Essentiality, Necessity, Beneficiality

 

The tests of essentiality, necessity, and beneficiality

A  fiduciary is expected to justify any expenditure of Association funds on the grounds of essentiality, necessity, and beneficiality. 

It appears an exaggerated sense of entitlement trumps the written law.  Do our trustees need to be compensated 300% more to motivate them? Whatever happened to volunteerism? to pro bono service?

How is increasing per diems by 300% essential?  Consider a thought experiment: what catastrophe or disaster would have happened if no such increase was made? 

Rehoa could not function? It will disintegrate? Become inutile? Unable to secure our homes? Garbage will not be collected? More frequent water interruptions? Number of guards will be reduced? The grass will not be cut? Streets will be dark at night? Home break-ins will double? Vicious dogs attack walkers, children playing, bikers?

Nonsense. The previous boards have managed our affairs in fairly good order without having to increase per diems.  

How is a monthly gasoline allowance necessary? If there were none, would our honorable trustees suffer by walking to and from the office? Do they need to be paid for gasoline to perform their duty, as trustees, to attend a meeting? Officially they meet only once or twice a month, inside Riviera, so at most a liter of gasoline at  P70 would surely suffice.

Would not an allowance of P1000 mean Rehoa is shouldering their gasoline expense going to the market or to the church?

(Sidebar: To paraphrase the Bard, that which you call a monthly allowance would cost as much by any other name.)

All these resolutions increasing per diems and allowances raise this question: Are  our current trustees just FINOS?

(sidebar: 

The trustees who are supposed to attend a meeting once or twice a month in a pleasantly air conditioned office, served with unli coffee and sugary pastries, added an extra P3,000 to their disposable income. Compare that with the salary increase they gave workers who toil for hours 5-6 days a week under the summer heat or during habagat season.

Who can say our field workers are not needier, if not more deserving, than our trustees, since inflation ravages workers far more than the well-to-do families.

The marginal utility of say, P100, for our grasscutters is far higher than that for trustees.  P2000 of additional per diems X 11 trustees equals P 22,000. Assuming 25 field workers, that amount could have added P 880 monthly pay on top of the increase  given in 2022.

Our workers are also our stakeholders. Don't we have a higher social obligation to our workers than to our trustees? Would that they heeded the better angels of their nature....)