[NCUC-EC] NCUC Operating Procedures

[farzaneh badii]

Renata, in that case chair can just refer the candidate to the suitable
person for advice.  I don't think it's a big deal really. But if you think
it is just make the necessary change in text and we can discuss with the
members.

On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:03 PM Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> I agree w/ all points Michael noted but 1
>
> Chair's advice for candidate to do better on future appointments
>
> Sometimes EC member or a mentor might know candidate better
>
> Sometimes member is not appointed if there is a potential conflict of
> interest or correspondence to the function is not ideal - we are seeing now
> the discussion about the difficulty w/ the "multiple hats" members of the
> group
>
> So I would suggest leaving this open. Candidate may request advice. Not
> necessarily from Chair.
>
> Em 27 de ago de 2017 4:25 PM, "farzaneh badii" <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
>> 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_aBkHyLcFkvzNsNU47BRQY/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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> --
Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20170827/2ad9b926/attachment.html>