Re: [802SEC] ************** Straw Poll on EC Teleconferences ***************...
Jerry,
I agree with your point (2), but a bit more strongly. I will be
opposed to any P&P change authorizing telecons. A procedure for an
alternate would not address my concerns.
When I submitted my ballot comment, I was also thinking about the
problem of alternates. However, instead of thinking of telecons, I
was thinking of the case in which an EC can't attend a meeting. I
suggested that, in this case, the member could participate by phone.
Here is a repeat of my comment:
>(5) Regarding 7.1.5.2 ("Meetings by Teleconference"), I don't think
>we need them and I am opposed to holding them. They might make sense
>in an emergency, but they couldn't be used in an emergency because of
>the 30-day notice required in this rule. The rule also fails to
>specify who is entitled to call such a meeting, and on what grounds.
>A better issue to address regarding telephone meetings is a provision
>to allow telephone participation in EC meetings by members who are
>ill, etc.
>
>Remedy: Delete 7.1.5.2. At the end of the first paragraph of 7.1.5,
>add "Members of the Executive Committee may participate in and vote
>in EC meetings by telephone if unable to attend due to illness or
>other extraordinary circumstance."
Roger
At 13:12 -0500 2005-03-09, Jerry1upton@AOL.COM wrote:
>
>Mat,
>I request that we vote the "Meetings by Teleconference" as a
>separate item from the overall proposed changes.
>My past experience on other "Boards" gives me significant concerns
>on this proposal.
>
>1. Regardless of the notice given, people travel and are unavailable
>for the calls at the times scheduled. Other Boards address this
>issue by having assigned alternates who can vote for the primary
>person. In our case we have no alternates to vote for us. Other
>Boards also set a higher level of approval votes for teleconference
>votes. For example 50% Yes votes of all eligible members regardless
>of how many members are on the call is used by some organizations.
>
>2. We already have two methods/venues for voting. We vote at Plenary
>sessions. We vote by email ballot including ballots of short
>duration. Therefore I do not see the reason for another method
>particularly without addressing the concerns in point number 1.
>
>Therefore I would currently oppose this P&P change.
>Regards,
>Jerry Upton
>
>
>In a message dated 2/20/2005 4:32:16 PM Central Standard Time,
>matthew.sherman@BAESYSTEMS.COM writes:
>
>EC Members,
>
>I am concerned that opposition on certain subtopics of the EC
>Membership and Meetings' P&P Revision ballot may be so strong as to
>defeat the whole ballot. Accordingly I wish to conduct a quick
>strawpoll on the following.
>
>Is your opposition to the following text so strong that you would
>vote against the 'EC Membership and Meetings' revision ballot
>regardless of its other content?
>
>7.1.5.2 Meetings by Teleconference
>
>Teleconference meetings of the EC may be held. Any teleconference
>meeting where formal business is conducted shall be announced along
>with an agenda identifying topics to be addressed 30 days in advance
>on the EC reflector. No formal actions can be taken on items not
>included on the announced agenda. The teleconference shall be
>announced by the EC Chair or his designee. Quorum and voting
>requirements of section 7.1.4 shall apply. Openness requirements
>apply.
>
>
>If the answer to this question is yes, please send me a quick e-mail
>so I can tally the opposition. If the answer is no, you need not
>reply.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mat
>
>
>Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
>
>Senior Member Technical Staff
>
>BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
>
>Office: +1 973.633.6344
>
>email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
>
>---------- 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.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.