# Case Flow Case flow is the formal process for escalating issues, complaints, and violations within AIESEC in Denmark. Whether it is a governance dispute, a breach of standards, an ethical concern, or a conflict between members, the case flow defines who handles it, in what order, and within what timeframe. Understanding this process protects both the individuals involved and the organization as a whole. {% hint style="info" %} Most issues in AIESEC are resolved informally through conversation between the people involved. The case flow exists for situations where informal resolution has failed or where the issue is too serious for informal handling (e.g., ethics violations, financial misconduct, safety concerns). {% endhint %} ## What Is Case Flow? Case flow is a structured escalation pathway that ensures: * **Every issue has a clear owner.** Someone is always responsible for reviewing and responding. * **Escalation is predictable.** If one level cannot resolve the issue, it moves to the next level with defined handover procedures. * **Timelines are enforced.** No issue should sit unaddressed for weeks. * **Documentation exists.** Every step is recorded, creating accountability and a reference for future cases. ## The Escalation Ladder Issues in AIESEC in Denmark follow a four-level escalation path: ``` Level 1: Local Committee (LC) ↓ Level 2: Member Committee (MC) ↓ Level 3: Entity Control Board (ECB) ↓ Level 4: AIESEC International (AI) ``` ### Level 1 — Local Committee (LC) **Who handles it:** The Local Committee President (LCP), supported by the relevant Vice President (VP). **What belongs here:** * Internal team conflicts (between members or between a member and a TL) * Minor operational issues (missed deadlines, communication breakdowns) * First-time standard violations (e.g., missed reporting, low meeting attendance) * Member complaints about LC operations **Process:** 1. The affected person raises the issue with their Team Leader (TL) or VP. 2. If the TL/VP cannot resolve it, the issue goes to the LCP. 3. The LCP reviews the issue, speaks with all parties, and determines a resolution. 4. The resolution is documented in the LC's internal records. 5. If the issue cannot be resolved at LC level, or if the LCP is part of the issue, it escalates to Level 2. **Response time:** Acknowledgement within 48 hours. Resolution target within 7 days. ### Level 2 — Member Committee (MC) **Who handles it:** The MC President (MCP) or the relevant MC functional manager. **What belongs here:** * Issues that the LC could not resolve * Complaints about an LCP or LC Executive Board (EB) member * Cross-LC disputes (e.g., two LCs in conflict over a partnership or territory) * Repeated or serious standard violations by an LC * National-level operational issues **Process:** 1. The LCP (or the complainant, if the LCP is involved) submits a written case summary to the MCP. 2. The MCP assigns the case to the appropriate MC member (e.g., MC TM Manager for people issues, MC Finance Manager for financial issues). 3. The assigned MC member reviews documentation, conducts interviews if needed, and proposes a resolution. 4. The MCP approves the resolution and communicates it to all parties. 5. If the issue involves potential governance violations, misconduct, or cannot be resolved by the MC, it escalates to Level 3. **Response time:** Acknowledgement within 48 hours. Resolution target within 14 days. ### Level 3 — Entity Control Board (ECB) **Who handles it:** The Entity Control Board — an independent body responsible for governance oversight in AIESEC in Denmark. **What belongs here:** * Governance violations (breaches of the National or Global Compendium) * Ethics and Safe Space Policy violations * Financial misconduct or suspected fraud * Complaints about the MC or MCP * Cases where the MC has a conflict of interest * Serious or repeated violations that lower levels could not resolve **Process:** 1. A formal case is submitted to the ECB Chair in writing, including all relevant documentation and a summary of actions taken at previous levels. 2. The ECB reviews the case and may request additional information from any party. 3. The ECB may hold a hearing where all parties can present their perspective. 4. The ECB deliberates and issues a binding decision. 5. The decision is communicated in writing to all parties, with reasoning. 6. If a party believes the ECB's process was flawed, or if the issue has international implications, it may escalate to Level 4. **Response time:** Acknowledgement within 72 hours. Resolution target within 21 days (complex cases may take longer, with updates provided every 7 days). {% hint style="danger" %} ECB decisions are binding. Failure to comply with an ECB ruling may result in further sanctions, including suspension of membership, removal from leadership positions, or LC status changes. {% endhint %} For more on the ECB's mandate and composition, see [Entity Control Board](/governance/entity-control-board.md). ### Level 4 — AIESEC International (AI) **Who handles it:** AIESEC International's governance structures (International President, International Board, or relevant committee). **What belongs here:** * Issues that the ECB could not resolve or where the ECB itself is compromised * Violations of the Global Compendium that have implications beyond Denmark * Cross-entity disputes (e.g., between AIESEC in Denmark and another Member Committee internationally) * Appeals of ECB decisions based on procedural grounds **Process:** 1. The case is submitted to AIESEC International through the official channels defined in the Global Compendium. 2. AI reviews the case and determines jurisdiction. 3. AI may request information from any party, including the ECB. 4. AI issues a decision or refers the case to the appropriate international body. **Response time:** Varies. Expect acknowledgement within 7 days and resolution within 30–60 days depending on complexity. {% hint style="warning" %} Escalation to AIESEC International should be rare. Most cases should be resolved at Levels 1–3. If you are considering escalation to Level 4, consult the ECB Chair first. {% endhint %} ## Types of Cases | Case Type | Typical Starting Level | Examples | | ----------------------------- | ---------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | | Interpersonal conflict | Level 1 (LC) | Two members in disagreement, communication issues | | Operational failure | Level 1 (LC) | Missed deadline, dropped exchange, unresponsive team | | Standard violation | Level 1 or 2 | LC not meeting minimum exchange targets, missing reports | | Leadership complaint | Level 2 (MC) | Concern about an LCP's conduct or decisions | | Cross-LC dispute | Level 2 (MC) | Two LCs claiming the same partnership | | Governance breach | Level 3 (ECB) | Compendium violation, unauthorized spending, election irregularity | | Ethics / Safe Space violation | Level 3 (ECB) | Harassment, discrimination, intimidation | | Financial misconduct | Level 3 (ECB) | Missing funds, unapproved expenditures, fraud | | International dispute | Level 4 (AI) | Cross-entity conflict, Global Compendium breach | ## Case Submission Template When submitting a case to Level 2 (MC) or Level 3 (ECB), use the following structure: **1. Case Title:** > A short, descriptive title (e.g., "LC Copenhagen — missed Q3 financial report"). **2. Submitted By:** > Your name, role, and LC. **3. Date of Submission:** > Date. **4. Summary of Issue:** > What happened, when, and who is involved. Stick to facts, not interpretations. **5. Actions Already Taken:** > What has been done to resolve this at previous levels? Include dates, people involved, and outcomes. **6. Supporting Documentation:** > Attach or link any relevant documents — emails, screenshots, reports, meeting minutes. **7. Desired Outcome:** > What resolution are you seeking? {% hint style="info" %} A case submission template (Google Doc) is available on the MC Google Drive under `08 — Standards & Compliance/Case Flow/`. Use it to ensure you include all required information. {% endhint %} ## Response Time Summary | Level | Acknowledgement | Target Resolution | | ------------- | --------------- | ----------------- | | Level 1 — LC | 48 hours | 7 days | | Level 2 — MC | 48 hours | 14 days | | Level 3 — ECB | 72 hours | 21 days | | Level 4 — AI | 7 days | 30–60 days | ## Confidentiality & Documentation * All cases are treated as confidential by default. Information is shared only with people who need it to review or resolve the case. * The submitter's identity is disclosed to the reviewing body but may be kept confidential from the other party in sensitive cases (discuss with the reviewing body). * All case documentation is stored securely on the MC Google Drive with restricted access. * Case records are retained for a minimum of two years after resolution. {% hint style="danger" %} Retaliation against anyone who submits a case in good faith is a serious violation of AIESEC's Safe Space Policy. If you experience retaliation, escalate immediately to the ECB. {% endhint %} *Last updated: April 2026 · Maintained by: MC Talent Management Manager* --- # Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter: ``` GET https://hubby.aiesec.dk/recruitment/case-flow.md?ask= ``` The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation. Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.