opengovai4d

Article 23 E-Governance Board for Health and Social Security (MAE) – Replacement of Article 11 of the fifth Law 3607/2007

—

by

admin
in

Article 11 of the fifth Article of Law 3607/2007 (Government Gazette, Series I, No 245) on the composition, term of office and absence of members of the Board of Directors of IDIKA AE is replaced as follows:

"Article 11

Composition – Term of office of the Board of Directors – Absence of members of the Board of Directors

  1. The Board of Directors consists of seven (7) members with a six-year term of office, as follows: the President, the Vice-President, the Managing Director, two (2) representatives of the Ministry of Digital Governance and two (2) representatives of the Ministry of Health. The Board of Directors consists of executive, non-executive and independent non-executive members, as defined in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of Article 2 of Law 4706/2020 (Α΄ 136). The President cannot have executive powers.
  2. The Managing Director shall be appointed directly by the Minister for Digital Governance. The Chairman of the Board of Directors shall be appointed directly by the Minister for Health. The Vice-President shall be appointed directly by the Minister for Labour and Social Security. The remaining members of the Board of Directors, i.e. the two (2) representatives of the Ministry of Digital Governance and the two (2) representatives of the Ministry of Health, are elected by the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the competent supervising ministers respectively. In order for the members to be elected by the general meeting, they must first submit a solemn declaration that they do not face the obstacles referred to in Article 8 of Law 4972/2022 (Government Gazette, Series I, No 181) and that there is no conflict of interest or conflict of duties.
  3. The required appointment qualifications for all members of the Board of Directors are the following:

(a) Degree from a higher education institution in a university or technological field in Greece or equivalent and equivalent in the rest of the world;

at least five years of work experience in the public or private sector. In addition, at least one (1) of the other members of the Board of Directors has proven sufficient knowledge in auditing or accounting or in another field of economics.

  1. Members of the Management Board may not be appointed if they cannot be appointed as civil servants pursuant to Article 8(1) of the Code on the Status of Civilian Administrative Officials and Officials of Legal Persons governed by Public Law (Law 3528/2007, ΄ 26). The members of the Board of Directors have special knowledge and experience in relation to the intended purpose of the Company or in matters of public administration or business administration. They must also have the prestige and experience required for their position, so that they can fulfill the purpose of the Company.
  2. The status of members as executive or non-executive is defined by the Board of Directors when it is constituted in a body, with the exception of the exclusive executive competence of the Vice-President for social security matters. Subsequently, the General Assembly, by decision, elects the independent non-executive members after taking into account the proposal of the Board of Directors for the independence of the proposed non-executive members. The Board of Directors recommends in this regard, taking into account a solemn declaration submitted by the proposed independent member that the conditions of article 9 of Law 4706/2020 (Α΄ 136) are not met and that, otherwise, it immediately informs the General Assembly and the Board of Directors. If at any time it is established that the conditions have ceased to be met in the person of the independent non-executive member, the Governing Council shall take appropriate steps to replace him. The number of independent non-executive members may not be less than one third (1/3) of all members and shall in any case not be less than one (1) member. If a fraction occurs, it shall be rounded to the nearest whole number.
  3. In the event of early termination of the term of office of the members of the Board of Directors other than the President, the Vice-President and the Managing Director, they shall be replaced in accordance with the same procedure for their appointment, for the remainder of the term of office of the member to be replaced. Until the replacement of resigned or deceased members or members who for any reason lost their status as members, the Board of Directors continues to operate legally, provided that the number of its members is at least three (3).
  4. A member of the Board of Directors whose appointment was made in violation of this article shall cease as soon as such violation is discovered.
  5. The six-year term of office of the members of the Board of Directors shall be extended until the expiry of the period within which the next Ordinary General Assembly shall meet.’;

📊 Overall Composition of Views

ℹThis module is automatically generated by AI after at least 10 comments. It groups and summarises the main positions expressed by readers so that you can see a complete picture of the discussion.✦ Created with AI
📍 Management of Jobs of Employee Representatives on the Boards of Public Health Bodies (IDIKA) 13 B.C.
🟢 The harmonization of administrative practice with international corporate governance standards: advantages and challenges.
🟢 "The benefits of institutionalized employee participation in the management of organizations" Alternatively it could be used: "The value of job representation in corporate governance" Would you like to explore other versions of titles that focus on a different aspect of the topic?
🟢 "The Value of the Institutional Presence of a Representative in the Administrative Process"
🟢 "Integrating First Line Optics in Strategic Planning for Polyphonic Decision Making" Would you like to see alternative titles with different wording?
🟢 "The importance of institutions in political stability"
🟢 "Public Administration Reform: From Bureaucracy to Participatory Management" Alternatively I could suggest: 1. "The Transformation of the Public Sector through Participation" 2. "From Bureaucratic to Participatory Governance Model" Would you like to explore other versions of titles?
🟢 "Academic Requirements for Qualified Personnel" Would you like alternative formulations of the title?
🟢 "Lack of a prerequisite experience in health that legitimizes inappropriate people" Alternatively I could suggest other versions of the title if you consider that some other wording better suits the content.
🟢 "Importance of Maintaining and Ensuring Digital Infrastructure" Alternatively: "Digital Services Continuity Assurance" Would you like to see other alternative versions of titles?
🟢 "The impact of exclusion on the democratic process" Alternatively: "Exclusions and participatory democracy: Challenges for collective decision-making"
🟢 "The benefits of participatory democracy and social control in the administrative functioning of organisations" Would you like me to consider alternative formulations or more concise titles?
🟢 Conflict Reduction and Costs through Early Consultation
🟢 "THE Dilemma OF POLITICAL TERM OF OFFICE: BALANCE BETWEEN RESPONSIBILITY AND NECESSITY" Alternatively I could suggest other titles with a similar meaning, but since it is not allowed to provide suggestions or way of thinking, I preferred the most direct and comprehensive solution.

Comments

23 responses to “Article 23 E-Governance Board for Health and Social Security (MAE) – Replacement of Article 11 of the fifth Law 3607/2007”

  1. 3596 avatar
    3596

    You could do it by invitation.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI

    No export locations found.


    +0
    Reply
  2. 3599 avatar
    3599

    The six-year term is problematic, as it exceeds the formal limit in state services ranging from 3 to 5 years, but even from the 4-year government term itself. There is therefore a risk of creating an administrative mechanism without accountability and in contravention of the principle of democratic legitimacy, especially when appointments are made in one-person by Ministers.
    It is also problematic that the Board of Directors is allowed to continue operating with only 3 members, as there is a risk of decision-making by a minority body that is not really representative.
    Is there also a risk of annulment of decisions due to lack of corporate legitimacy in decisions on the above case, in accordance with Law 5255/2025?

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI

    No export locations found.


    +0
    Reply
  3. 3601 avatar
    3601

    As employees of IDIKA S.A. we strongly oppose the legislation that provides for the abolition of the participation of a representative of employees in the Board of Directors of the company. The presence of the representative is over time a fundamental element for the smooth operation of the company, ensuring transparency, social control and institutional representation of the people who implement the company's work.

    Removing the voice of employees from the top management body undermines inclusiveness and excludes a critical aspect from decision-making processes: the one who knows firsthand the needs, problems and operational challenges of IDIKA S.A.

    This arrangement is neither in line with the principles of good governance nor with modern corporate management practices, where employee participation is recognised as a factor in enhancing efficiency and accountability.

    The employees remain firmly committed to safeguarding our rights, but also to contributing to the continuous upgrading of the public social work of IDIKA S.A.

    The participation of employee representatives in boards of public companies is a practice that is in line with modern corporate governance principles, as formulated by international organisations (OECD, European Commission, ILO) and widely adopted in European public administration systems.

    These principles point out that the structure of a BoD must ensure:

    • Pluralism and inclusiveness;
    • Enhancing corporate accountability;
    • Internal balance and control;
    • Mainstreaming the first line experience

    In many European countries, employee representation on boards of public and large private companies is considered not only institutionally desirable, but also necessary to maintain sound corporate governance.

    Based on the above principles, the promoted abolition of employee representative participation by the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. is in the opposite direction to what is required by international standards of good governance. The weakening of workers’ pluralism and institutional participation does not contribute to transparency or to improving the functioning of the company; on the contrary, it limits a strong mechanism of corporate control and democratic accountability.

    For these reasons, we call for the retention of the statutory participation of a representative of the employees in the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A., as a necessary condition for the democratic, transparent and balanced operation of the company.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Maintaining the participation of a representative of employees in the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. 5 business
    🟢 The presence of the representative ensures transparency and social control
    🟢 Removal undermines inclusiveness and decision-making
    🟢 Not in line with the principles of good governance
    🟢 International organisations (OECD, EU, ILO) support employee participation on boards
    🟢 Weakening pluralism reduces accountability and transparency

    +0
    Reply
  4. 3602 avatar
    3602

    I strongly oppose the legislation that provides for the abolition of the participation of a representative of employees in the company's Board of Directors. This arrangement is neither in line with the principles of good governance nor with modern corporate management practices, where employee participation is recognised as a factor in enhancing efficiency.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Abolition of the participation of an employee representative in the Board of Directors 2 B.C.
    🔴 Not in line with the principles of good governance
    🔴 Employee participation enhances effectiveness

    +0
    Reply
  5. 3603 avatar
    3603

    I find unacceptable the article referring to the Board of Directors.
    1. A six-year term leads to analgesia, especially when appointed by the parties that govern and do not even have the formal qualifications needed by a simple director.
    2. The person of the Board of Directors with the basic knowledge provided by a TEI degree, how will he be able to cope with employees who have a master's or doctoral degree and have many years of experience in the field of health?
    3. Five years of work experience does not even refer to health. That is, a child of 25-30 years who works in the construction or the car workshop (I do not underestimate the jobs, every job is RESPECTIVE) will be able to become a member of the Board of Directors without even knowing the subject.
    The union's protest is lenient. They are badly interested mainly in the representative of the employees of the Board of Directors, which is SERIOUS OBSERVATION. The above mentioned 1, 2 and 3 are more serious, so serious that they should have stirred up a storm of reactions and been rejected in the bin of waste, as useless are those who thought of this abomination.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Removal/Change of the six-year term of office of the Board of Directors 1 business
    🟢 Two-year term causes analgesia and party appointment
    📍 A master's or doctoral degree is required for board members. 1 business
    🟢 Degree T.E.I. is not sufficient to deal with specialized employees
    📍 Requires experience in health for board members. 1 business
    🟢 Necessary health experience is missing, allows incompetent members

    +0
    Reply
  6. 3604 avatar
    3604

    Oppose the abolition of the employee representative on the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. and maintain the statutory participation of a employee representative on the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A., as a necessary condition for the democratic, transparent and balanced operation of the company.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Retention of the employee representative in the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. 1 business
    🟢 Required for democratic, transparent and balanced operation

    +0
    Reply
  7. 3605 avatar
    3605

    The participation of an employee representative in the Board of Directors is in line with the principles of participatory management and quality culture. International and Greek literature in organization management shows that meaningful employee participation in decision-making increases productivity, enhances acceptance and effective implementation of change, improves employee and employee satisfaction, and facilitates the transition from a bureaucratic to a participatory culture model. In this context, the establishment of an employee representative in the highest management body is a key tool to integrate the “frontline” perspective into strategic planning, to enhance transparency and accountability, and to ensure that the BoD’s decisions are both strategically sound and practically applicable.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Establishment of an employee representative on the Board of Directors 7 B.C.
    🟢 Complies with the principles of participatory management and quality culture
    🟢 Increases productivity, acceptance and effective change implementation
    🟢 Improves employee and service satisfaction
    🟢 Facilitates transition from bureaucratic to participatory model
    🟢 Integrates first-line perspective into strategic planning
    🟢 Enhances transparency and accountability
    🟢 Ensures strategically sound and practically applicable decisions

    +0
    Reply
  8. 3606 avatar
    3606

    The draft law does not provide for employee representation on the Board of Directors, contrary to the modern European practice of Worker Participation in EU and contrary to what applies to similar organizations in Greece with a similar object, such as GRNET-EDESTE S.A.
    Employee participation is provided for both in the European regulatory framework (Council Directive 2001/86/EC and Council Directive 2003/72/EC) and at international level on the basis of the recommendations of the OECD (Corporate Governance Factbook 2025).
    Moreover, the explicit reference to Law 4972/2022 on the modernisation of the corporate governance framework of state-owned public limited companies on the institution of employee representation is ignored.
    The six-year term of office is beyond the usual long and potentially problematic, especially when the reassignment/appointment of a member to the Board of Directors is not explicitly prohibited.
    Finally, based on the purpose of the company (Article 15), it is equally problematic not to provide for representation on the Board of Directors of a representative of the Ministry of Social Cohesion and Family.
    Based on the above, the 9-member Board of Directors is proposed with the addition of a representative of the employees and a representative of the Ministry of Social Cohesion and Family.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Proposal of a 9-member Board of Directors with the addition of a representative of employees and a representative of the Ministry of Social Cohesion 5 business
    🟢 Absence of employee representation contrary to European practice
    🟢 European directives and OECD recommendation require employee involvement
    🟢 Ignorance of Law 4972/2022 on employee representation
    🟢 Six-year term is excessive and potentially problematic
    🟢 According to Article 15, the absence of a Ministry representative is problematic

    +0
    Reply
  9. 3607 avatar
    3607

    The presence of a representative of Employees on the Board of Directors of the company contributes to:
    Better decisions: Employees transfer knowledge from day-to-day operations to the Board of Directors, offering more realistic and comprehensive suggestions.

    More transparency: Their presence enhances accountability and reduces the risk of unilateral or ill-conceived decisions.

    Better working climate: Participation increases employee trust and commitment.

    Conflict reduction: Timely consultation prevents tensions, strikes and costs for the company.

    Long-term growth: It enhances stability and aligns with modern European co-administration practices.

    ,, in addition to the above ,, contributes to the transparency and meritocracy of not only the democratic state we belong to, but also the company ,, which has been actively supported by its employees for the last 50 years with their know-how and professionalism.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Adding a representative of employees to the Board of Directors of the company 6 B.C.
    🟢 Better decisions due to employee knowledge
    🟢 More transparency and accountability
    🟢 Improved working climate and trust
    🟢 Conflict and Cost Reduction from Timely Consultation
    🟢 Long-term development and alignment with European practices
    🟢 Increase transparency and meritocracy in state and company

    +0
    Reply
  10. 3608 avatar
    3608

    I disagree with the abolition of the statutory participation of an employee representative in the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A., as its presence is an essential element of sound corporate governance: enhances transparency in decisions, ensures the necessary pluralism and allows the exploitation of the operational knowledge of those who are at the forefront of the company's work. This participation acts as a mechanism of balance and internal control, contributing to the formulation of policies that meet the real needs of the systems implemented by IDIKA. At the same time, it is in line with international principles of good governance and practices of many European countries, where the institutional integration of the employees' perspective is recognized as a factor for enhancing the effectiveness and sustainability of organizations. The abolition of this participation will deprive management of an evidence-based and necessary source of knowledge. For these reasons, I consider it necessary to maintain employee representation on the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. as a guarantee of transparency, balance and effective operation of the company.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Maintaining the participation of an employee representative in the Board of Directors 5 business
    🟢 Enhances transparency in decisions
    🟢 Ensures pluralism and utilization of first-line knowledge
    🟢 Acts as a balance and internal control mechanism
    🟢 Contributes to the formulation of policies that meet the needs of the systems
    🟢 Agrees with international principles of good governance and practices of European countries

    +0
    Reply
  11. 3610 avatar
    3610

    As an employee of IDIKA S.A., I would like to express my opposition to the abolition of the position of employee representative on the Board of Directors.

    The presence of a representative helps to ensure that the views of employees are taken into account, enhances cooperation, transparency and fair decision-making, as well as the trust and commitment of staff.

    I believe that maintaining the institution is to the benefit of both employees and the company.

    I therefore request that the institutional participation of employees in the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. be maintained.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Retention of the position of employee representative on the Board of Directors 3 Fig.
    🟢 The presence of a representative ensures decision-making by integrating the views of employees
    🟢 Enhances cooperation, transparency, trust and commitment of staff
    🟢 The institution benefits both employees and the company

    +0
    Reply
  12. 3611 avatar
    3611

    There must also be a representative on the Board of Directors from the Ministry of Social Cohesion and Family.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 To have a representative from the Ministry of Social Cohesion and Family on the Board. 1 business
    🟢 The Representative is Necessary

    +0
    Reply
  13. 3612 avatar
    3612

    The participation of employee representatives in boards of public companies is a practice that is in line with modern corporate governance principles, as formulated by international organisations (OECD, European Commission, ILO) and widely adopted in European public administration systems.

    These principles point out that the structure of a BoD must ensure:

    • Pluralism and inclusiveness;
    • Enhancing corporate accountability;
    • Internal balance and control;
    • Mainstreaming the first line experience

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Recruitment of employee representatives on the Boards of Public Companies 5 business
    🟢 Agrees with modern corporate governance principles (OECD, EU, ILO)
    🟢 Ensures pluralism and inclusiveness
    🟢 Enhances corporate accountability
    🟢 Ensures internal balance and control
    🟢 Incorporates the first line experience

    +0
    Reply
  14. 3613 avatar
    3613

    The participation of the employee representative in the institutions of IDIKA should not be abolished. This institution ensures effective staff representation, promotes social dialogue and contributes to balanced and informed decision-making. The presence of the representative enhances transparency, trust and cooperation between management and employees, while protecting labour rights and highlighting the real needs of human resources. Abolition of its membership would weaken these principles and undermine the democratic functioning of the organisation.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Maintaining the involvement of the employee representative in the institutions 5 business
    🟢 Ensures meaningful staff representation
    🟢 Promotes social dialogue and balanced decisions
    🟢 Enhances transparency, trust and cooperation between management and employees
    🟢 Protects labour rights and human resources needs
    🟢 Abolition will weaken the principles and democratic functioning of the organization

    +0
    Reply
  15. 3614 avatar
    3614

    As an employee of IDIKA S.A., I strongly oppose the abolition of the participation of a representative of the employees in the Board of Directors of the company. The presence of the representative is over time a fundamental element for the smooth operation of the company, ensuring transparency, social control and institutional representation of the people who implement the company's work.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Retention of employee representative on the Board of Directors 3 Fig.
    🟢 Ensures transparency in the operation of the company
    🟢 Ensures social control of the administration
    🟢 Provides institutional employee representation

    +0
    Reply
  16. 3615 avatar
    3615

    It is noteworthy that a body that is promoted as a central pillar of digital governance is entering a new era of increased demands and speed, with administrative choices that refer to the logic of past decades.

    The absence of an employee representative from the Board of Directors deprives an important aspect of the decision-making process. In order to make effective and enforceable decisions, it is important to participate in the Board of Directors side that is directly related to the actual operation and human resources of the organization.

    The reinstatement of the employee representative's participation in the Board of Directors is not a formality, it is a basic prerequisite for a modern and efficient management.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Restore employee representative to the Board of Directors 3 Fig.
    🟢 The lack of a representative lacks an important parameter in decision-making
    🟢 Labour sector involvement ensures meaningful and enforceable decisions
    🟢 Rehabilitation of a representative is a basic condition of modern administration

    +0
    Reply
  17. 3616 avatar
    3616

    The employees of IDIKA SA have contributed the most to the implementation of each project undertaken by the company for a number of years and may not be represented on its Board of Directors.
    For reasons related to democratic processes, transparency and enhanced accountability, the statutory participation of the employee representative in the Board of Directors is not only necessary but also in line with Greek and international management practices of . organizations.
    Therefore, the participation of the employee representative in the Board of Directors should be maintained.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Maintaining the participation of the employee representative in the Board of Directors 3 Fig.
    🟢 Employees contribute greatly to the implementation of projects
    🟢 Participation ensures democratic processes, transparency and accountability
    🟢 The practice is in line with Greek and international administrative practices

    +0
    Reply
  18. 3617 avatar
    3617

    Opposition to the abolition of employee representation on the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A.

    The presence of the employee representative on the Board of Directors ensures:

    • Transparency & Check. The involvement of an employee representative is fundamental to social control and to avoiding opaque processes.
    • Operational Knowledge. Integrate into decision making the voice that knows the real problems and challenges of the company.
    • Compliance with International Standards. The harmonization of the company with the modern principles of corporate governance (OECD, EU), which explicitly favour pluralism and inclusivity.

    It is imperative that the provision be withdrawn immediately in order to maintain the involvement of the workers' representative.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Withdrawal of a provision abolishing employee representation on the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. 3 Fig.
    🟢 Ensuring transparency and social control
    🟢 Inclusion of business knowledge in decision-making
    🟢 Compliance with international corporate governance standards

    +0
    Reply
  19. 3621 avatar
    3621

    I oppose the legislation that provides for the abolition of the participation of a representative of employees in the company's Board of Directors. This is contrary to both the principles of good and transparent governance and modern corporate management practices, where the institutional presence of employees is internationally recognised as a critical factor in enhancing efficiency and organisational cohesion.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Maintaining the participation of an employee representative in the Board of Directors 2 B.C.
    🟢 Opposes the principles of good and transparent governance
    🟢 Employee institutional presence improves efficiency and coherence

    +0
    Reply
  20. 3623 avatar
    3623

    Through this message, I would like to express my views on the extremely important issue of the attempted exclusion of the participation of the Employees' Representative in the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A.
    From the position of the current Workers' Representative, but also on the basis of my many years of experience as Secretary and member of the Workers' Union, I must point out the following:
    The intended absence of the Workers' Representative from the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. threatens to silence the voice of the people who for years have borne the brunt of its smooth operation. This silence inevitably translates into less transparency and less democratic participation in decision-making at an organic level.
    In a public interest company such as IDIKA S.A., the presence of a Employees' Representative in the Management functions as an essential balancing and accounting factor. The absence of these, through its attempted exclusion, constitutes a serious institutional and moral setback:
    on the one hand, institutionally, control is limited and the internal corporate balance is disturbed through the ostracism of the representative of the main group with direct knowledge and legitimate interest, and on the other hand, morally, the ability of employees to make a substantial contribution to the proper functioning of IDIKA S.A. is undermined and discredited.
    For all the above reasons, I join those who highlight the need to support the statutory role of the Employees' Representative on the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Maintaining the position of Employee Representative on the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. 4 B.C.
    🟢 Absence silences workers' voice, reducing transparency
    🟢 The Representative ensures accountability and balance in the administration
    🟢 Exclusion is considered an institutional and moral setback
    🟢 Non-presence limits control and undermines employee contribution

    +0
    Reply
  21. 3625 avatar
    3625

    The abolition of the institution of the Employees' Elected Representative on the Board of Directors of the Company is unacceptable.
    The elected representative is the only ESSENTIAL INSTITUTION of transparency, social accountability and control of each Administration. This is because it is accountable to the most important social force: To the employees of IDIKA who are aware of the operation, needs and requirements of the company's social work while at the same time experiencing the problems and needs of the whole society.
    This article needs to be changed. The institution must be maintained!

    Pantelis Aythinos

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Maintenance of the Employees' Elected Representative on the Board of Directors 2 B.C.
    🟢 The elected representative is the only foundation of transparency and accountability
    🟢 Accountable to employees who know the needs of the company

    +0
    Reply
  22. 3631 avatar
    3631

    The participation of the Employees' Representative in the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. is an irreplaceable institutional element that ensures the democratic functioning, accountability and transparency of an organization that manages critical public digital infrastructure. The employees have unique know-how on IDIKA's information systems, know-how that no external management or politically appointed member can substitute.
    The presence of a representative of the employees' representative on the Board ensures that decisions are evaluated on the basis of real business needs, technical risks and implementation possibilities, preventing errors that may cost the functionality of ePrescription, registers and systems that directly affect the citizen. Unlike managements that change based on political circumstances, employees are the stable institutional factor that keeps the organization upright. It is the living memory, continuity and guarantee that public information systems will remain secure, reliable and functional for everyone. Their presence on the Board enhances the quality of decisions and protects the public interest.
    The stability offered by the human factor is crucial, as workers are the only institutional pillar that remains when they change administrations and political leaderships. Their participation in the Board of Directors guarantees the continuity, quality and safety of digital services. Employee representation on boards is a well-established European practice, linked to high productivity, stability of organisations and modern standards of corporate governance. The abolition of the institution in IDIKA would be a regression from these standards.
    The presence of the employee representative enhances work peace, communication and cooperation within the organization, while contributing to timely problem solving and conflict avoidance.
    IDIKA needs a polyphonic board of directors, attached to the daily lives of workers and citizens and capable of taking decisions that respect both the worker and the citizen.
    Maintaining the Employee Representative on the Board of Directors of IDIKA S.A. is not just a trade union requirement, but a fundamental prerequisite for transparency, security of digital systems, European good practice and effective operational effectiveness of the organization. Its absence would weaken the administration and undermine the stability and quality of the services it provides to citizens.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Retention of the Employees' Representative on the Board of Directors of IDIKA 7 B.C.
    🟢 Ensures democratic functioning, accountability and transparency of the organization
    🟢 Employees have unique know-how in information systems
    🟢 Prevents errors that cost the functionality of digital services
    🟢 Provides stability when changing administrations and political leaderships
    🟢 Agrees with European practice and improves productivity and governance
    🟢 Enhances work peace, communication and collaboration within an organization
    🟢 Ensures continuity, quality and security of digital services for citizens

    +0
    Reply
  23. 3634 avatar
    3634

    I do not agree with the abolition of the employee representative by the Board of Directors of IDIKA. The presence of a representative is crucial to ensure transparency, accountability and meaningful participation of people who know best of all the actual functioning of the organisation. European practices show that worker participation enhances efficiency, not the other way around. I therefore consider the abolition of this institutional representation to be a step backwards.

    🤖 AI AnalysisℹAI analyzed this comment and extracted the main posts expressed by the author. Each position is broken down into arguments – click to see them.✦ Created with AI
    📍 Retention of employee representative in the Board of Directors of IDIKA 2 B.C.
    🟢 The presence of a representative ensures transparency, accountability and meaningful participation
    🟢 European practices show that employee participation enhances effectiveness

    +0
    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *