I would second a motion to set the time line for appeals and table the rest. Linda -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cyndie Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 7:41 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BOARD] FW: RESULTS: Move to Table Motion 2009/10-23 The vote on tabling the motion was over before I had a chance to vote, but based on what has transpired I was and still am in favor of tabling it. We can make a separate motion which just sets a time line for appeals. If others feel that particular items from the motion have merit, maybe we need to look at them individually instead of trying to make multiple changes at once after the EC agenda items are addressed. Cyndie SP Rep. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sherri Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 7:41 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BOARD] FW: RESULTS: Move to Table Motion 2009/10-23 So, do you have alternate wording to suggest to cover your points, Cyndie, and/or a suggestion for what pieces of this revision/update you'd suggest dropping? I added the references to the fact that the confidentiality should never extend past the end of the grievance based on discussion that had occurred on various project lists. As I said earlier, this is your motion - I just put this up to try to make it easier to see what the suggested changes were. Sherri -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cyndie Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 7:02 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BOARD] FW: RESULTS: Move to Table Motion 2009/10-23 I agree with Linda's statement: " I will further state that I am not now, nor ever have been, in favor of taking confidentiality to a paralyzing nth degree with regard to a grievance. Grievants cannot seek assistance from anyone with peripheral issues due to the extreme confidentiality definition. This very effectively freezes areas of the project which can result in a negative impact to all, particularly those involved in a grievance and the State itself." I do not see anywhere in the current procedures where it forbids the AB from knowing that a grievance has been filed and knowing who the parties are. For some reason, only this session has confidentiality in the grievance procedures been interpreted this strictly. I feel that confidentiality situations are very case by case and trying to procedure us to death to cover every circumstance is causing more problems than it is helping. If there is something extremely wrong happening in a grievance process, like a person is being discriminated against (violating XIV.F.3 of the bylaws), why do they have to wait for an appeal to report it? This may result in continued discrimination throughout the process that could be prevented. What if a CC is replaced (violating XIV.F.2 of the bylaws) prior to the completion of a grievance? The way confidentiality is being interpreted, the AB will not know this until the grievance is over, so it is an impossible situation to enforce. I really do not think the writers of the grievance procedures intended for confidentiality to be interpreted this way. I feel it was meant to cover the discussion of the matter grieved, not peripheral issues (as Linda nicely worded it). I don't understand what purpose releasing information publically about completed grievances serves. This may cause people who have been wronged to not file a grievance because they don't want it publicized to everyone. There have been demonstrated reasons given for the AB to know, but I don't understand why anyone else needs to know unless there is a penalty of some sort, such as MNIGS. In that case, the parties who need to know can be notified. I am, however, in favor of a timeline for submitting an appeal. Cyndie SP Rep. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Linda Lewis Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 1:43 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [BOARD] FW: RESULTS: Move to Table Motion 2009/10-23 Resending - this bounced. Linda -----Original Message----- From: Linda Lewis [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 11:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [BOARD] RESULTS: Move to Table Motion 2009/10-23 I am in favor of tabling this item for the following reasons: - We've spent a long time on this item and in my opinion, it has not been an effective or productive use of our time; many more items are queued awaiting our attention. - Each proposed change seems to be met with controversy in the membership - not just in my region. I will further state that I am not now, nor ever have been, in favor of taking confidentiality to a paralyzing nth degree with regard to a grievance. Grievants cannot seek assistance from anyone with peripheral issues due to the extreme confidentiality definition. This very effectively freezes areas of the project which can result in a negative impact to all, particularly those involved in a grievance and the State itself. While grievances are a very important mechanism, they are not the equivalent of a murder trial and should be more like a civil case (IMO - have received input from numerous others that agree). I am in favor of setting the time limits and I am in favor of publishing the results but I am not in favor of the previous motion nor am I in favor of continuing this discussion at this time. Linda -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sherri Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 5:07 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BOARD] RESULTS: Move to Table Motion 2009/10-23 OK, can we please have those that have issues with this motion speak up with exactly what you are having issues with and suggest wording changes? I've also received a few of comments from others that you may want to consider since we're reworking this anyway. First, from the Grievance Committee, the timing for filing a grievance is different for different situations. The suggestion is to change it to a straight 14 days to file from the incident occurred or was discovered or someone is terminated from the Project. (This suggestion is because the stated time frame for filing a grievance can be subject to interpretation if the person is removed from a project but is still a member of USGenWeb through another project.) Second, a time limit for filing an appeal should be stated. The suggestion is 10-14 days for that, too (so that we can actually close all of the loopholes and have complete closure on the issue). A limit to the number of times an appeal can be filed should also be added. Third, and we've all heard this from more than a few members, is the suggestion that once the grievance process is complete (including the possibility of filing an appeal), that at least basic information about the grievance should be released. The suggested info to be made public would be the names of the parties involved, whatever the reason the grievance was filed and the resolution of the grievance and any appeals. If you don't want to include these things, just let me know and we'll leave them on the agenda as a separate item. So, can you please speak up so that we can keep this moving? Thanks, Sherri -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sherri Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 10:10 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BOARD] RESULTS: Move to Table Motion 2009/10-23 With 12 members voting, the motion to table motion 2009/10-23 fails. Those voting to table the motion: Alice Allen, Colleen Pustola, Linda Lewis and W. David Samuelsen Those voting against tabling the motion: Ann Allen Geoghegan, Dale Grimm, Denise Wells, Jeff Kemp, Larry Flesher, Les Shockey, Pauli Smith and Tina Vickery Those not voting: Cyndie Enfinger Discussion will continue on motion 2009/10-23. Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sherri Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 6:35 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [BOARD] Move to Table Motion 2009/10-23 A motion to table motion 2009/10-23 has been made by David Samuelsen and seconded by Alice Allen. Those in favor of tabling motion 2009/10-23 temporarily, please respond with "agree". Those opposed, please respond with "disagree". Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at <http://usgenweb.org> http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda <http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php> http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php USGenWeb Advisory Board Agenda: http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.shtml ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message USGenWeb Advisory Board Agenda: http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.shtml ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message USGenWeb Advisory Board Agenda: http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.shtml ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message USGenWeb Advisory Board Agenda: http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.shtml ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message USGenWeb Advisory Board Agenda: http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.shtml ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message USGenWeb Advisory Board Agenda: http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.shtml ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message USGenWeb Advisory Board Agenda: http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.shtml ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message