You are here

Executive Meeting | November 22, 2006

 

TRIUMF PSRC Meeting

November 22, 2006  13:00 – 14:00

Attending: Stu Austen (Chair), John Drozdoff, Brian Evans, Ann Fong, Mike Mouat, Roman Ruegg (Ex-officio)

 

S. Austen led a discussion about the planning for the 2006 PSRC Annual General Meeting. Last year’s PSRC Board members were elected through an electronic voting system set up by Glenn Jones. S. Austen will approach Glenn to see if he will assist in setting up a similar system for this year’s vote. A possible date for this year’s AGM, subject to the auditorium’s availability, is December 7.

The agenda for the AGM should include the approval of the minutes from the 2005 AGM and a call for nominations and acceptance by nominees for the positions of both PSRC Chair and Members at Large. It was felt that a review of the voting tabulation method would be useful and the membership should be reminded that it was quite possible to run for both the Chair and a Member at Large position at the same time. Board members seemed to feel that this could be made clearer if two separate and distinct ballots were used, one for each of the two types of positions.

S. Austen will receive all nominations.

Board members also agreed that it would be useful to review the PSRC Board’s recent activities at the AGM. That list of activities would include its participation in the search for a new Director, its attendance at OPCOM meetings, its involvement with Human Resources in resolving PPR appeals, and its success in having more funds directed to scale increases than was originally proposed.

The need for an AGM guest speaker was also discussed and attempts should be made to have a management representative make a presentation about the formation of TRIUMF Inc. and what the implications were to staff, if indeed there were any. Another topic that would definitely be of interest to the PSRC membership would be the status of the proposed reorganization of TRIUMF.

The meeting ended with a short discussion about staff representative groups’ role in OPCOM. That role, like the role of OPCOM itself, is apparently under review.