December 2009 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:18305] RE: [arrl-odv:18297] information for the OD and ODV discussion
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 08 Dec '09

08 Dec '09

Mike, as best I am able to determine there have been 151 arrl-od emails sent so far this year. The vast majority dealt with teleconferences in which only officers and directors participated, or email votes of the Board. The latter in particular run up the traffic count. The comparable number for arrl-odv is 881. Dave K1ZZ From: raisbeck(a)comcast.net [mailto:raisbeck@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 10:14 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18297] information for the OD and ODV discussion Hello All, As the discussion has begun to develop on the separation of OD and ODV email, I've seen several comments (some private) that made assumptions about the frequency of OD-only email traffic. It strikes me that we could clarify this matter quite easily. The email traffic carries a sequence number on ODV, and I assume that it does for OD as well. Dave, Joel, or someone with access, could you figure out how many OD emails have gone out since the beginning of the year, and how many ODV emails? The comparison might inform this discussion. If there's a mountain being made out of a mole hill, might as well find out early ... ;-) 73, Mike K1TWF NE Division Vice Director

1 0

[arrl-odv:18304] 2010 Mileage Reimbursement
by Shelley, Barry, N1VXY 08 Dec '09

08 Dec '09

Officers, Directors and Vice Directors: On December 3rd, the IRS announced the standard mileage rates to be used for calculating the deductible costs for operating a motor vehicle in 2010. In accordance with ARRL policy, we will use this rate to reimburse volunteers for the use of personal automobiles while on League business. Beginning January 1, 2010, the rate we will use for reimbursement of mileage is 50 cents per mile. This is a decrease from the 2009 rate of 55 cents per mile. I've enclosed an updated expense reporting form in Excel format to be used for travel on or after January 1, 2010 which incorporates the new rate. The IRS left the rate for charitable driving unchanged at 14 cents per mile. Barry J. Shelley, N1VXY Chief Financial Officer ARRL, Inc-The National Association for Amateur Radio(tm) 225 Main St. Newington, CT 06111 www.arrl.org <http://www.arrl.org/> Phone: (860) 594-0212 E-mail: bshelley(a)arrl.org <mailto:bshelley@arrl.org>

1 0

[arrl-odv:18300] Re:Words to avoid
by Chris Imlay 07 Dec '09

07 Dec '09

Well, Jim, let's try it without the kilt...this time, laddie. I should note at the outset that I am not an expert at labor law; Rick Roderick is; and he will, I am quite certain, tell us if any of the following is incorrect. Rick does not hesitate to correct folks when he discovers an error they have made. Or maybe that just applies to me. :-) The premises of your e-mail are spot-on: ARRL's representatives cannot, consistent with their fiduciary obligation to the Corporation, make representations about staff departures, because to do so may affect the departed staff member, or be perceived to do so adversely, and thereby expose the Corporation to liability. While Directors are entitled to information concerning staff departures if they ask, they should not disclose such infomation at all to third parties. While certainly a Director will feel awkward when asked what the circumstances surrounding a staff departure were, whether or not a person was fired, etc., a response to such a question is (a) inappropriate, and (b) unnecessary. It is inappropriate for the reasons stated above. It is unnecessary because members are simply not entitled to answers to such questions. They have no right to know the circumstances of a staff departure. Normally (and this applies pretty much across the board with organizations) when a person leaves an organization for any reason, the only information that is subject to disclosure is (a) the fact of the person's departure, e.g.: "X is no longer a member of the staff" and (b) the effective date of the person's departure. I think you will find if you call almost any company for references on a potential job hire of a former employee, you will be told that the only information that is available is when the person was hired and when the person left the employ of the employer. That would be the case regardless of the circumstances of the person's departure. There is no reason why that is not a complete response to an inquiry from a member. If the member asks for the circumstances of the person's departure, the response from the Director should simply be that it is (1) inappropriate for the person to ask, and (2) it would be inappropriate for the Director to discuss. Both are true. So you should decline the opportunity to discuss it. If you want to minimize the risk of offending the inquring ham, you can of course omit poining out that it is inappropriate for the ham to ask. You should, however, say # (2) above and no more. As a corollary to the above, I realize that the current topic of discussion on the ODV remailer is about whether all information to which Directors are entitled should be available to Vice Directors as well, if so, when. I don't want to stir up any hornet's nests here, but one issue about which there may be a line to be drawn between the two groups is with respect to staff departures. Directors are entitled to most information about staff departures if they ask. Vice Directors, not being members of the Board (See Article 4 of the Articles of Association and Bylaw 14), are not likewise entitled to such information. There could, therefore, be a delay in notifying Vice Directors about staff departures in some circumstances to a time after the Directors are notified, and there could be a difference in the information provided to Directors and that provided to Vice Directors. Normally, however, no information about the circumstances of staff departures is appropriate for dissemination in written formats anyway. Jim, for Directors, the key (I think) is to avoid any evaluative or qualitative remarks at all about a staff person's departure. I hope this helps. 73, Chris W3KD Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret, Imlay & Tepper. P.C. 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD(a)ARRL.ORG -----Original Message----- From: K8JE <k8je(a)arrl.org> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Mon, Dec 7, 2009 1:23 pm Subject: Words to avoid As somewhat of a build on the OD/ODV discussion, I wonder if it would be seful to ask Chris, W3KD to offer a few words of caution regarding what oard members should or should not say in announcing a departure from staff? believe we all know such departures could result in unpleasant legal ction if handled improperly. On the other hand, it can also be quite wkward to have members contact me, for example, asking if it is true that so and so" was fired, is no longer with ARRL, etc. before HQ has released he official notice. I believe a dishonest answer to these questions would e of no benefit to the director or the League. Similarly, although one ould plead ignorance to the details of the situation, we look rather idiculous (or ignorant) if we plead we know nothing of the departure. Knowing what type of words to avoid or to use when we are drawn into iscussion of such unwelcome situations would be helpful. I think a few inutes of Chris' eloquence (with or without kilt) would be useful. FWIW. Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director RRL Great Lakes Division 065 Bethany Rd. ason, OH 45040 -mail: k8je(a)arrl.org, Tel.: 513-459-1661 RRL - The national association for Amateur Radio

2 2

[arrl-odv:18302] Re: Words to avoid
by k5ur＠aol.com 07 Dec '09

07 Dec '09

Hi all: I agree with Chris but I'll expand a bit further. The general response should be that it is a personnel matter and it would be inappropriate to discuss it. Period. Most people will understand that and respect such a response. If they don't, well, that will tell you something about the person you are talking to. You drop your guard just a little bit and the next thing you know, you are being quoted all over the chat rooms about how the ARRL "fired that no good ......" Be careful. Never underestimate the position you are in as a Director of an organization, or Vice Director for that matter. You never know when the person pounding you for scoop is going to quote you, or perhaps, without your knowledge, secretly record your comments (yep, that's legal in some states). Radio Shack sells nice little voice activated ones that fit in a shirt pocket. In the old days, you use to hear it go click when the tape ran out but now you don't. I've had cases where top level managers, and Board members like us, have been sued for defamation and discrimination based on secretly recorded comments. Funny, those cases never go to trial and you never hear about them. 73, K5UR -----Original Message----- From: Chris Imlay <w3kd(a)aol.com> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Mon, Dec 7, 2009 1:38 pm Subject: [arrl-odv:18300] Re:Words to avoid Well, Jim, let's try it without the kilt...this time, laddie. I should note at the outset that I am not an expert at labor law; Rick Roderick is; and he will, I am quite certain, tell us if any of the following is incorrect. Rick does not hesitate to correct folks when he discovers an error they have made. Or maybe that just applies to me. :-) The premises of your e-mail are spot-on: ARRL's representatives cannot, consistent with their fiduciary obligation to the Corporation, make representations about staff departures, because to do so may affect the departed staff member, or be perceived to do so adversely, and thereby expose the Corporation to liability. While Directors are entitled to information concerning staff departures if they ask, they should not disclose such infomation at all to third parties. While certainly a Director will feel awkward when asked what the circumstances surrounding a staff departure were, whether or not a person was fired, etc., a response to such a question is (a) inappropriate, and (b) unnecessary. It is inappropriate for the reasons stated above. It is unnecessary because members are simply not entitled to answers to such questions. They have no right to know the circumstances of a staff departure. Normally (and this applies pretty much across the board with organizations) when a person leaves an organization for any reason, the only information that is subject to disclosure is (a) the fact of the person's departure, e.g.: "X is no longer a member of the staff" and (b) the effective date of the person's departure. I think you will find if you call almost any company for references on a potential job hire of a former employee, you will be told that the only information that is available is when the person was hired and when the person left the employ of the employer. That would be the case regardless of the circumstances of the person's departure. There is no reason why that is not a complete response to an inquiry from a member. If the member asks for the circumstances of the person's departure, the response from the Director should simply be that it is (1) inappropriate for the person to ask, and (2) it would be inappropriate for the Director to discuss. Both are true. So you should decline the opportunity to discuss it. If you want to minimize the risk of offending the inquring ham, you can of course omit poining out that it is inappropriate for the ham to ask. You should, however, say # (2) above and no more. As a corollary to the above, I realize that the current topic of discussion on the ODV remailer is about whether all information to which Directors are entitled should be available to Vice Directors as well, if so, when. I don't want to stir up any hornet's nests here, but one issue about which there may be a line to be drawn between the two groups is with respect to staff departures. Directors are entitled to most information about staff departures if they ask. Vice Directors, not being members of the Board (See Article 4 of the Articles of Association and Bylaw 14), are not likewise entitled to such information. There could, therefore, be a delay in notifying Vice Directors about staff departures in some circumstances to a time after the Directors are notified, and there could be a difference in the information provided to Directors and that provided to Vice Directors. Normally, however, no information about the circumstances of staff departures is appropriate for dissemination in written formats anyway. Jim, for Directors, the key (I think) is to avoid any evaluative or qualitative remarks at all about a staff person's departure. I hope this helps. 73, Chris W3KD Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret, Imlay & Tepper. P.C. 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD(a)ARRL.ORG -----Original Message----- From: K8JE <k8je(a)arrl.org> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Mon, Dec 7, 2009 1:23 pm Subject: Words to avoid As somewhat of a build on the OD/ODV discussion, I wonder if it would be seful to ask Chris, W3KD to offer a few words of caution regarding what oard members should or should not say in announcing a departure from staff? believe we all know such departures could result in unpleasant legal ction if handled improperly. On the other hand, it can also be quite wkward to have members contact me, for example, asking if it is true that so and so" was fired, is no longer with ARRL, etc. before HQ has released he official notice. I believe a dishonest answer to these questions would e of no benefit to the director or the League. Similarly, although one ould plead ignorance to the details of the situation, we look rather idiculous (or ignorant) if we plead we know nothing of the departure. Knowing what type of words to avoid or to use when we are drawn into iscussion of such unwelcome situations would be helpful. I think a few inutes of Chris' eloquence (with or without kilt) would be useful. FWIW. Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director RRL Great Lakes Division 065 Bethany Rd. ason, OH 45040 -mail: k8je(a)arrl.org, Tel.: 513-459-1661 RRL - The national association for Amateur Radio

1 0

Words to avoid
by K8JE 07 Dec '09

07 Dec '09

As somewhat of a build on the OD/ODV discussion, I wonder if it would be useful to ask Chris, W3KD to offer a few words of caution regarding what Board members should or should not say in announcing a departure from staff? I believe we all know such departures could result in unpleasant legal action if handled improperly. On the other hand, it can also be quite awkward to have members contact me, for example, asking if it is true that "so and so" was fired, is no longer with ARRL, etc. before HQ has released the official notice. I believe a dishonest answer to these questions would be of no benefit to the director or the League. Similarly, although one could plead ignorance to the details of the situation, we look rather ridiculous (or ignorant) if we plead we know nothing of the departure. Knowing what type of words to avoid or to use when we are drawn into discussion of such unwelcome situations would be helpful. I think a few minutes of Chris' eloquence (with or without kilt) would be useful. FWIW. Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director ARRL Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org, Tel.: 513-459-1661 ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio

1 0

[arrl-odv:18298] Ham co-invents tiny UWB antenna
by Kay Craigie 07 Dec '09

07 Dec '09

See http://www.vt.edu/spotlight/innovation/2009-11-30-antenna/antenna.html One of the co-inventors of this tiny UWB antenna prototype is William A. Davis, who is Extra class Amateur W9KIC and an ARRL member. He and the other two inventors received the "Best Paper Prize" in the fields and waves category at the 2008 General Assembly of the International Union of Radio Science. Plus, Bill is my next-door neighbor. He isn't on HF from home (no swamped receivers), obviously likes antennas, let me in on a deal he had already negotiated to buy some land behind our houses so I could get the part behind my house ... can't do better than that for a neighbor. It's great to see a ham, and a nice guy also, receive recognition for his technical work. 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

[arrl-odv:18297] information for the OD and ODV discussion
by raisbeck＠comcast.net 07 Dec '09

07 Dec '09

Hello All, As the discussion has begun to develop on the separation of OD and ODV email, I've seen several comments (some private) that made assumptions about the frequency of OD-only email traffic. It strikes me that we could clarify this matter quite easily. The email traffic carries a sequence number on ODV, and I assume that it does for OD as well. Dave, Joel, or someone with access, could you figure out how many OD emails have gone out since the beginning of the year, and how many ODV emails? The comparison might inform this discussion. If there's a mountain being made out of a mole hill, might as well find out early ... ;-) 73, Mike K1TWF NE Division Vice Director

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:18293] Re: thoughts on the use of OD and ODV
by Kay Craigie 07 Dec '09

07 Dec '09

In response to David's comment, sections 4.4 and 4.5 of the Director's Workbook deal with confidentiality of Board communications. These documents were adopted by Board vote, in January, 2008, if my records are accurate. Before that, we had no formal guidance about confidentiality -- just a sort of Board folklore -- unless a communication was explicitly tagged "Board confidential." Probably those sections of the DW will need some tweaking as time goes by. 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

[arrl-odv:18295] Re: thoughts on the use of OD and ODV
by James A. Tiemstra 06 Dec '09

06 Dec '09

Good afternoon Everyone, I wholeheartedly agree with Mike's sentiments and, frankly, cannot imagine a supportable rationale for dual lists. Regards es 73, Jim, K6JAT Pacific Div VD -- Sent from my Palm Pre raisbeck(a)comcast.net wrote: Hi All, The time has come again to chat about the role of Vice Directors in general, and the use of separate OD and ODV email lists in particular. Clearly several Vice Directors were a bit annoyed that they found out about the Dennis Dura situation third hand. So was I. Dave offered an apology, and I please understand that I completely accept it. It’s easy to make such a mistake – I do these things often enough myself – and when situations such as this erupt there is a lot going on to distract all parties. So, there is no blame to be had and no reprimand due on anyone’s part. However, it does point up a systemic issue. This problem would have been most unlikely if there weren’t separate OD and ODV mailing lists. Why do we have them? The primary function of a Vice Director is to be fully ready to step in to cover for an absent director. As such, Vice Directors would be most effective if they were privy to all the same information that Directors see. I have brought this issue up a few times in private conversations, and frankly, I have never received what I feel is a convincing response. The answers I’ve gotten seem to boil down to the following 3 themes: 1. There are certain things so sensitive that only Directors should know them 2. There are certain matters that would be so embarrassing if they got out that it is imperative to limit the exposure 3. There are certain matters that by law should only be revealed to Directors All of these arguments strike me as specious. So, I call for the two lists to be merged. Whether this means eliminating OD or adding the Vice Directors to it is unimportant. I would also ask, since the Dennis Dura matter was clearly a mistake, that someone forward all the relevant OD-only emails to ODV so we can all have a look. If there is not pretty universal consensus that merging the lists is the right thing to do, then we’ll need a discussion. In that case, I would call upon Dave, Joel, perhaps Chris to prepare a clear, crisp justification for maintaining separate lists. In the case that this be the path we take, I offer the following guidance: 1. The answers must be specific. I’m not interested (and I doubt any other Vice Directors are, either) in a “well there are just things that Vice Director’s shouldn’t know” answer. What things? Why? Why are these things that all Directors should know, as opposed to just a subgroup – EC, perhaps, or Election Committee? 2. Potential for embarrassment is irrelevant. For serious enough matters, anything on OD is likely to be discoverable anyway, and the track record of the Directors in keeping secrets isn’t, as best as I can tell, any better than the track record for Vice Directors. 3. If there are legal issues, then let’s have a full discussion of them – this is where you come in, Chris. Frankly, I doubt that there are. Note that the voting authority of the Vice Directors is automatic – if the Director is unavailable the Vice Director gets to vote, period. It isn’t an option. Of course, there is nothing to stop Directors, Vice Directors, or anyone else from maintaining their own personal email lists, and I’m sure there are plenty of these around, most for perfectly honorable reasons. Insofar as communication to the entire Board is concerned, however, I call upon the Board to establish and state as a matter of policy that all communications to the entire board should include Vice Directors as well as Directors. Thoughts? 73, Mike K1TWF NW Vice Director

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:18293] Re: thoughts on the use of OD and ODV
by David A. Norris 06 Dec '09

06 Dec '09

Loose lips sink ships; however it may be time to discuss this subject as I agree with Gary. I think we all are aware of what matters should be kept confidential. Kay, that's what I forgot to add to my comments on the Director's Workbook evaluation; an emphasis on or a more in depth discussion about which type items should and should not be discussed outside the BoD. {Memory is the first thing that slips and I forgot what went first... hi!} 73 David K5UZ Vice Dir. Delta Div. -----Original Message----- From: Tom Frenaye [mailto:frenaye@pcnet.com] Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2009 10:25 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18293] Re: thoughts on the use of OD and ODV At 10:54 AM 12/6/2009, KI4LA wrote: >I believe this arbitrary separation is just an attitude holdover from the old board way of doing things. It is disrespectful and demeaning to the independently elected Vice Directors to have Directors and others filtering information. It's time for a serious discussion on this topic to begin. There are very few messages that just go to the ARRL-OD reflector. >From time to time we have had Vice Directors (and Directors) who have not been so good at handling confidential material (I should point out that this has been more of a problem with Vice Directors...). It is normal to limit some information distribution to those that "need to know" and who are corporately accountable. This last point is important - Vice Directors do not have the same standing and liability, as I understand it. In this case, where the issue was a staff resignation, I did let my Vice Director know about it - though not on the same day. Perhaps other Directors didn't want to or just didn't notice they were not included in the information distribution. -- Tom PS: Though K1TWF signed his message saying he was the NW Division Vice Director, he does still live in New England... :^ ) ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0