and they had the proper amount of votes necessary... than how was he wronged, and how can the MARB over rule the NEC?

[FW]

^
1. Retaliation
2. Lack of Due Process
3. Material failure to follow the regulations.

If any 1 of the above is shown, the decision can be reversed.  This isn't about votes, it's about the process.  CAP leaders must be free to act within the rules; not by the whims of others.  That is what "good governance" is all about.

Since the MARB is "outside the chain of command", it has the constitutional authority to reverse the decisions of commanders; even if they act as a body like the NEC.

[NCRblues]

WOW, ok well, thanks. Should be interesting to watch play out anyway...

[Pace]

Politics and red tape aside, Col Tilton is a great guy, resourceful leader, and humble volunteer.  I, personally, am glad to see him back at the reins.

[Mustang]

He's no Ned Lee.