[Osmf-talk] Sustainable Travel Expenses Resolution – Request for Support

John Whelan jwhelan0112 at gmail.com
Mon Oct 26 11:16:05 UTC 2020


I'm not sure if this would work locally. Passenger trains run on tracks 
which are owned by freight companies which means they are sidelined from 
time to time to give freight trains priority.

Travel times are not completely reliable and it has been known for a 
train journey to take a couple of days longer than the scheduled time of 
hours.

I must confess I like the idea but would be unsure about if it was 
practical in all circumstances.

Cheerio John

Michael Reichert wrote on 2020-10-26 06:13:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose the following resolution at the upcoming AGM on
> 12 December 2020.
>
> According to Companies Act 2006 s. 292(5) [1], I need at least 5% of the
> members of the Foundation (i.e. about 80 members) to sign this request
> in order put it on the agenda of the meeting. They can be either normal
> or associate members.
>
> If you want to express support this proposal and get it up on the
> agenda, please comment on the following user diary entry until 4
> November 2020 23:59 UTC. Further instructions can be found in the diary
> entry.
>
> I will submit the list of user names to the board afterwards.
> Supporting the proposal in this step does not mean that you have to vote
> for the proposal.
> XXXXXXXXX LINK
>
> The resolution needs a simple majority at the AGM in order to pass.
>
>
> Text to be send to all members
> ==============================
>
> The annual general meeting on XX December 2020 should vote on the
> following resolution:
>
> Sustainable Travel Expenses Resolution
> --------------------------------------
>
> The Foundation will not pay travel expenses for travel that includes a
> flight if there is an option for that person to travel without flying that
>
> * departs or arrives within 4 hours of the flying option's departure or
>    arrival, and
> * does not take more than 6 hours longer than the flying option.
>
> "For the person" means there must not be visa, or accessibility,
> restrictions preventing that person from taking that travel option.
>
>
> Rationale
> =========
>
> Board members, employees and other people travel quite a lot for the
> operation of the Foundation. As far as we know, there are no rules
> within the Foundation so far for reimbursement of travel expenses. For
> international travel, the Foundation has reimbursed flights in the past
> quite a lot of times. While some flights are unavoidable due to a lack
> of suitable alternatives (e.g. flying from North America to Europe),
> other journeys by plane have alternatives. For example, travelling from
> Germany to UK is a distance where high speed train services offer a more
> sustainable alternative.
>
> The aim of this resolution is to avoid spending Foundation money for
> travelling with a large carbon dioxide footprint if reasonable
> alternatives exist.
>
> The climate crisis requires action by everyone. It does not bring us
> forward to point onto each other and expect others to change. Flying is
> one of the most harmful options of travel, especially if non-flying
> options such as trains, ships or buses exist.
>
> We, the humans, will not be able to save the planet if we continue to do
> as we have done so far. We need to change our behaviour, we need to
> reconsider any custom. This includes to give up some convenience. As
> long as politics does not guide people to environmental friendly
> options, e.g. by changing taxation, flying is often cheaper on
> short-term but on the long term the costs of a broken climate will be
> higher than we want to imagine.
>
> This resolution does not forbid people to fly. However, they will not
> get their flying option reimbursed by the Foundation in certain cases.
>
> As stated in the proposed resolution, there can be cases where
> reimbursement is permitted although train/bus/ship/… services exist,
> e.g. if the person travelling cannot use the service due to disabilities
> or access restrictions.
>
>
> End of the text to be send to all members
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Best regards
>
> Michael Reichert aka Nakaner
>
>
> [1] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/13#section-292
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk

-- 
Sent from Postbox <https://www.postbox-inc.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20201026/b795ad9d/attachment.htm>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list