Proposed Constitutional Amendment: Expansion of SSE Council
- Created by kjm34 on Oct 13, 2020
- Last update by on Dec 21, 2024
The ballot for the 2021 SSE Council election will include the following proposed change to Article 4 of the SSE Constitution [1]:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Article 4, COUNCIL. The Council shall be the governing body of the Society between the annual meetings. It shall consist of the President, President-elect, Retiring President, Executive Vice-President, the two Vice- Presidents, Secretary, Treasurer, Editor-in-Chief, nine elected Councilors, and two representatives (Chair and Past Chair) of the SSE Graduate Student Advisory Committee (GSAC). Three Councilors shall be elected each year to serve a three-year term. Former Councilors shall be again eligible for election one year after the expiration of their previous term. GSAC representatives shall serve three-year terms on Council, and are selected by GSAC."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This change would increase the number of Councilors elected each year from two to three, beginning with the 2021 election. The total number of Councilors serving at one time would increase from six to nine. Continue reading for the motivation for this proposal from SSE Secretary John Stinchcombe:
"My motivation for offering this amendment is two-fold. First, SSE Council does a lot more than it used to, and has taken on more work on behalf of the community than it had done in the past. Expanding council offers the chance to both spread the workload out more, such that the time demands are less for each person, but also ensures that we have a slightly larger set of voices and opinions included when we are making decisions about the society, its goals, and what it should do. Second, a larger suite of candidates offers the potential to include more axes of diversity in the candidates put forward. While we realize that this will not inexorably lead to more diversity, we think its a useful way of creating the potential. One thing to note, is that at carrying capacity, adoption of this amendment by the membership will cost the society an additional ~ $4500 per year in meeting expenses for attendance at the annual meetings (once COVID allows in-person meetings). I've offered the amendment based on my personal experience on council and discussions with the Nominating Committee."
We welcome members' feedback on this proposal. Please sign in with your SSE member username and password to leave your comments below. Comments will be collected until the SSE Council election opens in early November. Members will be able to vote for or against this proposal as part of the election.
[2]
Comments
I have been extremely impressed by the growth in activities and advocacy undertaken by SSE Council and agree that increasing membership to share the load, enable greater follow-through, and diversify ideas is worthwhile and wise.
John has made a compelling argument for why this is a good idea. It would appear to help SSE perform better, and in a more inclusive way.
I completely support the expansion of the SSE council for all the reasons provided. I also think it in keeping with a number of other societies--six councillors is too few to provide the diverse perspectives needed to run a major organization in the 21st century.
I support the changes being proposed! I think that in current times, more individuals and diversity (and therefore ideas) will only benefit and allow the society to push towards the changes that have been long mentioned.
This sounds like a fine way to distribute workload while amplifying more voices and giving more people a chance to participate in society leadership. The cost is low relative to the value accrued. I'm certainly in support.
Increasing the number of councilors provides, as has been noted, an opportunity for a more diverse council. Part of that diversity might be a more international council, with members outside of North America and western Europe. Such a move would make for a more international society as a whole.
I support the amendment with these caveats: more voices does not ensure more opinions unless the more voices have more divergent points of view; the opportunity for more diversity must be accompanied by the conscious pursuit of more diverse councilors.
I support this as well.
Only logged in users are allowed to comment. Register [3] or log in [4].