From what I understand, you're mostly concerned
about fraud and conflicts
First of all: wholly agree with Andy. I am not aware of any organization
that would monitor the bank account transactions of its board members.
Self-reporting interests, sure. I'm curious what kind of outrageous fraud
you suspect that would justify such invasion of privacy.
Second, any of these measures probably would require us first to have a
clear picture of what would qualify as a problematic relationship that
would benefit from such a cooling off period. Usually, such a cooling off
period seems to be suggested in a context where people may lobby for
something in the hope of getting a juicy appointment elsewhere
afterwards, or because they were strongly colored by a previous appointment
elsewhere. I don't think it's realistic to expect a cooling off period for
voluntary board members. For its staff members, I don't know enough at this
point about labor law to know if this is already covered elsewhere. Do you
know of guidelines that suggest that this is a best practice at charities?
I suspect most of our organizations will have some implied or explicit
conflict of interest policy, to cover at least that angle.
I'm fascinated what triggered this highly suspicious email. Did I miss
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:16 PM Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk>
On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 20:21, Pine W
For example, is there any monitoring of the bank
accounts of board
members and executives
I very much hope not. That would be an outrageous intrusion.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org