Motions

FY18

Going forward, please visit the SWE Senate Blog for details on proposed motions. All motions are posted at http://senate.swe.org/amendments-and-motions.html

 


FY17

All motions are posted at http://senate.swe.org/amendments-and-motions.html

Motion for FY17 Senate Procedure Update under S-1718 – Motion Adopted as Proposed

Proposed Bylaws Amendments and Motions voted on at the Winter Senate Meeting:

  • S-1713: Other Groups – Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1714: Collegiate Director Eligibility – Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1715: Senate Procedures Updates – Motion Passed as Proposed
  • S-1716: Procedure Review for SWE Membership Conduct – Motion Passed as Proposed
  • S-1717: Endorsement of the Proposed Governance Changes – Motion Passed as Proposed

Proposed Bylaws Amendments voted on at WE16:

  • S-1608/S-1705: Collegiate Director Eligibility – Substituted S-1702 in place of S-1705
  • S-1609/S-1706: Director of Regions Eligibility – Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1610/S-1707: Collegiate Director Term – Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1611/S-17008: Vacancies – Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1613/S-1709: Honorary Members – Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1615/S-17010: Dues – Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1616/S-1711: External Policy Responsibility – Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1617/S-1712: Trademarks and Emblems – Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1702: Collegiate Director Eligibility – Voted to not move forward on this motion (rather to move forward on a vote on S-1703)
  • S-1703: Collegiate Director Eligibility – Motion Adopted with Friendly Amendment to “within two years”
  • S-1704: Region Councils – Motion Adopted as Proposed

The first motion for FY16 is:  S-1701 Special Senator. – Motion Passed as Proposed

  • Pam Dingman has been nominated by the Senate Speaker and approved by the Senate as a Special Senator for FY17.

FY16

Proposed Bylaws Amendments for June 2016

  • S1608: Collegiate Director Eligibility
  • S1609: Director of Regions Eligibility
  • S1610: Collegiate Director Term
  • S1611: Vacancies
  • S1613: Honorary Members
  • S1615: Dues
  • S1616: External Policy Responsibility
  • S1617: Trademarks and Emblems

 June 29, 2016 Update: For the proposed bylaws amendments S1608 to S1617, 29 votes were submitted. 30 in the affirmative is required for each of the motions to pass according to the electronic voting requirements. All of the proposed bylaws amendments will be placed on the WE16 Annual Senate Meeting agenda. 

Motion S1618 for Employee Sponsored Membership passed with 29 votes in the affirmative. Motions require 25 for quorum. 

Below is the motion that is on the agenda for the Winter Senate Meeting in Feb 2016.

  • S-1605: Special Directors – Motion Passed

Below are the motions that were voted on at the WE15 Senate Meeting.

  • S-1603: SWE-EFI Amendments – Motion Passed
  • S-1602: Bylaws Amendments by Electronic Ballot – Motion Passed

The first motion for FY16 is:  S-1601 Special Senator.- Motion Passed

  • Pam Dingman has been nominated by the Senate Speaker and approved by the Senate as a special Senator for FY16.


FY13

Below are the motions that were voted on in May 2013 Senate.

The Final Status of Motions
  • S-1309: Adoption the new Long-Range Strategic Plan- Motion Adopted as Proposed
  • S-1310: Delegation of the Senate Leadership Slate to Nominating Committee – Motion Adopted as Proposed

______________________________________________________

S-1309: Adoption the new Long-Range Strategic Plan – Motion Adopted as Proposed

The Mission, Vision, and Core Values were reviewed early last year and unchanged.

Two small teams, made of the Senate and Strategic Planning Committee, developed the new Value Propositions and Vivid Descriptions   You have all seen these, they were approved by the BOD and Senate before Conference last fall.

That work led into the creation of the new Strategic Plan.  The new plan is focused on 3 main goals, each having strategic objectives below them.

Goal 1:  Professional Excellence: SWE will develop women engineers at all stages of their personal and professional lives.

  • Objective 1.1: Develop an education-, experience-, and exposure-based portfolio for all career and life stages and paths
  • Objective 1.2: Develop new markets and strengthen existing markets for the education, experience, and exposure portfolio.

Goal 2:  Globalization: SWE will be recognized as a global, inclusive organization, promoting diversity and inclusion and serving women engineers wherever they are.

  • Objective 2.1: Partner with global employers to promote the SWE brand.
  • Objective 2.2: Partner with other organizations to promote achievement of common goals through the SWE brand.
  • Objective 2.3: Develop a flexible SWE governance structure that supports globalization and inclusion.

Goal 3:  Advocacy: SWE will advocate for the inclusion and success of women, present and prospective, in engineering and technology.

  • Objective 3.1: Lead advocacy efforts with government and through the media.
  • Objective 3.2: Provide resources for individuals to advocate for the Society’s Mission and for themselves.
  • Objective 3.3: Create opportunities for and improve access to careers in engineering and technology by impacting those who influence career choices for women and girls
  • Objective 3.4: Advocate with employers and academic institutions for the recruitment, retention and advancement of women on women’s own terms.

Process Changes:

The following image shows the changes to the processes.
ImageNext:The new strategy will be in place for the new fiscal year.  The new strategy will be communicated down through the Senate and Sections, from Headquarters  from Region leaders, and announced at conference and through SWE publications. The new BOD will begin laying out the goals for the new FY and the operational plan for the year; ready to be distributed at the beginning of FY14.

S-1310: Delegation of the Senate Leadership Slate to Nominating Committee – Motion Adopted as Proposed

Moving the slate delegation of Senate Leadership to the Nominating Committee and their procedures.

______________________________________________________

Below are the motions that were voted on at WE12 Senate meeting in Houston. Each has more details listed below.

•Bylaws Amendments

  • S1301: Roberts Rules of Order – Motion Adopted As Proposed
  • S1302: Date for determining representation – Motion Adopted As Proposed
  • S1303: Alternate Senator – Motion Adopted As Amended
  • S1304: Petition Candidates – Motion Adopted As Propsed
  • S1305: Collegiate Director Election – Motion Postponed Indefinitely
  • S1306: Nominating Committee Chair – Motion Failed

•Senate Motions

  • S1307: Employer Sponsored Dues – Motion Withdrawn
  • S1308: Employer Sponsored Dues – Motion Adopted As Amended

______________________________________________________

S1301: Roberts Rules of Order – Adopted As Proposed

Background: The 11th edition of Robert’s Rules was released in Sept 2011.  SWE currently uses the 10th edition.

Amendment: Changes language from the 10th edition to the 11th.

Impact: All sections, regions will need to upgrade to the 11th edition for their parliamentary procedures.

.

.

S1302: Date of Determining Representation – Adopted As Proposed

Background: At present two different dates are generally used to determine representation on region councils, 12/31 for Collegiate and 3/31 for professionals sections and MALs.  The two dates cause confusion.

Amendment: The number of voting members and active collegiate sections as of December 31 shall be used to determine the number of representatives that each of the above entities may elect to serve for the following fiscal year.

Pros:

  • Ensures Nom Com will have enough time to seek out candidates
  • Gives more time for candidates to be sought out and allows for smoother election schedule
  • Allows for one report to be submitted with both sets of numbers

Cons:

  • Between 12/31 and 3/31 a few professional entities cross the threshold for the number of representatives they will be able to elect for the following fiscal year.
  • Some professional Entities may lose (or gain) representation in the future.

.

.

S1303: Alternate Senator – Adopted As Amended

Background: A task force was formed to evaluate the role of the alternate senator and their responsibilities.  The work of that task for led to this motion.

Amendment: Changes wording to remove “and alternates”

Amendment:  International members may select one or more alternates according to policies adopted by the Senate. Alternates shall serve for one fiscal year.

Pros:

  • Increases accountability of senators to engage in senate issues
  • Simplifies senate operations and elections
  • Training and communications can be focused on a smaller group

Cons:

  • Does not provide resources to meet quorum for the senate
  • Removes training opportunities for those interested in becoming senators

Impact: If your senator doesn’t show up to vote, your region will lose a vote; however, senate meetings are open to the entire membership so an absent senator could as someone who is well informed to SPEAK on a position if need be.

.

.

S1304: Petition Candidates – Adopted As Proposed

Background: For society leadership positions, the slate of candidates is developed and vetted by the society nom com.  However, any candidate may petition to place themselves on the slate if they have enough signatures and are eligible.  Current language requires 200 signatures from voting members with at least 40 from 4 separate regions.

Amendment: Changes the requirement of 40 signatures from 4 regions to no more than 60 signatures from any 1 region or the international members.

Pros:

  • Requiring 200 signatures is quite reasonable as that is approx 2.2% of the current voting members.
  • The current min of 40 from 4 regions can be difficult and is subject to interpretations.
  • This option clarifies that international members can also sign/endorse.

Cons:

  • Under current system, a candidate could have 80 signatures from one region.  The thinking is that region would be the candidate’s home region.
  • This system reduced that to 60, making the candidate having to go more outside of their own region.

.

.

S1305: Collegiate Director Election – Postponed Indefinitely

Background: In the past, this position was nominated by the president and approved by the BOD as a non-voting guest of the BOD.  The collegiate senators and the nom com want to align the election of the collegiate director with that of the rest of the BOD, involving the nom com in the candidate vetting and evaluation process and allowing collegiate section presidents to vote on the slate.

Amendment:

Changes wording from “The collegiate director for the next fiscal year shall be nominated by the president elect and approved by the board of directors”

to

“The collegiate director for the next fiscal year shall be elected by the collegiate section presidents to”

Pros:

  • Will provide consistency in the vetting of the process of the board members
  • Gives collegiate members stake in the selection of the collegiate director
  • Will align with the elections of the other Region collegiate leaders
  • Removes perception of a conflict of interest of having the BOD appoint another voting member

Cons:

  • Collegiate section presidents may not have complete knowledge of what the BOD responsibilities and the role of the collegiate director.
  • Removes the BOD’s ability to decide what is best for the collegiate director position in the next FY.
  • Add duties to the Nom Com.

2 task forces have this in their scope and it will be best to wait on the recommendations before making a change.

.

.

S1306: Nominating Committee Chair – Failed

Amendment: Removes “must have recent service on the nominating committee” and a may be members of the committee at the time of selection. The chair may not serve concurrently as a regional representative on the committee adds “or in any other position for which the committee is charged with nominating candidates.”

Pros:

  • Larger candidate pool
  • Allows someone to serve up to three consecutive years as chair provides increased flexibility

Cons:

  • If adopted, the chair may not have experience on the Society nom com, with can be challenging give the quick start this committee has each year.

.

.

S1307: Employer Sponsored Dues – Withdrawn

Background: Inquiry from a corporate partner began the research/interest.  SWE is considering various models to expand membership.  This motion will create a framework for the SWE BOD to implement an employer-sponsored membership program for large segments of their employees.

Motion Description:

  • Employer identifies the number of employees eligible
  • minimum of 200 to participate
  • must be all “eligible” employees in a broad category as determined in coordination with HQ
  • Company pays a reduced dues amout for all eligible employees (15%) — based on total # eligible

Pros:

  • Increase membership
  • Improve corporate ability to leverage SWE as a platform for all women engineers
  • Improve ability of sections with major local employers
  • Increase section membership
  • The number of potential new members significantly outweighs the risk of current members utilizing this program

Cons:

  • Does not allow smaller companies to participate with the 200 minimum
  • Companies may see this as thier contribution to SWE and not want to give additional $
  • Sections may result in larger number of members from specific company
  • Sections may lack ability to support large influx of new members

Motion S-1308: Employer Sponsored Membership Program (Senate Procedures) –  Adopted As Amended

The SWE board of directors may develop a pilot program for reduced-dues membership programs for use by employers of professional members, provided that the following conditions are met:

• This is a four year pilot program, with an official review and report to the senate at the end of year 3
• Employers shall identify the total number of employees eligible for SWE professional membership (TNEE)
• The dues paid by the employer shall be calculated as follows: TNEE x Current Dues x 15% (or higher)
• Rebates shall be based on a dues amount of $30 per member
• During the pilot, if the number of members in the section or MAL organization increases relative to baseline, but the rebate decreases relative to baseline, the Society will provide an additional rebate after adjusting for any professional sections chartered or reinstated from that section or MALs as follows:

(FY12 rebate – Fyxx rebate) x 125%

Motion adopted as amended.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Motions

  1. Pingback: FY13 Senate Action « Sonora Senate

  2. Re: s1305, what does the BOD think? Have we considered allowing the Pres-elect down select from the candidates, or play a key role in the down select process?
    S1307: 200 what? Employees. What is the dues Amount?
    Are the full motion details available somewhere?
    Thank you for posting this information.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s