<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Maybe I’m wrong, but one experiential point may be getting in the way here: Being a contractor in the EU is more similar to being an employee in the US.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the US it’s very easy to hire and fire and there’s a fluid job market. In parts of the EU it’s near-impossible to fire someone and can easily take 6-12 months and an enormous legal effort.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the US employment also usually confers things like healthcare which are “free” in much of the EU.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Therefore it may be the case that people on both sides of this debate are using words that mean different things to each other and it might help to nail down some of it.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Andy’s point about the irreversible nature of employment might be an example here, since hiring in parts of the EU is in fact effectively irreversible. The relationship between employees and their jobs is very different in Europe to the
US, and I’m sure in other places too. The EU isn’t as harmonized as the US either and one country in the EU can be super different to another on employment.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Best</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Steve<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="border:none;padding:0in"><b>From: </b><a href="mailto:gravitystorm@gmail.com">Andy Allan</a><br>
<b>Sent: </b>Thursday, August 13, 2020 2:43 AM<br>
<b>To: </b><a href="mailto:rory.mccann@osmfoundation.org">Rory McCann</a><br>
<b>Cc: </b><a href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org">OSMF Talk</a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Osmf-talk] Interesting Points | Re: Funding of iD Development and Maintenance</p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sat, 8 Aug 2020 at 08:43, Rory McCann <rory.mccann@osmfoundation.org> wrote:<br>
<br>
> We didn't discuss the specifics of that contract. permanent / fixed<br>
> term. Yes, legally there is a difference, but in practice is it a large<br>
> difference? We have the right to make a position redundant, and that<br>
> might cost money, but it is very different from telling someone “we're<br>
> not renewing your fixed term contract”? Either way, someone is pissed<br>
> off, right?<br>
<br>
Yes, it makes a big difference, both to the employee, and to the OSMF.<br>
<br>
For the employee, it sets expectations. If the position is advertised<br>
as permanent, then the employee has a reasonable expectation that it<br>
will continue to exist, as advertised, for a few years, if not longer.<br>
But if there's a reasonable chance that the OSMF wants to review the<br>
role and responsibilities, maybe after the first year or first two<br>
years, then it's unfair on the employee to advertise it as permanent.<br>
For many people, being made redundant 1 year into a permanent contract<br>
will be a horrible experience, and will feel entirely different to<br>
working on a 1 year fixed contract that was not renewed.<br>
<br>
It also affects the OSMF. Altering the roles and responsibilities of a<br>
permanent position is much harder, and the emotional impact on<br>
volunteer board members of steering a situation of enforced redundancy<br>
(perhaps on an employee we are all friends with) would be a big ask.<br>
It's a tough situation and most board members would choose the "muddle<br>
along" option, rather than the "grasping the thorn" option, since<br>
there is nothing pleasant about managing redundancies (especially, as<br>
discussed above, if the employee wasn't expecting it). Whereas a<br>
fixed-term contract is easier - if everyone is happy, the contract can<br>
be easily extended, whereas if the role needs to end it does so by<br>
default, with much less emotional damage to the board members and the<br>
whole organisation.<br>
<br>
Now of course there are advantages to having a permanent position<br>
advertised - you'll get a different pool of candidates, the permanence<br>
of the contract will likely mean lower salary expectations, short term<br>
contracts might be unnecessary for this particular role, and so on. I<br>
don't mean to say that I know one option is better than the other.<br>
<br>
What I really want to hear from the Board is that they recognise which<br>
bits of these decisions are not easy to reverse, and as well as<br>
recognising those situations they are also considering the<br>
alternatives.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Andy<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
osmf-talk mailing list<br>
osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org<br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>