Document:LNC Minutes 11-12 August 1990: Difference between revisions

Redpath reported that he has started working with Thies and Dunbar on an operational audit  [Attachment BB], and that the insurance plan for employees is now set up.

In response to a statement by Redpath that the existing employee bonus plan, Resolution 339,  was not suitable for this year and needed to be updated or deleted, Thies moved to delete the resolution.  Ahmad objected that the existing plan was intended to work for future years and could simply be adjusted. Redpath outlined a specific new set of numbers for computing the bonus  pool,  one feature of which was separate calculations based on the number of renewals and the number of new members.  Dasbach objected that the sum of the base numbers for

these two categories was less than the current membership, and that it would be hard to calculate these two numbers separately.  Redpath conducted a straw poll to determine whether the Committee preferred having some kind of quantitative plan, a qualitative plan, or no plan; the first alternative was most popular. Thies withdrew his motion.

Redpath  moved  to  amend  Resolution  339  by  replacing  the  pool computation formula with:  "(1) $1 for  every membership renewal  over 5000, plus (2)  $10 for every  successful Liberty Pledge renewal, plus (3) $2 for  each new member  over 2000, plus (4)  10% of the  gross of Liberty Pledge over  $8000/month for September-December 1990, plus (5) 5% of gross revenues over $500,000".

Thies moved to amend Redpath's proposal to delete all but the last point. There was a discussion of the effect of the two variants on revenue, and of the appropriateness of including in the calculation various items that are not directly under the control of the office. Allard suggested including a bonus for good ideas. Dunbar said that basing the bonus on specific items such as  Liberty  Pledge was an interesting way of communicating to the office staff what the Committee considers important.

Gingell moved to further amend the proposal to base the calculation on net revenue over $300,000 rather than gross over $300,000. Argument in favor of net was that it would encourage employees to raise funds in the least expensive ways, rather than by doing something that might bring in a  large gross but cost a lot. Argument opposed was that net is not so clearly defined because some things could be considered either expense or a cost of raising revenue.  Gingell's amendment passed on a voice vote.

Ahmad moved to  substitute for the  pending proposal that the existing plan be modified  by replacing the  existing third and  fourth  points relating to revenue  by "5% of  the  gross  revenue  over  the  budget adopted at the  beginning of the  year", by eliminating  the  specific numbers from the  first and second  points,  and  by  eliminating  all references to 1989.  After some further discussion of what areas are really subject to influence by the office employees, Ahmad's motion to substitute passed on a voice vote.

The main motion passed on a  voice vote, with Givot voting no. Dunbar thanked the Committee for resolving the question.