4.4 AWOL (version 2)

Discuss our Party Constitution and any suggested amendments here

4.4 AWOL (version 2)

Postby azrael » Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:18 pm

Change 4.4

from

Members appointed or elected to a position shall automatically be relieved of their title and responsibilities should they be found to be absent for a period exceeding 28 days without prior notice.

to
Members appointed or elected to a position may be relieved of their title and responsibilities should the Board find them to be absent for a period exceeding 28 days without prior notice.


This is intended to clarify that this isn't something that happens without intervention, but requires the Board to specifically declare an appointed/election person as awol. This 'changes' the process from a magic/automatic one to one wielded via the Board - which will allow for a little discretion to be used.
Governor of the Board 2010-present
Former South-East Regional Administrative Officer (2010-2011)
User avatar
azrael
Party Governor
 
Posts: 1766
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:05 am
Location: Canterbury, Kent, UK

Re: 4.4 AWOL (version 2)

Postby Gavman » Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:21 pm

Im not gonig to ask for excrutiating details but can you provide a rough definition of being absent? To whom must they be abesent from? Not all elected people (in fact most) will deal with the board directly.

Also should the person not have some form of recourse (if they are gone of rover 28 days i doubt they will have a good reason - but shoudl it happen and they come back they need a way to appeal)
* assange () has joined #ppuk
* Obama () has joined #ppuk
* assange slaps Obama around a bit with a large fishbot
User avatar
Gavman
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 9:12 am

Re: 4.4 AWOL (version 2)

Postby azrael » Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:27 pm

This is intended to deal with elected officials who can not be gotten hold of for a sustained amount of time. Not being in contact with the Board wouldn't be sufficient to trigger this. But if someone can't be contacted for a sustained period of 28 days without any prior warning - then this may be triggered.

This currently proposed change is only to change the wording of the existing clause which *could* be considered to kick in without anyone in control of the decision - so the change is trying to make the clause less automatic and provide greater flexibility.

If an additional sentence noting that this can be reversed upon a successful appeal to the Board would be desirable, that can be added. As to how practical a reversal might be ... not sure, there may well have been elections to replace the person by the time they pop up to appeal.
Governor of the Board 2010-present
Former South-East Regional Administrative Officer (2010-2011)
User avatar
azrael
Party Governor
 
Posts: 1766
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:05 am
Location: Canterbury, Kent, UK

Re: 4.4 AWOL (version 2)

Postby scuzzmonkey » Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:54 am

I'm happy with that.
- Will Mac (@Scuzzmonkey)
- Governor (July 2010 - March 2012), PPUK
---
- "One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no ‘them’ out there. It’s just an awful lot of ‘us’." - Douglas Adams
User avatar
scuzzmonkey
Space Pirate
 
Posts: 1338
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:38 pm
Location: Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK


Return to Constitutional Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
X
We use cookies to provide you the best possible experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on this website. If you would like to, you can change how your browser controls cookies at any time.
You can also view our Privacy Policy
I understand. Don't show me this message again.