System Message:

Australian Immigration Daily News

Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers. Please email help@migrationalliance.com.au

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form
Posted by on in General
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 3288
  • 0 Comments

Here we go again! Message to MIA Members - Constitutional Change

And once again it's an 'open to the public' SURVEYMONKEY.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FT32PQY

Remember last time? (click here to view the last time this happened)

Below is a picture of a fake member filling in their fake responses and using Kevin Lane's details and a fake MARN to complete the MIA member survey, followed by a 'successful completion notice':

a1sx2_Original1_MIA-non-member-fakes-their-contact-details.jpg

a1sx2_Original1_MIA-non-member-completion.jpg

Feedback from a MIA-MA member today: "In the survey I fail to see an option to retain the present system . I believe most members have recently decided not to change the current system. If any such change has to be brought about have it brought up in the annual general Meeting."

Here it is............

MIA Bulletin 23 August 2016

Dear Colleagues,

You may recall the MIA Board undertook to consult with members about constitutional changes designed to enhance the organisation in its role as the peak body for migration.

As you know the Board is currently reviewing its organisational structure and planning to improve and expand the services it offers its members. However, there are some opportunities to improve the Constitution of the MIA to create the best framework for us.

One particular matter the Board is reviewing is the length of the current terms of office for Directors and the number of consecutive terms that can be served. We currently have two-year terms (that is, elections every two years), with a limit of two consecutive terms.

In reality a two-year term is insufficient time for a Board to properly plan and implement significant changes, and the Board seeks your opinion on options to extend the length of terms of office and/or the number of consecutive terms which can be served.

The Board is seeking your opinion about the following possible changes to the length and number of terms:

Option 1 [the current situation]

Two-year terms, with a maximum of two consecutive terms served (that is, a possible total of 4 years)

Option 2

Two-year terms, with a maximum of three consecutive terms served (that is, a possible total of 6 years)

Option 3

Three-year terms, with a maximum of two consecutive terms served (that is, a possible total of 6 years)

Option 4

Three-year terms, with a maximum of three consecutive terms served (that is, a possible total of 9 years)

It is generally considered that for good governance of an organisation it is desirable that:

               i.Directors should not have unlimited tenure, so that there is an opportunity for new and fresh ideas to be introduced to the Board;

              ii.Directors should have the opportunity to serve for a period long enough to plan and implement significant and worthwhile changes. 

The four options being considered provide a spectrum of opportunities to provide for both positions.

Under Option 1 (the current situation) where our elections are currently held every two years, it is possible that a Director could have only one two-year term and not be re-elected. If re-elected, a Director’s maximum term of consecutive service can only be four years, and this deprives the Institute of the benefit of further years of valuable and effective service from a Director.

Option 4, at the other end of the spectrum, would allow a minimum of three years’ service (if not re-elected) and a maximum of nine years’ service, by which time it could be expected that a Director would probably have contributed as much as possible and could then make way for a new person.

Please note that in each of the options, the maximum consecutive years which could be served (4,6 or 9) would only be possible if the Director concerned was re-elected for a second or third term. Members have the ability, through a democratic vote, to prevent the maximum number of terms being served.

The Board would be grateful if you could take a few minutes of your valuable time to complete the survey which can be accessed from the button below. Please note you will be directed to log into the Members Section of the MIA website to ensure the security of the survey.

Any supported changes would have to be ratified by Members at the Annual General Meeting of Members in November.

The Board will be seeking your input into other changes later in the year.

Yours sincerely

Kevin Lane

Chief Operating Officer

 

Last modified on
Rate this blog entry:
1

Comments

  • No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment

Leave your comment

Guest Saturday, 30 November 2024
Joomla SEF URLs by Artio