Wikimedia Chapters Association/Resolutions/2012 Office location

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki


The WCA resolves to vote about the registration of the legal seat of the Association. Should the registration place for legal seat and the operational place for office be the same and therefore the SG will be required to relocate? Or will the association allow their SG and management staff (c-level) to work in another office that is not at the place of registration or virtually from their home? The resolution relates only to WCA management and will not affect the possibility of employing staff and external consultants outside the office, as commons in other organizations.

Question to be answered[edit]

Does the legal seat of registration need to be the same as the office incorporation?

Vote by Council Members[edit]

Conditions of voting

  • Voting will begin on 23 October and close on 5 November,[1] or earlier if all the council members have voted. A majority vote applies in accordance with the WCA charter.
  • As of 22 October there are 21 Members, so a majority of 11 applies.
  • Council Members may change their vote at any time until voting closes.
  • All Council Members will be invited by direct email to vote on this resolution on 23 October 2012.
The following discussion is closed: Voting closed on 5 November 2012 with no decision for the resolution. -- (talk) 15:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support : the registration place for legal seat and the incorporation place for office should be the same

  1. Can't see how the SG can work from one place and the Secretary and the accounting from another place. Or worst - that the office will be decided by the location of the SG that will be selected. The SG should adjust himself to the organization, not the organization to him. --Itzike (talk) 12:58, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. As we are starting from scratch, and we can pick any country we like, legal seat and office should be in the same place. In any case:
    • we don't necessarily need to have an office at the beginning - if we have only one employee (i.e. the SG) he can also work from home;
    • we should decide both places before we hire anyone, and "near the home of the SG" is not a valid argument for making a choice. - Laurentius (talk) 09:54, 30 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Detaching office and registration location simply gives us an extra problem to deal with. Also see Laurentius's argument above. Deryck C. 22:20, 30 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I should clarify that this resolution should not preclude WCA from having staff members who work from home. It simply says that if WCA were to have a central office, then we should put the legal registration in the same jurisdiction. Deryck C. 23:56, 31 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Our organisation is too small to have to worry about the overheads of communications and transport with a geographically dispersed management team. -- Chuq (talk) 05:18, 31 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. For practical reasons. Ziko (talk) 13:33, 31 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. DamianFinol (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Against : it doesn't matter, the places can be the same or be different

  1. Legal seat seems to be the blocker for any further progress. A detachment from the office location will make the decision on the legal seat way easier. --Mglaser (talk) 13:09, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. No problem neither technically nor legally. It is a good idea to have everything in one place but it shouldn't be used as an excuse to not be able to proceed. We should finally get going and ignore minor requirements for the moment. --Manuel Schneider(bla) (+/-) 13:27, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I don't agree this is minor issue. To decide on that in a year from now, can result decision of the SG to leave, and to start the whole process of hiring and the training and overlap of the SG from scratch. I'm sure we don't want to handle that again so soon. --Itzike (talk) 13:31, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. But I agree with Itzik, if the places should be different, the choice should be done by the council and not based on the only SG opinion --Charles Andrès (WMCH) 12:58, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I do agree to the last part - we should make the decision and do it now, not postpone it. --Manuel Schneider(bla) (+/-) 17:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I also agree with this sentiment.--Pharos (talk) 14:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'm now a candidate to be SG - I ask you as my employer - I need to relocate Geneva or I can manage the organization from Israel. This question is likely to be asked by each candidate - What will be you answer? --Itzike (talk) 19:57, 30 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. the places may be different. The choice of the location of the office may be done along with the recruitment process. The place will have to follow a bunch of requirements in particular related to ease of travel and can be decided as part of the recruitment decision. Anthere (talk) 18:30, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Pharos (talk) 14:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. (talk) 15:00, 30 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Having the registration and office locations coincide may be convenient, particularly in the short term, but I don't think it's absolutely necessary. Kirill [talk] 22:50, 30 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • As far as I see, whether these two can be different or not depends on the particular legislation. There can be a legal condition that there would be actual activity (or certain parts of it) in the country of registration. Legalities aside, it might be operationally possible (if inconvenient) to work in several places at once. --Oop (talk) 21:46, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think both variants are appreciated, per Oop. --A1 (talk) 09:04, 31 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. See talk page—A note on process.