[Osmf-talk] Framework for the foundation's hiring practices

Mon May 11 13:14:18 UTC 2020

English below

Il y a quatre ans [1] le board de l’OSMF, suite à de longues discussions (voir les liens dans [1]) lançait le recrutement d’un contrat à temps partiel dédié spécifiquement en soutien du board concernant différentes tâches administratives, de communication et d’organisation. Il demeurait néanmoins des réticences au sein des membres actifs de la communauté dans les activités de la Fondation de voir s’instaurer un premier cas de travail non bénévole au sein de l’OSMF.

Maintenant, le board communique sur la volonté de mettre en place un cadre de contractualisation, sans aucunement indiquer les besoins à remplir (seulement ceux que les volontaires n’accompliraient pas) ou les postes qui seraient créés, en indiquant quelques cadres et limites, parfois très vagues (moins de 20 employés en 5 ans).

Mais surtout, la question posée à la communauté n’est plus SI cette approche est la bonne, mais COMMENT la mettre en place. Comment un tel changement d’approche a-t-il pu survenir en cinq ans ?

Certes, la seule expérience jusqu’ici de contractualisation de l’OSMF a donné entière satisfaction, mais cela tient sans doute autant aux tâches spécifiques de la fonction qu’à la personne qui a été engagée. Vouloir répliquer cette expérience en changeant cette fois complètement d’échelle aura nécessairement des répercussions, et je rejoins totalement Frederik dans son analyse sur les dangers inhérents à faire appel à de nombreux contractuels. Avec ses fonds actuels, l’OSMF aurait nettement plus intérêt à assurer sur le long terme le fonctionnement mince actuel avant que de s’engager sur une augmentation de ses dépenses qui ne fera que pérenniser un besoin croissant de fonds, d’autant plus au moment où le monde va entrer dans la crise économique la plus profonde et globale de son histoire.

Quels sont les besoins non accomplis par les volontaires et comment sont-ils définis ?

S’agit-il de couvrir des besoins essentiels sans aucun temps volontaire disponible, ou bien ces besoins rejoignent une volonté de meilleure efficience ? Vouloir par exemple être capables s’assurer une continuité de service 24/7 (ou même de quelques heures) va évidemment au-delà de ce que des volontaires peuvent assurer, mais est-ce vraiment ce que la Fondation a besoin de mettre en place, au vu des contraintes et conséquences que cela imposerait ?

Par ailleurs, revient comme souvent dans la discussion le mantra de s’inspirer de ce que des structures professionnelles mettent en place, quitte de risquer d’en modifier son essence. OSM a réussi là où tous les acteurs économiques avaient échoué par le passé et échouent encore aujourd’hui à répliquer. Le mantra devrait au contraire de ne PAS chercher à intégrer ce qui pourrait tordre l’essence même de ce qu’est OSM.

[1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2016-April/003712.html

Severin

------------------------

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Four years ago [1] the OSMF board, after long discussions (see links in [1]) launched the recruitment of a dedicated part-time contract specifically to support the board in various administrative, communication and organizational tasks. Nevertheless, there was still reluctance among active members of the community in the Foundation's activities to see a first case of non-volunteer work within the OSMF.
Now, the board is communicating on the desire to put in place a contractualization framework, without in any way indicating the needs to be met (only those that the volunteers would not fulfil) or the positions that would be created, indicating a few frameworks and limits, sometimes very vague (less than 20 employees in 5 years).
Most importantly, the question asked to the community is no longer IF this approach is the right one, but HOW to implement it. How has such a change in approach been possible in five years?
Admittedly, the only experience to date of contractualization of the OSMF has been entirely satisfactory, but this is no doubt due as much to the specific tasks of the position as to the person who was hired. Wanting to replicate this experience, this time by completely changing scale, will necessarily have repercussions, and I totally agree with Frederik in his analysis of the dangers inherent in calling on a large number of contract workers. With its current funds, the OSMF would have much more interest in assuring its current slim operation over the long term before committing itself to an increase in its expenditures, which will only perpetuate a growing need for funds, especially at a time when the world is about to enter the deepest and most global economic crisis in its history.
What are the unfulfilled needs of volunteers and how are they defined?
Is it a question of covering essential needs without any volunteer time available, or are these needs linked to a desire for greater efficiency? For example, wanting to be able to ensure continuity of service 24/7 (or even for a few hours) obviously goes beyond what volunteers can provide, but is this really what the Foundation needs to put in place, given the constraints and consequences this would impose?
Moreover, as often in the discussion, the mantra comes back to be inspired by what professional structures put in place, even if it means risking to change its essence. OSM has succeeded where all economic actors have failed in the past and are still failing today to respond. On the contrary, the mantra should NOT seek to integrate what could twist the very essence of what OSM is.

[1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2016-April/003712.html

Severin

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Le samedi 9 mai 2020 20:19, Christopher Beddow <christopher.beddow at gmail.com> a écrit :

> I think we should take a deeper look into how Wikimedia Foundation handles this. They are based in the US but hire people globally. Having worked remotely as a US citizen for a Swedish company, it seems fairly clear to me that it's not a huge hurdle to simple register the organization in a couple countries for employment purposes and hire people from around the world without absolute location requirements. Others may feel very differently but Wikimedia appears to accomplish this well, as do HOT and others.
>
> On Sat, May 9, 2020, 19:56 Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
>
>> Am 09.05.2020 um 01:32 schrieb Allan Mustard:
>>>
>>>
>>> Simon,
>>>
>>> That's one of the questions we want the community to help us suss
>>> out.  Direct-hire, contract, or third-party hire?  What does the
>>> community suggest?
>>
>> Direct-hire is (too?) complex if the employees are not already there /
>> or can be relocated to where ever your place of business is or can be
>> employed by an in country subsidiary.  An additional complicating factor
>> is that the OSMF is no longer domiciled in the EU/in a country with free
>> movement with the EU. If it was, direct-hire would be far far more
>> viable as it would be possible to relocate people at least within the EU
>> with near zero red tape. The cynical approach to this is that the UK is
>> going to be a cheap labour country going forward anyway, so we might as
>> well stay there and employ locals.
>>
>> Contract (assuming full time employment/single employer) is legally not
>> an option in a great number of countries (except if you want to leave
>> the OSMF open to all kind of potential legal action and costs), and
>> essentially boils down to only employing people from countries with none
>> or little employee protection (which do exist naturally). Not to mention
>> that shady employment practices may impact the OSMFs ability to raise
>> the necessary funds to start with.
>>
>> I don't have a strong opinion on third-party hire, this is obviously
>> possible, the commercial route might be a bit expensive, but assuming
>> employing via local chapters that already have staff it might be viable.
>>
>> tl;dr version: there are reasons why real companies are typically not
>> totally remote and virtual.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>>
>>> apm
>>>
>>> On 5/8/2020 6:01 PM, Simon Poole wrote:
>>> > Tobias
>>>
>>> > Could you clarify if the board actual means "employee" when it is using
>>> > the term or if the actual intent is to simply contract work out.
>>>
>>> > The legal issues with both variants are rather convoluted, but
>>> different.
>>>
>>> > Simon
>>>
>>> > Am 06.05.2020 um 22:24 schrieb Tobias Knerr:
>>> >> Hi all,
>>> >>
>>> >> the OSMF Board wants to think about a general framework to hire people
>>> >> to fill in the gaps that volunteers can't fill. We believe that, given
>>> >> good practices and firm boundaries, hiring people would be worthwhile.
>>> >> It could ensure the continued stability of the OSM platform (servers,
>>> >> integral software) among other things, and augment the currently
>>> >> overworked volunteers and under resourced efforts in the face of
>>> >> continued growth.
>>> >>
>>> >> We would like to gather your input on strategies to have the highest
>>> >> possible positive impact at an acceptable cost, and with as few
>>> negative
>>> >> effects as possible.
>>> >>
>>> >> We had a brainstorm about this during the screen2screen, and these are
>>> >> some things we all agree on:
>>> >>
>>> >> * We strongly prefer not to hire when there are adequate volunteer
>>> >> options. In particular, we are not going to engage in paid mapping.
>>> >> * We need to define criteria for when we -canвЂ™t- wait for
>>> volunteers to
>>> >> step up.
>>> >> * We do not want to grow an army of employees. We do not envision 20
>>> >> employees within 5 years, let alone 200!
>>> >> * We want to make employees cooperate remotely, and through the same
>>> >> platforms that volunteer contributors to that project also use.
>>> >> * We should make sure all employees are treated equitably.
>>> >> * People with an OSM volunteer background should be preferred (because
>>> >> it demonstrates qualifications, added trustworthiness, and is the right
>>> >> thing to do), but we don't agree to which degree.
>>> >> * We want to avoid paid leadership or decision-making positions
>>> >> * We want people to work for the community, not for the Board. But we
>>> >> also do not want employees to have 10,000 bosses - that's a recipe for
>>> >> burnout.
>>> >>
>>> >> Some of the risks we hope the community can help address include the
>>> >> following:
>>> >> * Paid work can have a chilling effect on volunteering.
>>> >> * Paid staff has other incentives than volunteers.
>>> >> * Paid staff has more power to set direction of the project than a
>>> >> volunteer, if only because of the amount of time they have.
>>> >> * Paid staff hired from outside the community may lack an understanding
>>> >> and appreciation for the way the community works.
>>> >> * A direct link between organizations providing funding and a job being
>>> >> done might give those organizations undue power.
>>> >> * The organization that decides what gets worked on becomes quite
>>> >> powerful, which risks losing the benefits of do-ocracy.
>>> >>
>>> >> We know there are many issues with hiring people, but we hope that we
>>> >> can install meaningful guardrails against the risks. Your input will
>>> >> help us devise a strategy that makes sure we define the right jobs and
>>> >> hire the right people for them.
>>> >>
>>> >> Feel free to share your ideas here or send them to
>>> board at osmfoundation.org
>>> >>
>>> >> Tobias
>>> >> (for the OSMF board)
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> osmf-talk mailing list
>>> >> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>>> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>>
>>>
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > osmf-talk mailing list
>>> > osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> osmf-talk mailing list
>>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20200511/e0012e1a/attachment.htm>