Staff restructuring process - Revision history

Rfs: /* H. Define how big picture decisions are made */ formatting

2010-10-05T21:47:33Z

H. Define how big picture decisions are made: formatting

2010-07-06T23:58:24Z

categorized

2010-04-03T19:02:37Z

F. Put it on a big grid

2010-04-03T19:01:40Z

F. Put it on a big grid

2010-04-03T18:58:53Z

F. Put it on a big grid

2010-04-03T18:58:02Z

F. Put it on a big grid

2010-04-03T18:56:38Z

F. Put it on a big grid

2010-04-03T18:54:20Z

F. Put it on a big grid

2010-04-03T18:52:02Z

F. Put it on a big grid

2010-04-03T18:49:32Z

F. Put it on a big grid

@@ Line 86: / Line 86: @@
 # A hierarchical structure, typical on mainstream nonprofits (which would violate our principles -- included for completeness).
 # A representative structure where someone from each group participates. Reps would be selected by each group, but each group would need to be able to recall their rep in a democratic way. There could be term limits, rotation, etc., but these types of restrictions need to be thought through carefully.
-# Proposals can be made in one group and then passed around through all the groups, avoiding the representative structure. This takes longer and
+# Proposals can be made in one group and then passed around through all the groups, avoiding the representative structure. This takes longer and runs into some problems when conflicting "amendments" create disparate versions of proposals, but we might be able to work out a process to handle that.
 # A giant all staff group can work for certain types of discussions and decisions but there are logistical issues to consider (such as how often the group could meet, and what kind of discussions are pointless in such a large group). This option could supplement one of the other options.
 # Overlapping membership between groups can reduce the number of proposals that go to the whole staff

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:58, 6 July 2010
Line 97:		Line 97:

	Once we've worked through all that, we should have a solid idea of what Free Geek's staffing and compensation structures should look like. We can identify what pieces are already in place, and how to migrate to what we want to do.		Once we've worked through all that, we should have a solid idea of what Free Geek's staffing and compensation structures should look like. We can identify what pieces are already in place, and how to migrate to what we want to do.
		+
		+	[[Category: HR]]

@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 I think this is a useful exercise to help people visualize the state of the conversation as a whole. List all the pay scales down along the top of the grid, the highest pay scale at the left. List all the jobs and tasks down the left hand side. If we wanted the least expensive staff possible (in the short term) we'd want to fill all the jobs in the rightmost column. (I'm NOT saying we want that. It's just a mental exercise.) Now figure out which jobs we want really want covered at what level and why.
-In the example grid below an X indicates that someone thinks a particular job could be done by a worker in the indicated pay scale based on the job description and the criteria developed above.
+''In the example grid below an X indicates that someone thinks a particular job could be done by a worker in the indicated pay scale based on the job description and the criteria developed above.''
 {| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 === F. Put it on a big grid ===
 I think this is a useful exercise to help people visualize the state of the conversation as a whole. List all the pay scales down along the top of the grid, the highest pay scale at the left. List all the jobs and tasks down the left hand side. If we wanted the least expensive staff possible (in the short term) we'd want to fill all the jobs in the rightmost column. (I'm NOT saying we want that. It's just a mental exercise.) Now figure out which jobs we want really want covered at what level and why.
 {| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
@@ Line 50: / Line 52: @@
 | Hardware grants coordinating || production || ? || ? || ?
 |-
-| Some other job || ? ||  || X ||
+| Some other job || ? || X || X ||
 |-
-| Some other task || ? ||  || X ||
+| Some other task || ? || X || X ||
 |-
 | Some other job || ? || X || X ||
 |-
-| Some other task || ? ||  || X ||
+| Some other task || ? || X || X ||
 |-
 | Some other job || ? || X ||  ||
 |-
-| Some other task || ? ||  ||  || X
+| Some other task || ? || X || X || X
 |}

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 ! Job/Task !! Group !! Pay Scale 1 ($13.55++) !! Pay Scale 2 ($12.55+) !! Pay Scale 3 ($11.55)
 |-
-| Keeping the books || ? || ? || ? || ?
+| Keeping the books || admin || ? || ? || ?
 |-
-| Recycling oversight || ? || ? || ? || ?
+| Recycling oversight || warehouse || ? || ? || ?
 |-
-| Hardware grants coordinating || ? || ? || ? || ?
+| Hardware grants coordinating || production || ? || ? || ?
 |-
 | Some other job || ? ||  || X ||

@@ Line 50: / Line 50: @@
 | Hardware grants coordinating || ? || ? || ? || ?
 |-
-| Some other job ||  ||  || X ||
+| Some other job || ? ||  || X ||
 |-
-| Some other task ||  ||  || X ||
+| Some other task || ? ||  || X ||
 |-
-| Some other job ||  || X || X ||
+| Some other job || ? || X || X ||
 |-
-| Some other task ||  ||  || X ||
+| Some other task || ? ||  || X ||
 |-
-| Some other job || || X ||  ||
+| Some other job || ? || X ||  ||
 |-
-| Some other task ||  ||  ||  || X
+| Some other task || ? ||  ||  || X
 |}
 === G. Group the jobs and tasks ===

@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 {| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
-|+Sortable table
+|+Staff Structure Grid
 |-
 ! Job/Task !! Pay Scale 1 ($13.55++) !! Pay Scale 2 ($12.55+) !! Pay Scale 3 ($11.55)

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 |-
 | Hardware grants coordinating ||  ||  ||
 |}
 === G. Group the jobs and tasks ===