Board Minutes August 2012: Difference between revisions

(Created page with "These minutes are not yet approved. == EBC Board Meeting Minutes for August 16, 2012 == * Time: 6:30pm * Location: LAW 101 * Food: Bernadette == Call to order == * In atte...")
 
Line 52: Line 52:


**Neil - I'm bringing this up because the best interests of EBC seems to be "yes," though marginal, but I'm concerned about that other employers in our group who aggressively manage their WCB costs might start screening applicants for potentially expensive pre-existing conditions, so if it were up to me I'd be voting against EBC's financial interests, and felt I should clear this by the board.  I suspect it'll pass regardless of how we vote.
**Neil - I'm bringing this up because the best interests of EBC seems to be "yes," though marginal, but I'm concerned about that other employers in our group who aggressively manage their WCB costs might start screening applicants for potentially expensive pre-existing conditions, so if it were up to me I'd be voting against EBC's financial interests, and felt I should clear this by the board.  I suspect it'll pass regardless of how we vote.
===Reviewing the need for formal position statements===
*from the most recent newsletter:
"One of the big takeaways was this: in cities throughout Canada, the United States, Australia, and the world, at all stages of bike infrastructure (from almost nothing in American cities to European cities with established cycle paths), there has been a move away from painted bike lanes as ineffective, instead favouring separated cycle tracks (like in Ottawa, Montreal, New York City, and Vancouver), for arterials, and bike boulevards and neighbourhood greenways for lower-traffic roads.
It's what's needed to make the 60% of "interested, but concerned" potential cyclists feel safe enough to ride on the road. Would you be comfortable with a child or a grandmother riding down Edmonton's streets? If not, then are we only building bike lanes for people who will ride anyway?"
**I don't necessarily have a problem with this idea, but do we need a broader discussion (within the board, advocacy committee, or members) before something becomes a de facto position of EBC? -Adam


== In Camera ==
== In Camera ==