On 06/03/2012 08:30, WereSpielChequers wrote:
There are charities in the UK with some very strange ways of recruiting board members. It isn't unusual to have trustees nominated by other organisations, I know one organisation where the majority of trustees are nominated by a total of four other organisations. But there are implications that the WMF might not like:
And the WMUK membership might not agree too.
The time taken from WMUK to become a registered charity and the final discussions with the Charities Commission, and the time elapsed since the registration as a Charity mean it is not so easy to make a major change in governance.
In general, I am very fed up with organizations who make constitutional change about once a year on average. Changes dilute the strength of a constitution. A constitution that reacts to every whim of the members of the body (or the parent body) is not robust. It ends up with the feeling that you can make it up as you go along.
IMHO WMUK is run very well by Board, and very properly. Any observation by a third party to that WMUK is not run to the highest standards would not be a good thing.
Gordo