[NCUC-EC] NCUC Operating Procedures

[farzaneh badii]

Thanks Michael.

Here is the link to the Google doc everyone:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uolqcYivX_KVOgPdjl3wB_aBkHyLcFkvzNsNU47BRQY/edit#heading=h.1x7lfonwlklh

Please comment or resolve issues on the above link. Deadline to finalize is
tomorrow, so I will put the doc back for second reading by the members
tomorrow.

Farzaneh

On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Michael Karanicolas <
michael at law-democracy.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I agree with "guidelines" rather than requirements.
>
> I just tried to edit the transparency sections, but the doc told me my
> access had changed halfway through. A couple of small suggested changes, as
> follows:
>
> C.  Review and selection of candidates:
> 1. NCUC EC will review all the candidates’ statements
> 2. NCUC EC will evaluate each application based on qualifications
> 3. Each NCUC EC member will provide justification as to why one candidate
> is more qualified than other applicants. Candidates who are not selected
> for the position shall be sent an email by the NCUC Chair informing them of
> the EC’s decision. *Upon request of the candidate, or where otherwise
> appropriate, the Chair shall communicate to the applicant how they can
> increase their chances of appointment in future rounds.*
> 4. If the NCUC EC does not agree on a candidate a meeting shall be
> arranged to discuss and deliberate the candidates applications
> 5. The deliberations about the candidates should be held confidentially
> but the record should be kept by Chair
> 6. The meeting will be held privately but the notes, recording and the
> transcript should be kept in case the EC decision is challenged * Upon
> request of the candidate(s), a more detailed account of the assessment of
> their candidacy will be provided. *
>
> Best,
>
> Michael
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 6:06 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I'm in agreement with the changes
>>
>> I think the appointees section should be guidelines, I don't think much
>> should be added there and a note that some requisites are desirable not
>> obligatory
>>
>> Em 22 de ago de 2017 11:02 PM, "farzaneh badii" <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>> escreveu:
>>
>>> Reminding you of the timeline for the operating procedure. We are now at
>>> the stage of resolving the comments. We have until 28th August, then
>>> members need to look at it again and comment.
>>>
>>> Important things to do:
>>>
>>> I tried to sort out the transparency issue for selections and
>>> appointments, please have a look.
>>>
>>> We need to be more precise about the requirements of appointees section
>>> (II).
>>>
>>> We should probably not be too restrictive. So I suggest instead of
>>> calling it "requirements" lets say guidelines for appointments.
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uolqcYivX_KVOgPdjl3wB_aB
>>> kHyLcFkvzNsNU47BRQY/edit#
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <
>>> raquino at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the updates regarding this work.
>>>> I'm in agreement w/ timeline and sending document for familiarization
>>>> and comments by members
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NCUC-EC mailing list
>>>> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCUC-EC mailing list
>> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20170827/de95475f/attachment.html>