Can the Board attach sums of money to be turned over to Committees for completion of tasks needing to be done around the space?
e.g. Underwater Basket Weaving (UWB) Committee receives $500 towards their new weaver if Alex never has to plumb another toilet for the 3 months.
or
Whatever committee changes the most light bulbs will receive $1000 when all remaining light bulbs have been changed.
That’s a good idea. Committee bounty system.
The bounties would have to remain non subjective like, whichever committee replaces the most lightbulbs and ballasts.
Let’s try to get some kind of base system together to pitch to the board.
Eric, I moved this out of the new Volunteer Opportunities category to the DMS General category, as this is a discussion thread and the Volunteer Opportunities category is not for discussions. Thanks! 
I oppose this idea. If we pay or otherwise compensate one member, the other volunteers will be wanting like treatment. Where does it end?
If we cannot find a volunteer to do something, hire an outside vendor to do it.
Judging by the tasks Robert has laid out, I’d guess at about $3K and with a Board focused on lease renewal and long-term planning instead of menial tasks for us minions.
What are the estimates on this?
Much better Title too!
Tasks are already assigned to a committee. If it cannot be done by a volunteer, the chair should get the quotes.
Yea man! Robert’s given us a tangible outline with his posts. I’m a big believer in informed markets leading to efficient economies and would recommend testing the market from the lower end. For less urgent issues, offer say $250 at this month’s Board meeting and if there’s no takers offer $350 at next month’s meeting. Or, maybe kick this thing off with an auction if the overall idea flies.
In theory, full blown Communism “should” work. Any Communists reading this? Sorry.
Let’s look at a specific issue, say the light bulbs. How much would an outside contractor cost? Is there a committee(s) that would do it for less than that. I bet so if the Board otherwise turns off the spigot or ramps it down a bit. This system now brings the added bonus of incentivizing DMS as whole to save money. In the instance of a light bulb changing contest that also offers a 2nd and 3rd place price, I’d bet those bulbs get changed in a week and for less than hiring a contractor.
I see your point, but that provides a perverse incentive for a volunteer to put off tasks until they age to crisis level and there is compensation.
Either a volunteer does it or we pay an outsider to do it.
Committees with a veiled appearance of being in crisis can be denied eligibility if projects for which they’ve received Board money are unfinished. Bang!
I would fear lowest bidder problems and we’d end up with some half-assed solution (not saying that a contractor would be any different but at least you could hold them accountable with a bad review or BBB). It’s a good idea to introduce competition into the space but I feel like it might ruin some people’s makerspace experiences if it got out of hand.
Well if DMS has taught me anything, it’s that if you want to be active in having your say here, you’d better have thick skin. So even if things did start to get out of hand within this framework, it’d be nothing new. If things we’re to start get hyper competitive within this system though it’d only mean things getting done faster for cheaper. Evaluation of faulty or crappy work would ultimately be the responsibility of the Board to vet before dispensing monies.
Would we not have issues with enurement with this?
I’m not sure, but I believe enurement pertains to transfer of monies into a member’s private account. Also, a competitive bidding system ensures transfer of money at or most likely well below outside market rates. I believe this is one of the stipulations to avoid enurement in the cases of transfer of money to a member’s private account.
Correct (I think). If monies went to a committee for something like this (and IMO they should! never to a member directly) it wouldn’t be an issue.
Enurement is special treatment for an individual.
The theoretical bonus system only benefits a committee, not an individual.
Examples:
#1 Members 1-9 get paid $50 per laser class taught. Member 10 get paid $300 for the same laser class.
#2 Member John Smith gets permanent use of the the small conference room which he converts into a personal office, he pays no rent on the space, and it is labeled with a sign saying “exclusively for the use of John Smith.”
#3 Member needs a special compound that costs $500 per gallon. DMS buys it for that person and no one else is allowed to use that product.
hmmm this got out of hand quickly.
when I read it, the payment went to a committees fund. never a person.
lets make an example using the light replacement.
-The board places a “bounty” on the bounty board something like
“whatever committee replaces 25 sets of old fluorescent bulbs with new LEDs by (date/deadline) gets $(some amount) for the committee”
-The laser chair drums up enough people to get the job done through leadership or some kind of commitment to use the funds for a specific item.
-The laser committee replaces the 25 sets of bulbs before the deadline.
-the board awards the laser committee the funds.
in this case the bounty could be set up to be possible to be taken multiple times until the lights are replaced.
lets not shut something like this down by immediately jumping to the “PEOPLE ARE EVIL AND WILL TAKE ALL THE MONEY”
I agree this has a perverse incentive to delay not doing something hoping a bounty will be put up.
What if two committees start to replace lights, who gets it? It’s a novel idea and if can be worked out, then it needs to be explored.
I wouldn’t make the bounty really high though. If it becomes a lot of money probably cheaper to have a contract maintenance guy just doing things as they are needed. @ say $20/hr, 20 hours a week, would be $1,600/mo. If that person changed the A/C filters that we pay $250/mo for then that’s a savings plus they’d be changed more often as needed. Could do lots of the small repairs and maintenance schedules for machines could be set-up resulting in higher up times for members use of the machines.
i just used arbitrary numbers, lets not get tied up in those