[MCFA Int] Re: statutes amendments

[Danny Roobaert <roobaert@DROPMEnada.kth.se>]

---- The International MCFA E-Mail List Server ----

Dear Laure,

A Word-document is much more readable than a monotonous text in the body
of an e-mail. It is the reason why I send my proposal in an attachment.
Nevertheless, I can understand your concerns. So Laure, and for people
in a similar situation, I send hereby my propositions again in a
text-only version.

Hoping on a better reception this time.

Best regards,

Danny

--
Danny Roobaert
Marie Curie research fellow
Computational Learning, Vision and Active Perception
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm/Sweden       
Email: roobaert@DROPMEnada.kth.se
Tel: +46 (0)8/790.6209 or +46 (0)70/775.1043 
http://simone.neuro.kuleuven.ac.be/danny.html


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

                Marie Curie Fellowship Association

                  Statutes amendments proposition

                  by Danny Roobaert, MCFA Sweden

			   18 Feb. 1998




Abstract

Two propositions for a change of the statutes are formulated:
1.   as a vision for the future the MCFA and as an urge for a
  change of the statutes that is flexible enough to cope with this
  evolution, I propose the notion of subgroup to extend the notion of
  local group
2.   the proposed cease of the difference between associate and
  active members, has some implications on the practical organisation
  of the General Assembly. Problems concerning democratic voting will
  be discussed and as a solution, voting by subgroup representatives
  is proposed.



1. A future look: from national groups to scientific subgroups

At present, the MCFA as association is structured mainly in
different national groups. These groups are -at the moment- the
major driving force of the association and are the centres of
activity of the association. However the situation might change in
the future. Fellows will probably change the country of residence
after they have completed their grant: some will return to their
home country, others will pursue a carrier in still another country
or several countries simultaneously. These countries might be
European, but non-European as well. In all cases and especially in
the latter cases, it could be hard for the ex-grantholder to
affiliate to one specific national group.

In addition, on the long term, some fellows might like to unite in
(scientific) interest groups rather than nationally defined groups.
The resulting network of personal contacts would make national
borders more transparent which is, eventually, the original idea of
the TMR program and of European integration.

Therefore, I would propose to change the notion of \local group\
present in the current statutes, in to the concept of \subgroup\,
in doing so, removing the constraint of geographical location as
definition of  a group. For flexibility's sake, only the concept of
\subgroup\ should be introduced in the statutes, while concrete
details about a definition of a subgroup should be included in a
set of internal rules. This set-up would allow easy adaptation to
the current needs of the association. An example definition of a
subgroup is given at the end of this document.



2. As the difference between active and associate members ceases to
exist, democratic voting at the General assembly becomes a problem

In the current statutes, only active members of the association
elect the administrative board by the directly. However most
earlier comments propose a non-differentiation between active and
associate members, with all members having the right to vote. This
would imply a huge assembly since the number of potential members
will grow fast: now there are already several thousands of current
and former MC fellows, soon there will be many ten-thousands: the
practical organisation of such an election in a democratic way
becomes highly questionable. When we want a democratic majority of
these members present, a meeting of that size becomes financially
infeasible since many members will need to travel thousands of
kilometres.

As a solution, a way to vote by proxy is included in the statutes,
and some mentioned the possibility to vote by email/internet. Still
then it is highly questionable how many members will actually vote
in an unbiased way. Since candidates of other subgroups will be
mostly unknown, or known only from web-pages, most members will
primarily vote for candidates that they know personally, i.e.
candidates of their own subgroup. This implies that candidates of
large subgroups will have much more votes compared to candidates
from smaller subgroups, irrespective of their merits or proposed
projects. Considering the limited number of positions in the
administrative board, only candidates of the large subgroups will
be in the administrative board.

Therefore, at least a part of the administrative board should be
elected in another way. I propose the idea that representatives of
the subgroups elect a part of the administrative board (note1). Since
representatives are chosen by the subgroup members and this on the
basis of merit for the subgroup or their projects for the
association, they might "deserve" a stronger vote. Hence the
proposal is that every subgroup sends a representative to the
general assembly and these representatives together elect, with one
vote for every representative, a part of the administrative board.

The other part of the administrative board can be elected directly
by the members (note2).


_______________________________
(note1) This proposal is different however from the original Swedish
proposal by Winfried Meining, where the administrative board itself
consists of representatives. (see our web-page on the discussion of
the statutes: http://www.csb.ki.se/mcfa/mcfa_top.html )

(note2) With in mind Meinhard Ober's proposal of 10/2/98 (see the
international mailing list archive:
http://www.csb.ki.se/mcfa/maillist/mcfa_int/maillist.html )
· [Members] propose half of the members of the European co-
ordination Board and the
MCFA president
· [National group committee] Proposes half of the member of the
European Co-ordination board for
election in the General Assembly

Half of the administrative board (co-ordination Board) can be
elected by the subgroup representatives (National group committee).
_______________________________



Sample definition of a subgroup

This definition must be part of the internal rules of the
association only.
A subgroup of the European Marie Curie Fellowship Association, is a
group of MCFA members that satisfy following minimum requirements:

§1.  A subgroup must define the common interest of the subgroup
  members in terms of:
     ·    geographical region covered and/or
     ·    scientific interest shared.
  Candidate subgroups express their candidature prior to the
  General Assembly. A subgroup is accepted in the
  association, if its candidature is approved by absolute
  majority by all other existing subgroups.
  The initial subgroups are the now existing national groups if
  they can comply with §2. Subgroups that can prove to have more
  members than (total number of members)/(number of subgroups at
  the last GA) are by default accepted at the general assembly if
  they also comply with §2.

§2.  Elect annually, prior to the General Assembly, a
  representative of the subgroup. At this election, at least half of
  the members of the subgroup must be present and the representative
  must have the support of at least the absolute majority of the
  subgroup members present.


---------------------------------------------------
Common Commands for this list are:
HELP
UNSUBscribe MCFA_Int
Send commands to MCFA_Command@DROPMEcbt.ki.se
Any problems with this list should be sent to
Carmelo.Volpe@DROPMEcbt.ki.se