In a recent presentation, Wikimedia UK reported that it had 180 members. It was noted that an office manager had been hired part-time during the fundraising (that would have been Richard Symonds, now full time). In that same presentation, there was the following slide:
The events organizer position is the one advertised here and may already have been discussed on WR.

Why does a charity with less than 200 members require a full-time "chapter manager" to work alongside the office manager (who presumably takes care of correspondence with members) and an event organizer (who presumably organizes events)? What would they do?

What would a full-time developer do? Develop bots to streamline the tedious process of downloading images from the websites of museums?

Carbuncle, don't you realize? Each member of the board probably has at least one or two close chums who are either under- or unemployed. They need jobs!

That is correct. Wikipedia is rapidly becoming a fundraising powerhouse. And given the sleazy, opaque way they've run it since its foundation, nepotism is inevitable.

No mystery here. Wikimedia UK is simply seeking to reproduce the sinecure manufacturing success of the WMF. No doubt they will soon fully fund a "Storyteller" to counter the "lies" of "stalkers and trolls."

One of the issues here is that there are two functions of Wiki UK Ltd.

1) To fund local initiatives (of which I have no particular objection to the GLAM concept, if only because it should expose Wikipedians to real people, though it seems to be part of the mindset that indoctrination is a vital part of working with Wikipedia - you have to do things there way).

2) To launder money through a UK charity to gain a tax advantage for the WMF.

The problem with (2) is that it inflates the apparent income of Wiki UK Ltd and will make it appear that the spending is reasonable in proportion.

Again, the charity trustees have a legal obligation to spend the charities money efficiently and wisely in the best interests of the charity. Appointments of cronies does not fit into this. The issue is demonstrating this appropriately to the CC and in the first instance, it might be appropriate to make a formal complaint to the trustees about the trustees own actions.

I am not suggesting that there has been or will be any nepotism or inappropriate spending, I am just trying to understand why they are proposing to hire people for these particular positions. One might think that if it was on a slide in WMUK presentations, the purpose might be a bit more obvious, but I cannot think of any sound reason why such a small charity would hire someone called a "chapter manager".

I guess the people to ask are Wikimedia UK, but I suspect the most likely result is being forbidden to ask further questions.

Agreed, no need for the cronies comment - a presumption on my part. The fundamental issue is that they are very eager to staff up, when, as far as I can see, they haven't really created any new funding to justify it - they have just diverted funds that were raised through the online system anyhow (and have eaten up any tax benefit in the process).

I am told that the "chapter manager" position is what they were calling the position now called Chief Executive and filled by Jon Davies in September. A "communications organiser" is now being recruited as well.

Yep, it's another wiki sinecure farm alright. Frei kultur uber alles my ass.