I have already voted no for the amendment.
The proposed amendment and rebuttals are: http://www.ieee.org/about/corporate/election/amend ment.pdf The rebuttals are worth reading. They convinced me to vote no. Best regards, Richard Nute Life Fellow, PSES IEEE Bend, Oregon, USA ps: The BoD hired (with our dues) external experts to agree with them. Kinda like the attorney who will do whatever it takes to make his client happy whether or not it is right. From: Schaefer, David [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 12:59 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [PSES] IEEE Elections and Constitution All, Im sure you all have been receiving emails from the IEEE about the upcoming elections and vote on the constitutional amendment. A link is below about it. http://www.ieee.org/about/corporate/election/2016_ constitutional_amendment.html Id like to ask the people here their opinions about it. Its a major change in the structure of the IEEE. My opinion are below. I think there has been electioneering happening in favor of the proposal, and the consolidation of power in the BoD could eliminate checks on their ability to do as they wish. With this change it looks like the BoD approves candidates that would be elected to the board, thereby letting them choose their own membership with much less input from the societies and regions. So now a list of candidates would be published, and as few members have the time or ability to become familiar with these candidates, they will be rubber stamped. As the Board also controls the budget and bylaws, I see the elimination of checks on their power as a major problem. I also see too much corporate weasel words in the rebuttals to the objections that have been raised. For example: The proposal increases flexibility and agility in a complex and rapidly-changing world while providing for a governance structure that increases the members voice in governing IEEE. The Board has taken considerable time and effort to review viable alternatives, including a review by external non-profit governance experts that concluded the risk of not changing was greater than under these changes. The Board identified these changes for the members consideration as the most appropriate mechanism to achieve its strategic goals. Draft Bylaws, necessary to comply with changes in the Amendment if it is approved, are available on the Amendment webpage. To me this reads as we want to change, and consultants we hired agreed with us. It didnt address the opposition statement. That does not give me confidence in their sincere desire to improve IEEE instead of just making changes they wish to see. David Schaefer EMC Chief Technical Advisor TÜV SÜD America Inc Office: 651 638 0251 Cell: 612 578 6038 Fax: 651 638 0285 - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected]> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> David Heald: <[email protected]>
