Hoi, There may be many people volunteering their time. There is a great lack of people for specific functions.
Yes, volunteers are given tasks/responsibilities. It is however up to them to decide what they want to do and when they do them. They are volunteers, they cannot be told. The notion of relying on a specific task to be done in a certain time frame is something you CAN demand of an employee not from a volunteer.
PS I have some sort of official capacity; I am a member of the language committee. Some people say that we take our time. I would argue that this is not necessarily a bad thing.
Thanks, GerardM
On 3/5/07, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/03/07, GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, An employee brings minimally as his/her commitment to work 40 hours a
week.
An employee can be told to do what is deemed necessary by the
organisation.
An employee is part of an hierarchy and he/she does not have the option
to
say "Sorry, but like you I am a volunteer".
These are all things that are really relevant differences. Strange that
I
did not have to think hard nor long to come up with just this initial
list.
When I think of it, a professional can be hired to do the things where
we do
not have the volunteers to do these tasks.
Thanks, GerardM
Based on the fact that Wikimedia Foundation has such a large pool of volunteers, I think the 40 hour week difference makes little difference. Is there a reason why Wikimedia Foundation can't contract volunteers (as charity shops do)? Similarly, there is no reason why the Foundation can't give official positions to volunteers who can be trusted to work a minimum number of hours a week (with or without a contract). Such volunteers would be given a job description and be asked to do things by the Foundation in the way an employee would.
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com)
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l