How To Organize Welfare Committee Elections?

[Hyponeros]

We will have new welfare committee election in the company I am working for. There must be 5 representatives by law.

There is no problem on how everything is organized but there is one point that really surprises me: even if 5 representatives have to be elected, every employee is allowed to choose one 1 person.

This seems strange to me. I would have thought that if they have to choose 5 representatives they should be allowed to vote for 5 people!

If every employee votes for the same person and each candidate votes for himself, what would happen? I know this is unlikely to happen but still it is not logical to me.

I couldn’t find any document or law on how it should be organized.

Does anybody have any links to confirm that I am right (or wrong!)?

[tim armstrong]

Hyponeros,

I don't think there is a rule to tell you HOW to do this. I would call for 5 nominations over a 2 week period, from all employees, except any still on a probationary period. If you get more than 5 then take the 5 with the longest period of service. I doubt that everyone would vote for themselves unless there is some incentive, - financial or otherwise. Longevity of service is a useful tool as labour courts respect this idea. If you advertise that no one gets paid to be on the committee, I would be surprised then if there was a rush of volunteers.

[Hyponeros]

Hyponeros,

I don't think there is a rule to tell you HOW to do this. I would call for 5 nominations over a 2 week period, from all employees, except any still on a probationary period. If you get more than 5 then take the 5 with the longest period of service. I doubt that everyone would vote for themselves unless there is some incentive, - financial or otherwise. Longevity of service is a useful tool as labour courts respect this idea. If you advertise that no one gets paid to be on the committee, I would be surprised then if there was a rush of volunteers.

Thank you for your reply.

In that case we have 11 candidates so that elections are organized.

My question concerns more the process of voting itself. 5 representatives need to be elected but each employee can vote only for one person. Since they have to chose 5 representative I would think they have to vote for 5 person each! This seems to be the most logical to me, but it appears that I am the only one.

By saying "one person, one vote" they are thinking that one vote means choose one person only, but I think that each vote has to choose 5 person out of the 11 candidates because they will have 5 representatives.

[tim armstrong]

Hyponeros,

I don't think there is a rule to tell you HOW to do this. I would call for 5 nominations over a 2 week period, from all employees, except any still on a probationary period. If you get more than 5 then take the 5 with the longest period of service. I doubt that everyone would vote for themselves unless there is some incentive, - financial or otherwise. Longevity of service is a useful tool as labour courts respect this idea. If you advertise that no one gets paid to be on the committee, I would be surprised then if there was a rush of volunteers.

Thank you for your reply.

In that case we have 11 candidates so that elections are organized.

My question concerns more the process of voting itself. 5 representatives need to be elected but each employee can vote only for one person. Since they have to chose 5 representative I would think they have to vote for 5 person each! This seems to be the most logical to me, but it appears that I am the only one.

By saying "one person, one vote" they are thinking that one vote means choose one person only, but I think that each vote has to choose 5 person out of the 11 candidates because they will have 5 representatives.

I think I understand your position, but I agree with the staff - one person only, for their ONE vote. If you don't get your 5 members this way and they all vote for one or two people, go back to the longevity of service idea to appoint the rest. The responsibility is with you as the management, and as long as the process has been open, consultative, and fair, no-one should argue. If there is someone with many more votes than the rest, make them the chairperson (to be politically correct).