Travel arrangements for ATRT members
Hi, First it was a pleasure meeting face to face with you in LA these last few days. I think we have quite an exciting and busy 9 months ahead of us. I hope everyone's trip home was uneventful was as pleasant as it could be. I was also honored by the manner in which you decided to include me in the coordinating group of chair and vice-chairs. Thank you. Note: I am _not_ doing this as an activity of the chairs' group, but on my own as a long time volunteer worker at ICANN who happens to be a member of the ATRT at this point in time. I have continued my personal discussion on ICANN Staff's decision regarding the fact that members of the ATRT are being forced to accept travel arrangement at ICANN's cheapest possible economy fare standards. Hearing some of the travel horror stories you all went through, further convinces me that I am not doing the wrong thing. I beleive that ICANN, as an organization, does not treat its volunteer workers properly as a general case and that it disrespects them in many ways. I especially beleive ICANN is not treating this group with the right level of respect. And I beleive that the level of respect a group like this gets is an important indicator of the organization's respect for the process and the work it is doing. Not to mention that most of us are busy and need the ability to work when we travel and some are older and perhaps need a bit more consideration - without the embarrassment for getting a doctor's note that says we are older. As long as anybody, including the CEO of the NGO called ICANN, can travel in better than economy class, we should all be able to travel that way. The senior officers of this 'in the public interest' corporation should not travel in a better class than the community they are accountable to or than those at the core of ICANN who do the work that gives the organization its legitimacy. As I say, I have taken this on as a personal campaign. But wanted to be sure I was disclosing to the group that I was doing it and would continue doing it. avri
Dear Avri, colleagues, - I do support Avri's concerns. Much of the tension would have been avoided, if the members of the RT(s) were treated with more adequate care, than the 'cheapest possible' principle prescribes. Thank you all for the pleasure of working together in L.A.! Kind regards, Michael from the frozen Moscow 2013/3/17 Avri Doria <avri@acm.org>
Hi,
First it was a pleasure meeting face to face with you in LA these last few days. I think we have quite an exciting and busy 9 months ahead of us. I hope everyone's trip home was uneventful was as pleasant as it could be.
I was also honored by the manner in which you decided to include me in the coordinating group of chair and vice-chairs.
Thank you.
Note: I am _not_ doing this as an activity of the chairs' group, but on my own as a long time volunteer worker at ICANN who happens to be a member of the ATRT at this point in time.
I have continued my personal discussion on ICANN Staff's decision regarding the fact that members of the ATRT are being forced to accept travel arrangement at ICANN's cheapest possible economy fare standards. Hearing some of the travel horror stories you all went through, further convinces me that I am not doing the wrong thing.
I beleive that ICANN, as an organization, does not treat its volunteer workers properly as a general case and that it disrespects them in many ways. I especially beleive ICANN is not treating this group with the right level of respect. And I beleive that the level of respect a group like this gets is an important indicator of the organization's respect for the process and the work it is doing.
Not to mention that most of us are busy and need the ability to work when we travel and some are older and perhaps need a bit more consideration - without the embarrassment for getting a doctor's note that says we are older.
As long as anybody, including the CEO of the NGO called ICANN, can travel in better than economy class, we should all be able to travel that way. The senior officers of this 'in the public interest' corporation should not travel in a better class than the community they are accountable to or than those at the core of ICANN who do the work that gives the organization its legitimacy.
As I say, I have taken this on as a personal campaign. But wanted to be sure I was disclosing to the group that I was doing it and would continue doing it.
avri
_______________________________________________ atrt2 mailing list atrt2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
Avri, On Mar 17, 2013, at 8:43 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
I have continued my personal discussion on ICANN Staff's decision regarding the fact that members of the ATRT are being forced to accept travel arrangement at ICANN's cheapest possible economy fare standards.
For clarity, I was not under the assumption that anyone was being forced to accept travel arrangements at any particular tier. As far as I understand, there is a general rule ("non-refundable economy") with leeway for exceptions to be made for reasons such as documented health concerns. Is my understanding incorrect?
I beleive that ICANN, as an organization, does not treat its volunteer workers properly as a general case and that it disrespects them in many ways.
As a matter of opinion, I disagree (strongly) with your assertion of lack of respect, at least with the current administration. However, with that said, do you believe this disrespect is an issue that impacts ICANN's accountability and transparency? If so, can you explain how?
I especially beleive ICANN is not treating this group with the right level of respect. And I beleive that the level of respect a group like this gets is an important indicator of the organization's respect for the process and the work it is doing.
My understanding of the ATRT process is that it is intended to be an independent review of ICANN's accountability and transparency. For potential perceived conflict of interest reasons, I personally do not believe it would be appropriate for ICANN staff/board to treat the ATRT any different than any other group in the ICANN ecosystem (beyond what ATRT needs to get its job done, of course).
Not to mention that most of us are busy and need the ability to work when we travel and some are older and perhaps need a bit more consideration - without the embarrassment for getting a doctor's note that says we are older.
I understand the need to work when traveling, particularly on long distance flights, and for that reason have personally paid for business class seats for Beijing. On previous (long distance) flights for ICANN-related business, I have used my frequent flier miles to upgrade my flights (that option wasn't available for me on the Beijing trip). I do not think I am unique and I feel ICANN's policies regarding reimbursement for travel are appropriate. I do not understand what would be embarrassing about getting a note from a doctor. I've had to do it on numerous occasions, albeit generally not for ICANN-related travel.
As long as anybody, including the CEO of the NGO called ICANN, can travel in better than economy class, we should all be able to travel that way. The senior officers of this 'in the public interest' corporation should not travel in a better class than the community they are accountable to or than those at the core of ICANN who do the work that gives the organization its legitimacy.
I am assuming you are not suggesting that everyone must travel economy regardless of their organization's (not ICANN's) willingness to pay for business class or higher. Personally, I think there is a qualitative difference between the needs of someone who travels three times a year at their own discretion and someone who travels 3 weeks every month at their organization's behest, however that might just be me and my opinion isn't really relevant. I believe what is relevant to ATRT is that the travel policies, like all ICANN policies, be transparent and accountable both in definition and implementation. If there is agreement that there are questions regarding the transparency/accountability of ICANN's non-resource policies (which is what I would class ICANN's travel policy), then perhaps that would be another item on the list for us to look at. If so, I'd give it a "B" priority. Regards, -drc
1/ I personally prefer good beds in quiet hotel rooms, than any seat in any airplane. 2/ I largely agree with Conrad's points, and actually was also able to upgrade to business my return trip using miles. But on the way up I had to fly a different airline with no upgrade. 3/ I agree with Michael that any trip over a certain amount of hours and over a few time zones should be considered a hardship assignment. That was not the case for me last week. 4/ I can keep flying to LAX under present conditions as long as the offer a hotel further away from the Freeway (and closer to the ocean ;) 5/ look forward to the conditions Stephen will offer for the Canberra meeting...... The meeting was excellent and worth all efforts. Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez SUTEL, Costa Rica +506 4000 0010 Oficina +506 8335 2487 Móvil +506 2215 6821 Fax El 17/03/2013, a las 13:35, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> escribió:
Avri,
On Mar 17, 2013, at 8:43 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
I have continued my personal discussion on ICANN Staff's decision regarding the fact that members of the ATRT are being forced to accept travel arrangement at ICANN's cheapest possible economy fare standards.
For clarity, I was not under the assumption that anyone was being forced to accept travel arrangements at any particular tier. As far as I understand, there is a general rule ("non-refundable economy") with leeway for exceptions to be made for reasons such as documented health concerns.
Is my understanding incorrect?
I beleive that ICANN, as an organization, does not treat its volunteer workers properly as a general case and that it disrespects them in many ways.
As a matter of opinion, I disagree (strongly) with your assertion of lack of respect, at least with the current administration. However, with that said, do you believe this disrespect is an issue that impacts ICANN's accountability and transparency? If so, can you explain how?
I especially beleive ICANN is not treating this group with the right level of respect. And I beleive that the level of respect a group like this gets is an important indicator of the organization's respect for the process and the work it is doing.
My understanding of the ATRT process is that it is intended to be an independent review of ICANN's accountability and transparency. For potential perceived conflict of interest reasons, I personally do not believe it would be appropriate for ICANN staff/board to treat the ATRT any different than any other group in the ICANN ecosystem (beyond what ATRT needs to get its job done, of course).
Not to mention that most of us are busy and need the ability to work when we travel and some are older and perhaps need a bit more consideration - without the embarrassment for getting a doctor's note that says we are older.
I understand the need to work when traveling, particularly on long distance flights, and for that reason have personally paid for business class seats for Beijing. On previous (long distance) flights for ICANN-related business, I have used my frequent flier miles to upgrade my flights (that option wasn't available for me on the Beijing trip). I do not think I am unique and I feel ICANN's policies regarding reimbursement for travel are appropriate.
I do not understand what would be embarrassing about getting a note from a doctor. I've had to do it on numerous occasions, albeit generally not for ICANN-related travel.
As long as anybody, including the CEO of the NGO called ICANN, can travel in better than economy class, we should all be able to travel that way. The senior officers of this 'in the public interest' corporation should not travel in a better class than the community they are accountable to or than those at the core of ICANN who do the work that gives the organization its legitimacy.
I am assuming you are not suggesting that everyone must travel economy regardless of their organization's (not ICANN's) willingness to pay for business class or higher.
Personally, I think there is a qualitative difference between the needs of someone who travels three times a year at their own discretion and someone who travels 3 weeks every month at their organization's behest, however that might just be me and my opinion isn't really relevant. I believe what is relevant to ATRT is that the travel policies, like all ICANN policies, be transparent and accountable both in definition and implementation. If there is agreement that there are questions regarding the transparency/accountability of ICANN's non-resource policies (which is what I would class ICANN's travel policy), then perhaps that would be another item on the list for us to look at. If so, I'd give it a "B" priority.
Regards, -drc
_______________________________________________ atrt2 mailing list atrt2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
Hi, First I want to reiterate, I was informing the group of my own actions for transparency sake, not asking the ATRT to take up my call for fair and respectful treatment of all AOC review groups, including ATRT2. I realize that changing this is my own ICANN Quixotic Quest. As for your specific question of relevance to the task of ATRT2, I thank you for brining up the issue. If there is an issue of Transparency, it would entail a review of how ICANN arrived at and administers the differential policy. It would not concern the specific details of our travel for ATRT2. There may also be issues of Legitimacy concerning an organization 'in the public interest' that has such differential travel tiering for volunteers and staff. In some circles, any travel better than economy by people at an NGO is considered a misuse of funds; my own view is not quite so radical but this is a prevailing view among many who work with NGOs. The respect for AOC activities is another matter. If I am right about the symbolic importance of this issue, and I may not be*, and about my impression that from start to finish ICANN Staff does not show adequate regard and respect for the AOC process or output, it may be significant with regard to Accountability. avri * Obviously David's experience as an employee and my experience as a volunteer worker with ICANN over the last many years have bred different perspective in us. As for the general rule you mentioned, it only applies to those who do not have the exception of being Board Members, SO/AC chairs or others who get a separate dispensation. As I have pointed out elsewhere, while the travel documents from ICANN indicate that most do receive the worse possible economy fares, they indicate that some get better arrangements. I also want to be clear, that these documents are not specific as to which category the AOC review teams fall not. Carlos, congratulations on being able to update. Not that it mattered on this flight for me, but I never get tickets from ICANN that even allow for me upgrade.
Avri, On Mar 18, 2013, at 10:01 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
The respect for AOC activities is another matter. If I am right about the symbolic importance of this issue, and I may not be*, and about my impression that from start to finish ICANN Staff does not show adequate regard and respect for the AOC process or output, it may be significant with regard to Accountability.
I find your impression quite surprising and certainly not in line with my experience. Do you have any evidence other than ICANN not paying for you to travel business class that would indicate "that from start to finish ICANN Staff does not show adequate regard and respect for the AOC process or output"? Does anyone else feel similarly? As for disrespect impacting accountability, I would think this would only be true if the lack of respect results in demonstrable actions (or inactions) that violate accountability. Can you point to anything along these lines?
* Obviously David's experience as an employee and my experience as a volunteer worker with ICANN over the last many years have bred different perspective in us.
For clarity, I was speaking of my ICANN-related travel experiences after I left ICANN, either as a volunteer (as a member of SSAC) or in support of an ICANN-related contract (as a sub-contractor). In both cases, if funding was provided it was for "non-refundable economy class". Also, for the record: while I was on staff (around 2007, I believe), the travel policy for ICANN meetings changed for (all) staff from business class for international flights to non-refundable economy class regardless of flight length (this was in addition to reducing the number of staff who attended ICANN meetings). Perhaps this policy changed (as I understand many did) after I resigned from ICANN in 2010.
As for the general rule you mentioned, it only applies to those who do not have the exception of being Board Members, SO/AC chairs or others who get a separate dispensation. As I have pointed out elsewhere, while the travel documents from ICANN indicate that most do receive the worse possible economy fares, they indicate that some get better arrangements.
Sorry, I must have missed it -- can you provide URLs to the documents you're referring to? With respect to Beijing, I was under the impression that ICANN would reimburse self-arranged airfare expenses up to a region-determined maximum (IIRC, $1550 for travel from North America). In any event, trying to up-level this away from the specific case of ICANN's travel policy, I would imagine the general topic of operational (as opposed to resource-oriented) policy development/conformance would fall under the financial aspect of "legitimacy" (if we generalize that to be more than just the new gTLD program). I suspect metrics for this will be reasonably easy to define and monitor over time. Regards, -drc
participants (4)
-
"Carlos Raúl G." -
Avri Doria -
David Conrad -
Michael Yakushev