Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [802SEC] Term limits

Title: Message
Bob,
 
I think that I would be in favor of option 2, eliminating the term limits, entirely.  While I can understand the desire to bring up fresh leaders, why should a working group be forced to replace an officer with whom they are perfectly content? 
 
This is not like limiting the terms of politicians with large political parties supporting them and gerrymandering to allow careful crafting of voting districts to support reelection.

 -Bob
 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grow, Bob
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 3:36 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [802SEC] Term limits

Colleagues:
 
We discussed possible changes on term limits at a prior EC meeting, though  I doubt that all requirements of 7.1.6.1 were fulfilled.  Out of fairness to all, if we are going to change this, it should be resolved by November 2005 at the latest.
 
I want to try to determine the preferences of the EC on this matter before advocating any specific change in March. 
 
At present, the specific text within 7.2.2 reads:
 
"An individual who has served as Chair or Vice Chair of a given Working Group for a total of more than eight years in that office may not be elected to that office again."
 
One common rationale would be the desire to retain the services of a willing and capable officer rather than that officer being arbitrarily forced out. There is less than universal agreement on what approach to take for this, but I remember four clear alternatives:
 
1.  Leave term limits as is.
 
Rationale:  Term limits do open up leadership opportunities for people.  It is too difficult to overcome the power/influence of incumbency without term limits.
 
2.  Strike the entire paragraph.
 
Rationale:  The rules allow replacement of WG officers at any plenary meeting (7.2.2).  Working Groups in the past would have liked to have kept a term-limited Chair.
 
3.  Change to read:  "An individual who has served as Chair of a given Working Group for a total of more than eight years in that office may not be elected to that office again."
 
Rationale:  Term limiting the Chair only still opens up leadership opportunities at the top, allowing either a Vice Chair to move up or someone new to take the Chair position.  A Vice Chair may with to continue in his/her role rather than take the Chair position.  WGs with multiple Vice Chairs arbitrarily limit those people by term limits even though they may be changing responsibilities within the WG (Moving from 2nd Vice Chair to 1st Vice Chair).
 
4.  Change to read:  "An individual who has served as Chair or Vice Chair of a given Working Group for a total of more than eight years in that office may only be eligible for election to that office again as the result of a motion passed by 75% of the voting members present."
 
Rationale:  Just as we currently grant the WG the ability to elect a new Chair at any plenary session by 75% vote, the WG should have similar latitude to retain a Chair independent of term limits.
 
My preferences lean toward options 4 or 3.  (Just to be clear, I find it inconceivable that I personally will ever test the term limits.)
 
Comments and preferences appreciated.
 
--Bob Grow
---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv. ---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.