1 / 9

OMOV May 2009 One member, One vote

OMOV May 2009 One member, One vote. Rik Smithies Past Chair HL7 UK NProgram Ltd. OMOV One member, One vote. OMOV committee at HL7.org (international) Exists to address imbalance in voting rights Between US and non-US (aka “international”...)

helki
Download Presentation

OMOV May 2009 One member, One vote

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OMOV May 2009One member, One vote Rik Smithies Past Chair HL7 UK NProgram Ltd.

  2. OMOVOne member, One vote OMOV committee at HL7.org (international) • Exists to address imbalance in voting rights • Between US and non-US (aka “international”...) • “international” members vote through “affiliates” • Like this one, HL7 UK • Not as individuals, or even as companies • This is complicated by fact that you can join .Org directly, and vote that way

  3. OMOV – what are we voting for • 2 things • standards • governance – the organisation itself, essentially the Board, which then provides the governance. • For standards, in most cases, any single negative vote has to be resolved. Hence more positive votes doesn’t count for much • Increasing votes looks good but doesn’t help practically • For governance, votes do count, elections • Anything that limits international votes prevents HL7 being international

  4. OMOV • Number of votes that whole UK has is 10% of membership number, but capped at max of 8 • We have around 200 members • We pay 20% (from this year) of all our income to .Org, previously 10%

  5. OMOV • Worldwide membership 7200 • 2000 .Org. US, almost exclusively • 5200 rest of world, over twice the size • 10% = 520, half the size • And it is capped, so less than 10% in many cases • A key difference is that all .Org dues go to .Org • Only 10, 15, 20% of dues of affiliates go to .Org

  6. OMOV • US/.Org members pay for votes • Based on company size, or can be a benefactor • $1000 = 1 vote • $22000, benefactor = 12 votes • Expensive, but then the company has more sway than a whole country • Entire UK has 8 votes • Doesn’t look right that a company outweighs a country.

  7. OMOV • Ideally One Member One Vote • Level playing field worldwide • Why have one rule in US and one elsewhere? • Even if percentages were fair, not a good way to be international • One person OV? One company OV? • Why is this controversial? • Partly because membership fees are different hence some people get cheaper votes. • An affiliate could have very cheap membership and then dominate in numbers.

  8. OMOV • May 2009 • OMOV proposed to remove “the cap” • More influence for affiliates, UK 8 votes -> 20 votes • But this isn’t OMOV • Also plan to establish a global membership directory, which is necessary for true OMOV (eventually) • But...what do these votes apply to?

  9. OMOV • When finally approved, this may mean the UK gets more votes • No other changes right now, no more voting convenience for instance. • Next question, not specifically related to OMOV • How do we use our votes responsibly?

More Related