Your Input Required by 21 May : Before APRALO Travel Policy Listening Call 23 May 6 UTC
Dear APRALO ALS and UIMs, On 23 May during our monthly call at 6 UTC we will have a 30 mins listening session on our initial thoughts on how the travel policy should be formed from APRALOs perspective. The ALAC leadership and Melissa Allgood, from ICANN staff, would be participating to hear our views. Their aim is to take the feedback from the RALO on what should be the key criteria and indicators from APRALOs perspective while drafting a travel Policy. If you recall, last month we organised an initial poll on what should be the key aspects of the APRALO Travel Policy. Please refer to the attachment and mail below. *Action Item:* As the next steps, in preparation to the call and taking the parameters shared in the poll as a baseline, we request you to list in SUGGESTION MODE what should be the Criterias and Indicators for APRALO Travel Policy by 21 May 2024 *Please use this link to add your input* Regards, Amrita ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Amrita Choudhury <amritachoudhury@ccaoi.in> Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 at 13:28 Subject: Travel Policy Response Summary To: APAC-Discuss <apac-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Dear APRALO Community, Thank you to all who submitted their response to the Travel Policy Poll. While the responses of the poll were shared in yesterday's APRALO Monthly call, sharing a summary of the same here. 34 people participated in the poll. As the poll was conducted prior to the Pilot Travel Policy being shelved (Ref: Mail from ALAC Chair). some of the responses will not be relevant. - 76% respondents supported the APRALO LT position on the Pilot Travel Policy. - 63% opined that the Pilot Travel Policy should be rejected. - 82% respondents felt that APRALO should have the discretion on how to use the 2 travel slots of the RALO - 94% felt that APRALO should be empowered to set APRALO specific metrics to evolve the travel policy which is fair and accountable and where required people for the meetings are predictable - In terms of suggestions for what could be the 2 or 3 parameters APRALO should apply metrics on to establish the new travel policy program for the RALOs, were: Engagement and Participation Equity Impact Assessment of Contribution (RALO, Community, IG) Diversity & Inclusion Incentive to engage Prioritize travel slots for RALO members who have proposed specific session topics, workshops, or initiatives that align with ICANN's strategic objectives and tnterests of the At-Large community. As a next step we will deliberate further in a small group on these metrics. Regards, Amrita On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 09:54, Amrita Choudhury <amritachoudhury@ccaoi.in> wrote:
Dear APRALO members,
We have a few questions where we need your inputs, related to travel policy. *Link: https://forms.gle/gabjf8fshuM7x1pZ7 <https://forms.gle/gabjf8fshuM7x1pZ7>*
Sharing the background and recent developments first.
The background
As per the existing travel policy, there are 2 travel slots for each RALO and each of the 3 ALAC members travel to each meeting.
A small team had been constituted at the At Large to discuss and evolve a more fair and transparent travel policy than the existing one which is performance and utility based. The small team had two online discussions. Most felt that the performance metrics need to be evolved which are flexible and creative and RALOs have the independence to create their own metrics. At a session at San Juan there was a discussion but it was inconclusive.
Current developments:
About two weeks ago the ALAC Chair sent an email announcing a pilot where slots for travel to ICANN80 were assigned based on the utility of travel members. However the slots of each RALO was reduced from 2 to 1 and 5 slots were allotted to AFRALO travellers.
This pilot has led to concerns in most RALOs. The main reason being it was a top down decision where before implementing it was not discussed in the small team or with the RALOs.
Several RALOs such as AFRALO, LACRALO and EURALO have issued statements against it and asked to repeal it.
APRALO LT position so far:
APRALO LT had written back the following statement:
"There had been no concluding discussions at San Juan on the topic of travel policy. Rather the key takeaway was that there needs to be more deliberation and discussion before we agree on any new process. Therefore this proposal was a bit unexpected.
While we from APRALO are ok to go age will go with this proposed pilot travel policy, just as a one time PILOT, however we will discuss it with the other RALOs and go with what all the RALOs together decide upon.
Further, we wish to add that,
1. Any future travel policy needs extensive prior deliberation and agreement between all ALAC members and RALOs etc. Even for a pilot it is preferred there is deliberation.
2. We agree that metrics need to be implemented, but that would require further discussion and flexibility region wise. RALOs should have the discretion to fix their own metrics and allot the 2 seats they have. Once we have proper metrics in place and it is agreed by all, only then it should be implemented. It should not be enforced.
3. Additionally, while we have no issues with AFRALO being given additional slots, I hope the same will be reciprocated when we have meetings in other regions. The APRALO will definitely be keen to have more travel slots during the Istanbul meeting. Of course we will request that based on what sessions/ initiatives we propose for that meeting.
4. For the one seat allotted this time we will continue with the rotation system that we are following, at least for ICANN80 and Ali will attend it ."
The Situation now:
Three of the RALOs have written back rejecting the Pilot Travel Plan. NARALO has not issued any statement. As mentioned above APRALO LT had stated that we will go ahead with whatever all RALOs decide together.
In that context we have a few questions where we need your view preferable by 17 April 2024 EOD.
Regards,
Amrita on behalf of APRALO LT
Thank you Amrita. Towards late 2019, efforts to prepare "ICANN Community Travel Support Guidelines". The discussions were very illuminating. There was no travel possible very soon due to COVID - 19, but a 30 page ICANN formatted document was done by 1 July 2020 !!! Some pertinent aspects: ICANN Travel Support does not select supported travelers. Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees, review teams, the Nominating Committee, other supported groups (e.g., ICANN NextGen and ICANN Fellowship programs), and ICANN support staff arranging an approved ICANN event determine who receives travel support for a given event. These groups then communicate the names of supported travelers to ICANN Travel Support. ICANN encourages community groups to have a documented, open, and transparent process for selecting supported travelers. Suggestion: The budget for travel support needs to include the category of UIM and "Wild Card" entries however limited the exact budgeted amount is. Who will select the supported travelers ? It is easy to make a round trip travel with strict adherence to the ICANN Expected standards.The procedures related to claims is also streamlined with good support from the staff. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 Home Page : http://www.annauniv.edu/staff/gopal +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 10:21 AM Amrita Choudhury via APAC-Discuss <apac-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:
Dear APRALO ALS and UIMs,
On 23 May during our monthly call at 6 UTC we will have a 30 mins listening session on our initial thoughts on how the travel policy should be formed from APRALOs perspective.
The ALAC leadership and Melissa Allgood, from ICANN staff, would be participating to hear our views. Their aim is to take the feedback from the RALO on what should be the key criteria and indicators from APRALOs perspective while drafting a travel Policy.
If you recall, last month we organised an initial poll on what should be the key aspects of the APRALO Travel Policy. Please refer to the attachment and mail below.
Action Item:
As the next steps, in preparation to the call and taking the parameters shared in the poll as a baseline, we request you to list in SUGGESTION MODE what should be the Criterias and Indicators for APRALO Travel Policy by 21 May 2024
Please use this link to add your input
Regards,
Amrita
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Amrita Choudhury <amritachoudhury@ccaoi.in> Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 at 13:28 Subject: Travel Policy Response Summary To: APAC-Discuss <apac-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Dear APRALO Community,
Thank you to all who submitted their response to the Travel Policy Poll. While the responses of the poll were shared in yesterday's APRALO Monthly call, sharing a summary of the same here. 34 people participated in the poll. As the poll was conducted prior to the Pilot Travel Policy being shelved (Ref: Mail from ALAC Chair). some of the responses will not be relevant.
76% respondents supported the APRALO LT position on the Pilot Travel Policy. 63% opined that the Pilot Travel Policy should be rejected. 82% respondents felt that APRALO should have the discretion on how to use the 2 travel slots of the RALO 94% felt that APRALO should be empowered to set APRALO specific metrics to evolve the travel policy which is fair and accountable and where required people for the meetings are predictable In terms of suggestions for what could be the 2 or 3 parameters APRALO should apply metrics on to establish the new travel policy program for the RALOs, were:
Engagement and Participation Equity Impact Assessment of Contribution (RALO, Community, IG) Diversity & Inclusion Incentive to engage Prioritize travel slots for RALO members who have proposed specific session topics, workshops, or initiatives that align with ICANN's strategic objectives and tnterests of the At-Large community.
As a next step we will deliberate further in a small group on these metrics.
Regards,
Amrita
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 09:54, Amrita Choudhury <amritachoudhury@ccaoi.in> wrote:
Dear APRALO members,
We have a few questions where we need your inputs, related to travel policy. Link: https://forms.gle/gabjf8fshuM7x1pZ7
Sharing the background and recent developments first.
The background
As per the existing travel policy, there are 2 travel slots for each RALO and each of the 3 ALAC members travel to each meeting.
A small team had been constituted at the At Large to discuss and evolve a more fair and transparent travel policy than the existing one which is performance and utility based. The small team had two online discussions. Most felt that the performance metrics need to be evolved which are flexible and creative and RALOs have the independence to create their own metrics. At a session at San Juan there was a discussion but it was inconclusive.
Current developments:
About two weeks ago the ALAC Chair sent an email announcing a pilot where slots for travel to ICANN80 were assigned based on the utility of travel members. However the slots of each RALO was reduced from 2 to 1 and 5 slots were allotted to AFRALO travellers.
This pilot has led to concerns in most RALOs. The main reason being it was a top down decision where before implementing it was not discussed in the small team or with the RALOs.
Several RALOs such as AFRALO, LACRALO and EURALO have issued statements against it and asked to repeal it.
APRALO LT position so far:
APRALO LT had written back the following statement:
"There had been no concluding discussions at San Juan on the topic of travel policy. Rather the key takeaway was that there needs to be more deliberation and discussion before we agree on any new process. Therefore this proposal was a bit unexpected.
While we from APRALO are ok to go age will go with this proposed pilot travel policy, just as a one time PILOT, however we will discuss it with the other RALOs and go with what all the RALOs together decide upon.
Further, we wish to add that,
1. Any future travel policy needs extensive prior deliberation and agreement between all ALAC members and RALOs etc. Even for a pilot it is preferred there is deliberation.
2. We agree that metrics need to be implemented, but that would require further discussion and flexibility region wise. RALOs should have the discretion to fix their own metrics and allot the 2 seats they have. Once we have proper metrics in place and it is agreed by all, only then it should be implemented. It should not be enforced.
3. Additionally, while we have no issues with AFRALO being given additional slots, I hope the same will be reciprocated when we have meetings in other regions. The APRALO will definitely be keen to have more travel slots during the Istanbul meeting. Of course we will request that based on what sessions/ initiatives we propose for that meeting.
4. For the one seat allotted this time we will continue with the rotation system that we are following, at least for ICANN80 and Ali will attend it."
The Situation now:
Three of the RALOs have written back rejecting the Pilot Travel Plan. NARALO has not issued any statement. As mentioned above APRALO LT had stated that we will go ahead with whatever all RALOs decide together.
In that context we have a few questions where we need your view preferable by 17 April 2024 EOD.
Regards,
Amrita on behalf of APRALO LT
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Gopal and all please add in the Google Document, since comments/ concrete suggestions will only be taken from there. Thanks Amrita On Sat, 18 May 2024 at 10:47, Gopal Tadepalli <gopal.tadepalli@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you Amrita.
Towards late 2019, efforts to prepare "ICANN Community Travel Support Guidelines". The discussions were very illuminating. There was no travel possible very soon due to COVID - 19, but a 30 page ICANN formatted document was done by 1 July 2020 !!!
Some pertinent aspects:
ICANN Travel Support does not select supported travelers. Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees, review teams, the Nominating Committee, other supported groups (e.g., ICANN NextGen and ICANN Fellowship programs), and ICANN support staff arranging an approved ICANN event determine who receives travel support for a given event. These groups then communicate the names of supported travelers to ICANN Travel Support. ICANN encourages community groups to have a documented, open, and transparent process for selecting supported travelers.
Suggestion:
The budget for travel support needs to include the category of UIM and "Wild Card" entries however limited the exact budgeted amount is. Who will select the supported travelers ?
It is easy to make a round trip travel with strict adherence to the ICANN Expected standards.The procedures related to claims is also streamlined with good support from the staff.
Sincerely,
Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 Home Page : http://www.annauniv.edu/staff/gopal +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 10:21 AM Amrita Choudhury via APAC-Discuss <apac-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:
Dear APRALO ALS and UIMs,
On 23 May during our monthly call at 6 UTC we will have a 30 mins
listening session on our initial thoughts on how the travel policy should be formed from APRALOs perspective.
The ALAC leadership and Melissa Allgood, from ICANN staff, would be
participating to hear our views. Their aim is to take the feedback from the RALO on what should be the key criteria and indicators from APRALOs perspective while drafting a travel Policy.
If you recall, last month we organised an initial poll on what should be
the key aspects of the APRALO Travel Policy. Please refer to the attachment and mail below.
Action Item:
As the next steps, in preparation to the call and taking the parameters
shared in the poll as a baseline, we request you to list in SUGGESTION MODE what should be the Criterias and Indicators for APRALO Travel Policy by 21 May 2024
Please use this link to add your input
Regards,
Amrita
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Amrita Choudhury <amritachoudhury@ccaoi.in> Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 at 13:28 Subject: Travel Policy Response Summary To: APAC-Discuss <apac-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Dear APRALO Community,
Thank you to all who submitted their response to the Travel Policy Poll.
While the responses of the poll were shared in yesterday's APRALO Monthly call, sharing a summary of the same here. 34 people participated in the poll. As the poll was conducted prior to the Pilot Travel Policy being shelved (Ref: Mail from ALAC Chair). some of the responses will not be relevant.
76% respondents supported the APRALO LT position on the Pilot Travel
Policy.
63% opined that the Pilot Travel Policy should be rejected. 82% respondents felt that APRALO should have the discretion on how to use the 2 travel slots of the RALO 94% felt that APRALO should be empowered to set APRALO specific metrics to evolve the travel policy which is fair and accountable and where required people for the meetings are predictable In terms of suggestions for what could be the 2 or 3 parameters APRALO should apply metrics on to establish the new travel policy program for the RALOs, were:
Engagement and Participation Equity Impact Assessment of Contribution (RALO, Community, IG) Diversity & Inclusion Incentive to engage Prioritize travel slots for RALO members who have proposed specific session topics, workshops, or initiatives that align with ICANN's strategic objectives and tnterests of the At-Large community.
As a next step we will deliberate further in a small group on these metrics.
Regards,
Amrita
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 09:54, Amrita Choudhury <amritachoudhury@ccaoi.in> wrote:
Dear APRALO members,
We have a few questions where we need your inputs, related to travel
policy. Link: https://forms.gle/gabjf8fshuM7x1pZ7
Sharing the background and recent developments first.
The background
As per the existing travel policy, there are 2 travel slots for each
RALO and each of the 3 ALAC members travel to each meeting.
A small team had been constituted at the At Large to discuss and evolve
a more fair and transparent travel policy than the existing one which is performance and utility based. The small team had two online discussions. Most felt that the performance metrics need to be evolved which are flexible and creative and RALOs have the independence to create their own metrics. At a session at San Juan there was a discussion but it was inconclusive.
Current developments:
About two weeks ago the ALAC Chair sent an email announcing a pilot
where slots for travel to ICANN80 were assigned based on the utility of travel members. However the slots of each RALO was reduced from 2 to 1 and 5 slots were allotted to AFRALO travellers.
This pilot has led to concerns in most RALOs. The main reason being it
was a top down decision where before implementing it was not discussed in the small team or with the RALOs.
Several RALOs such as AFRALO, LACRALO and EURALO have issued statements
against it and asked to repeal it.
APRALO LT position so far:
APRALO LT had written back the following statement:
"There had been no concluding discussions at San Juan on the topic of
travel policy. Rather the key takeaway was that there needs to be more deliberation and discussion before we agree on any new process. Therefore this proposal was a bit unexpected.
While we from APRALO are ok to go age will go with this proposed pilot
travel policy, just as a one time PILOT, however we will discuss it with the other RALOs and go with what all the RALOs together decide upon.
Further, we wish to add that,
1. Any future travel policy needs extensive prior deliberation and
agreement between all ALAC members and RALOs etc. Even for a pilot it is preferred there is deliberation.
2. We agree that metrics need to be implemented, but that would require
further discussion and flexibility region wise. RALOs should have the discretion to fix their own metrics and allot the 2 seats they have. Once we have proper metrics in place and it is agreed by all, only then it should be implemented. It should not be enforced.
3. Additionally, while we have no issues with AFRALO being given
additional slots, I hope the same will be reciprocated when we have meetings in other regions. The APRALO will definitely be keen to have more travel slots during the Istanbul meeting. Of course we will request that based on what sessions/ initiatives we propose for that meeting.
4. For the one seat allotted this time we will continue with the
rotation system that we are following, at least for ICANN80 and Ali will attend it."
The Situation now:
Three of the RALOs have written back rejecting the Pilot Travel Plan.
NARALO has not issued any statement. As mentioned above APRALO LT had stated that we will go ahead with whatever all RALOs decide together.
In that context we have a few questions where we need your view
preferable by 17 April 2024 EOD.
Regards,
Amrita on behalf of APRALO LT
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (2)
-
Amrita Choudhury -
Gopal Tadepalli