[Foundation-l] Travel policy

[Yann Forget]

Hello,

Comparing cats and children is not really responsible.
I think that at least *some* expenses needed for care of dependents
(i.e. children) should be reimbursed by the Foundation. I agree that the
amount of any expense should be approved in advance in order to be
reimbursed.

NB: I don't have dependents.

Regards,

Yann

Dan Rosenthal a écrit :
> Because Dependent care is not the responsibility of the foundation's  
> expenses. There is a reason why other boards do not do this. If one  
> is volunteering one's time as a board member, the volunteer is making  
> a decision for themselves to give up that time. They must weigh that  
> decision carefully against their own personal needs.
> 
> If I were a board member, for instance, it would be incredibly  
> unreasonable for me to ask for reimbursement for boarding, care, and  
> feeding of my cats while I was gone. It was my decision to get the  
> cats, and the assumption of responsibility is my own. Similarly, the  
> decision to be on the board would also be my own, and therefore the  
> foundation would not be beholden to the care of my cats.
> 
> It's the same thing with dependents... if you cannot afford to keep  
> care of them in the execution of ones duties, then do not sit on the  
> board.
> 
> On Jul 9, 2007, at 11:59 AM, Florence Devouard wrote:
> 
>>> 2.  Dependent care expenses are not reimbursed by most other
>>> organizations and should no longer be reimbursed by the WMF now  
>>> that it
>>> has matured.
>> Why ?
>> And, what does maturity have to do with that ?
> 
> 
> Not uncertain benefit: quite certain benefit. In any major  
> organization, for profit or not, you cannot just say "I want to go  
> here" without having the travel itself approved first. This  
> significantly cuts down on irresponsible costs...There is plenty of  
> travel that a foundation employee COULD go on and be reimbursed for,  
> but does not NEED TO go on. If you want to travel some place you  
> should be prepared to justify first why you are going there, and then  
> once it's approved for you to go there, then you start discussion on  
> how to minimize costs in transit.
> 
> i.e. if there is a meeting for say free software that is really not  
> all that important, and closely proceeds a major event, such as  
> Wikimania, or a major annual open source/free software convention,  
> it's not necessary to go to the first one.
> 
> Similarly, there is no reason for every single member of the staff  
> AND board to attend most events.
> 
> The Uninvited Co., Inc wrote:
> 
>> 1.  It should be made clear that travel must be approved in advance
>> before arrangements are made, in addition to the post-travel  
>> approval of
>> expense reports.
>>
> 
>  >Florence Devouard wrote:
>  >  Lots of bureaucracy for a quite uncertain benefit.
>  >  If a person travelling for WMF provides expenses not fitting with  
> the
>  >  policy, he can reimburse afterwards. If the case is borderline,  
> this can
>  >  be discussed afterwards and case clarified.
> 
> In all the boards I have been involved with, either having sat on or  
> been an employee thereof, all of them have required prior approval of  
> travel, and none of them have allowed reimbursement for dependancy.
> 
> It comes down to a single fundamental rule: You absolutely,  
> positively do NOT go ahead and do something first, and then get  
> reimbursed for it later. That is one of the most fiscally  
> irresponsible thing an organization can do, either for or not for  
> profit.
> 
> -Dan Rosenthal

-- 
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclopédie libre
http://fr.wikisource.org/ | Bibliothèque libre
http://wikilivres.info | Documents libres