I agree with Craig on the most reasonable interpretation of the limited commentary from the Board in recent weeks. Indeed, it would be quite normal, even expected, to include a mutual non-disparagement clause in any separation agreement, which by its very nature is confidential.
Risker/Anne On 7 March 2016 at 01:50, Craig Franklin <[email protected]> wrote: > To be honest, I consider it unlikely that Patricio or anyone else is going > to discuss HR matters at length in public, even when they concern Lila, and > especially when they could potentially be interpreted as negative towards a > particular identifiable individual. For legal reasons, it might be the > case that the BoT will let Lila have as dignified an exit as possible from > the organisation, without putting a whole bunch of information into the > public domain about how they regarded her performance. > > Cheers, > Craig > > On 7 March 2016 at 16:39, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1. I would also very much appreciate Patricio explaining whether the > > "full confidence of the board" actually meant the full confidence: > > IOW, that a vote was taken and everyone unanimously agreed that Lila's > > continuation was the best thing. > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
