Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan
Hello All, Based on discussions I have had over the past two ICANN meetings, there seems to be reasonable support for ICANN to fund some of the travel expenses for members of the Council and task forces. Even though some Council members are employed by members of the Internet industry that may seem like well resourced organisations, the reality is that it is becoming increasingly difficult for Council and task force members to get regular travel support to attend several meetings a year where there is not a direct commercial return from each meeting. The Internet industry is intensely competitive and most organizations in the industry manage costs very tightly. Some of these organisations already feel they are making a significant contribution through the time that they allow their staff to spend on ICANN matters. Note that ICANN already funds some of the travel of members of ICANN's nominating committee, the Council members appointed by the Nominating committee, and members of the At-Large Advisory Committee. Recent experience with meetings in Washington and Wellington have shown that face-to-face meetings are an important part of making more rapid progress on complex policy issues. However I don't believe that ICANN funding of travel should be taken for granted, and any recipients of funding should ensure that they have done significant work in advance of travelling to any physical meeting. I intend to submit feedback to the Kurt Pritz with respect to the Operating Plan for 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007. Here is my proposal so far: (1) GNSO Council - All GNSO Council members should receive travel support consistent with the support provided to other members of the ICANN community (e.g ICANN Board, nominating committee etc) for the three ICANN meetings per year. - I assume that there is some sort of consistent ICANN travel policy for the organisation, with respect to things like class of airline travel, class of hotel accommodation etc. (2) For major PDPs that are of strategic significance to the organisation - e.g new gTLDs, IDNs, and WHOIS - that allowance be made for up to three face-to-face meetings a year separate from the normal ICANN meetings - that funding be provided for: -- the chair of the committee/task force -- one representative from each constituency (not including the chair) -- one of the three appointees from the Nominating committee (not including the chair) -- each representative would need to apply to the Council for funding, and provide information on the outreach conducted by that representative, as well as a written summary of material that will be used as part of the physical meeting. This application would be public. If an application was inadequate the Council could decide to deny funding. - the location of the face-to-face meetings have a studio-quality audio-visual environment that allows for effective remote participation The intent is that meetings may be rotated around the major regions of the world, and that representatives that are located close to the location for the meeting would receive no funding for that meeting. Each rep would also typically have the opportunity to be funded once per year, assuming that the role is rotated. Please let me know any feedback, before I submit to Kurt Pritz. Regards, Bruce Tonkin
Bruce, I fully endorse this proposal. Its a significant step forward for a more professional organisation. Philip
Dear all, I believe that we need to give Kurt a rather firm estimate of costs for travel for Councilors asap. If we 'ballpark' an estimate of $3,000 USD for short policy meetings, and $5,000 for the week long ICANN face to face meetings, will that provide a firm enough estimate? I would also propose that perhaps we plan to budget two policy development meetings face to face, outside of the three ICANN meetings. I am happy to work with Glen on a straw proposal for the budget if we can get a general agreement for a "template" approach. Perhaps Ken would also be willing, as part of the Adm. Planning group to work on this? -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 5:51 AM To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'GNSO Council' Cc: 'Kurt Pritz'; 'Liz Williams'; 'Olof Nordling' Subject: RE: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan Bruce, I fully endorse this proposal. Its a significant step forward for a more professional organisation. Philip
Marilyn, Could you please describe what you mean by: 1- Short policy meetings. What is included, air ticket, hotel & meal, number of days etc.. 2- Week long ICANN meeting FTF, the same. Note: I am hoping your budget estimates for the travel cost of an international ticket /trip is different from local. If not please advise. Additionally, it is in any corporate travel policy, not sure have to ck labor law, that anything over 6hrs s/b business class. This should also be consistent with current ICAAN travel policy. Considering that we are not paid, I assumed the existing travel policy of ICANN is fair/consistant with that of most organization that actually are on paid travel. regards, Sophia On 11/04/06, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear all, I believe that we need to give Kurt a rather firm estimate of costs for travel for Councilors asap. If we 'ballpark' an estimate of $3,000 USD for short policy meetings, and $5,000 for the week long ICANN face to face meetings, will that provide a firm enough estimate? I would also propose that perhaps we plan to budget two policy development meetings face to face, outside of the three ICANN meetings.
I am happy to work with Glen on a straw proposal for the budget if we can get a general agreement for a "template" approach. Perhaps Ken would also be willing, as part of the Adm. Planning group to work on this?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 5:51 AM To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'GNSO Council' Cc: 'Kurt Pritz'; 'Liz Williams'; 'Olof Nordling' Subject: RE: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan
Bruce, I fully endorse this proposal. Its a significant step forward for a more professional organisation.
Philip
Sophia B wrote:
Additionally, it is in any corporate travel policy, not sure have to ck labor law, that anything over 6hrs s/b business class.
Not in the corporate travel policy I have to work with :) Happy to sit in the big seat for ICANN trips though :) -- -rr "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions. All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better." - Ralph Waldo Emerson Contact Info: Ross Rader Director, Research & Innovation Tucows Inc. c. 416.828.8783 Get Started? http://start.tucows.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
Ross, Three things to consider and not necessarily in this order: 1- Evaluate corp budget to earnings 2- I am sure you get paid a salary as an corp officer 3- Need a corporate culture that 'thinks' people are the asset of the organization, especially volunteer contributors. s On 11/04/06, Ross Rader <ross@tucows.com> wrote:
Sophia B wrote:
Additionally, it is in any corporate travel policy, not sure have to ck labor law, that anything over 6hrs s/b business class.
Not in the corporate travel policy I have to work with :)
Happy to sit in the big seat for ICANN trips though :)
--
-rr
"Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions. All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Contact Info: Ross Rader Director, Research & Innovation Tucows Inc. c. 416.828.8783
Get Started? http://start.tucows.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
Thanks, Sophia, for asking what I meant. I was thinking of the "short policy meetings" as like the D.C. meeting and the upcoming European meeting, where the meeting is 2-3 days, versus a 5-7 day ICANN face to face meeting which takes place 3 X a year. However, Liz has done more work already, I think on this topic, so my 'back of the envelop" ideas of estimates, may not be needed. Marilyn _____ From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Sophia B Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 2:35 PM To: Marilyn Cade Cc: Philip Sheppard; Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council; Kurt Pritz; Liz Williams; Olof Nordling Subject: Re: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan Marilyn, Could you please describe what you mean by: 1- Short policy meetings. What is included, air ticket, hotel & meal, number of days etc.. 2- Week long ICANN meeting FTF, the same. Note: I am hoping your budget estimates for the travel cost of an international ticket /trip is different from local. If not please advise. Additionally, it is in any corporate travel policy, not sure have to ck labor law, that anything over 6hrs s/b business class. This should also be consistent with current ICAAN travel policy. Considering that we are not paid, I assumed the existing travel policy of ICANN is fair/consistant with that of most organization that actually are on paid travel. regards, Sophia On 11/04/06, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote: Dear all, I believe that we need to give Kurt a rather firm estimate of costs for travel for Councilors asap. If we 'ballpark' an estimate of $3,000 USD for short policy meetings, and $5,000 for the week long ICANN face to face meetings, will that provide a firm enough estimate? I would also propose that perhaps we plan to budget two policy development meetings face to face, outside of the three ICANN meetings. I am happy to work with Glen on a straw proposal for the budget if we can get a general agreement for a "template" approach. Perhaps Ken would also be willing, as part of the Adm. Planning group to work on this? -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto: <mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 5:51 AM To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'GNSO Council' Cc: 'Kurt Pritz'; 'Liz Williams'; 'Olof Nordling' Subject: RE: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan Bruce, I fully endorse this proposal. Its a significant step forward for a more professional organisation. Philip
Marilyn, I just want to make sure that while I support all 'Constituency Councilors' should be accommodated for the travel expense issue that Bruce proposed, I also want to voice that the policy we are supporting to accommodate the 'Constituency Councilors' does not override/disadvantage the policy that already exist for the NomComm appointees. I think it is a fair play to accommodate both in their respective positions. regards, Sophia On 11/04/06, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, Sophia, for asking what I meant.
I was thinking of the "short policy meetings" as like the D.C. meeting and the upcoming European meeting, where the meeting is 2-3 days, versus a 5-7 day ICANN face to face meeting which takes place 3 X a year.
However, Liz has done more work already, I think on this topic, so my 'back of the envelop" ideas of estimates, may not be needed.
Marilyn
------------------------------
*From:* owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Sophia B *Sent:* Tuesday, April 11, 2006 2:35 PM *To:* Marilyn Cade *Cc:* Philip Sheppard; Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council; Kurt Pritz; Liz Williams; Olof Nordling *Subject:* Re: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan
Marilyn,
Could you please describe what you mean by:
1- Short policy meetings. What is included, air ticket, hotel & meal, number of days etc..
2- Week long ICANN meeting FTF, the same.
Note: I am hoping your budget estimates for the travel cost of an international ticket /trip is different from local. If not please advise.
Additionally, it is in any corporate travel policy, not sure have to ck labor law, that anything over 6hrs s/b business class. This should also be consistent with current ICAAN travel policy. Considering that we are not paid, I assumed the existing travel policy of ICANN is fair/consistant with that of most organization that actually are on paid travel.
regards,
Sophia
On 11/04/06, *Marilyn Cade* <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear all, I believe that we need to give Kurt a rather firm estimate of costs for travel for Councilors asap. If we 'ballpark' an estimate of $3,000 USD for short policy meetings, and $5,000 for the week long ICANN face to face meetings, will that provide a firm enough estimate? I would also propose that perhaps we plan to budget two policy development meetings face to face, outside of the three ICANN meetings.
I am happy to work with Glen on a straw proposal for the budget if we can get a general agreement for a "template" approach. Perhaps Ken would also be willing, as part of the Adm. Planning group to work on this?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto: owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 5:51 AM To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'GNSO Council' Cc: 'Kurt Pritz'; 'Liz Williams'; 'Olof Nordling' Subject: RE: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan
Bruce, I fully endorse this proposal. Its a significant step forward for a more professional organisation.
Philip
Thanks, very helpful. I hope my explanation about the two different kinds of meetings made sense. _____ From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Sophia B Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 3:25 PM To: Marilyn Cade Cc: Philip Sheppard; Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council; Kurt Pritz; Liz Williams; Olof Nordling Subject: Re: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan Marilyn, I just want to make sure that while I support all 'Constituency Councilors' should be accommodated for the travel expense issue that Bruce proposed, I also want to voice that the policy we are supporting to accommodate the 'Constituency Councilors' does not override/disadvantage the policy that already exist for the NomComm appointees. I think it is a fair play to accommodate both in their respective positions. regards, Sophia On 11/04/06, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote: Thanks, Sophia, for asking what I meant. I was thinking of the "short policy meetings" as like the D.C. meeting and the upcoming European meeting, where the meeting is 2-3 days, versus a 5-7 day ICANN face to face meeting which takes place 3 X a year. However, Liz has done more work already, I think on this topic, so my 'back of the envelop" ideas of estimates, may not be needed. Marilyn _____ From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Sophia B Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 2:35 PM To: Marilyn Cade Cc: Philip Sheppard; Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council; Kurt Pritz; Liz Williams; Olof Nordling Subject: Re: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan Marilyn, Could you please describe what you mean by: 1- Short policy meetings. What is included, air ticket, hotel & meal, number of days etc.. 2- Week long ICANN meeting FTF, the same. Note: I am hoping your budget estimates for the travel cost of an international ticket /trip is different from local. If not please advise. Additionally, it is in any corporate travel policy, not sure have to ck labor law, that anything over 6hrs s/b business class. This should also be consistent with current ICAAN travel policy. Considering that we are not paid, I assumed the existing travel policy of ICANN is fair/consistant with that of most organization that actually are on paid travel. regards, Sophia On 11/04/06, Marilyn Cade < <mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com> marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote: Dear all, I believe that we need to give Kurt a rather firm estimate of costs for travel for Councilors asap. If we 'ballpark' an estimate of $3,000 USD for short policy meetings, and $5,000 for the week long ICANN face to face meetings, will that provide a firm enough estimate? I would also propose that perhaps we plan to budget two policy development meetings face to face, outside of the three ICANN meetings. I am happy to work with Glen on a straw proposal for the budget if we can get a general agreement for a "template" approach. Perhaps Ken would also be willing, as part of the Adm. Planning group to work on this? -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto: <mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 5:51 AM To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'GNSO Council' Cc: 'Kurt Pritz'; 'Liz Williams'; 'Olof Nordling' Subject: RE: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan Bruce, I fully endorse this proposal. Its a significant step forward for a more professional organisation. Philip
Thanks Marilyn, you have clarified your intent. I was not sure of the ICANN FTF meeting you mentioned were for the international one we go to, as such the budget needs to consider that. I am sure it varies from location to location for both local/international and putting a fixed estimate may not be the best way, hence, you said Liz is working on it. Sophie On 11/04/06, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, very helpful.
I hope my explanation about the two different kinds of meetings made sense.
------------------------------
*From:* owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Sophia B *Sent:* Tuesday, April 11, 2006 3:25 PM
*To:* Marilyn Cade *Cc:* Philip Sheppard; Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council; Kurt Pritz; Liz Williams; Olof Nordling *Subject:* Re: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan
Marilyn,
I just want to make sure that while I support all 'Constituency Councilors' should be accommodated for the travel expense issue that Bruce proposed, I also want to voice that the policy we are supporting to accommodate the 'Constituency Councilors' does not override/disadvantage the policy that already exist for the NomComm appointees.
I think it is a fair play to accommodate both in their respective positions.
regards,
Sophia
On 11/04/06, *Marilyn Cade* <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, Sophia, for asking what I meant.
I was thinking of the "short policy meetings" as like the D.C. meeting and the upcoming European meeting, where the meeting is 2-3 days, versus a 5-7 day ICANN face to face meeting which takes place 3 X a year.
However, Liz has done more work already, I think on this topic, so my 'back of the envelop" ideas of estimates, may not be needed.
Marilyn ------------------------------
*From:* owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Sophia B *Sent:* Tuesday, April 11, 2006 2:35 PM *To:* Marilyn Cade *Cc:* Philip Sheppard; Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council; Kurt Pritz; Liz Williams; Olof Nordling *Subject:* Re: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan
Marilyn,
Could you please describe what you mean by:
1- Short policy meetings. What is included, air ticket, hotel & meal, number of days etc..
2- Week long ICANN meeting FTF, the same.
Note: I am hoping your budget estimates for the travel cost of an international ticket /trip is different from local. If not please advise.
Additionally, it is in any corporate travel policy, not sure have to ck labor law, that anything over 6hrs s/b business class. This should also be consistent with current ICAAN travel policy. Considering that we are not paid, I assumed the existing travel policy of ICANN is fair/consistant with that of most organization that actually are on paid travel.
regards,
Sophia
On 11/04/06, *Marilyn Cade* < marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear all, I believe that we need to give Kurt a rather firm estimate of costs for travel for Councilors asap. If we 'ballpark' an estimate of $3,000 USD for short policy meetings, and $5,000 for the week long ICANN face to face meetings, will that provide a firm enough estimate? I would also propose that perhaps we plan to budget two policy development meetings face to face, outside of the three ICANN meetings.
I am happy to work with Glen on a straw proposal for the budget if we can get a general agreement for a "template" approach. Perhaps Ken would also be willing, as part of the Adm. Planning group to work on this?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto: owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 5:51 AM To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'GNSO Council' Cc: 'Kurt Pritz'; 'Liz Williams'; 'Olof Nordling' Subject: RE: [council] Proposed approach to travel funding in the ICANN operating plan
Bruce, I fully endorse this proposal. Its a significant step forward for a more professional organisation.
Philip
I am in full agreement with this proposal. I have also expressed the same from the various documents that I received from the Nominating Committee. Kindly allow me as new appointee to note, that I have witnessed a lot of talent around the Council that whose time and efforts are worth more than payment for travel and accommodation. All the best. Sophia On 05/04/06, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> wrote:
Hello All,
Based on discussions I have had over the past two ICANN meetings, there seems to be reasonable support for ICANN to fund some of the travel expenses for members of the Council and task forces.
Even though some Council members are employed by members of the Internet industry that may seem like well resourced organisations, the reality is that it is becoming increasingly difficult for Council and task force members to get regular travel support to attend several meetings a year where there is not a direct commercial return from each meeting. The Internet industry is intensely competitive and most organizations in the industry manage costs very tightly. Some of these organisations already feel they are making a significant contribution through the time that they allow their staff to spend on ICANN matters. Note that ICANN already funds some of the travel of members of ICANN's nominating committee, the Council members appointed by the Nominating committee, and members of the At-Large Advisory Committee.
Recent experience with meetings in Washington and Wellington have shown that face-to-face meetings are an important part of making more rapid progress on complex policy issues.
However I don't believe that ICANN funding of travel should be taken for granted, and any recipients of funding should ensure that they have done significant work in advance of travelling to any physical meeting.
I intend to submit feedback to the Kurt Pritz with respect to the Operating Plan for 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007.
Here is my proposal so far:
(1) GNSO Council - All GNSO Council members should receive travel support consistent with the support provided to other members of the ICANN community (e.g ICANN Board, nominating committee etc) for the three ICANN meetings per year. - I assume that there is some sort of consistent ICANN travel policy for the organisation, with respect to things like class of airline travel, class of hotel accommodation etc.
(2) For major PDPs that are of strategic significance to the organisation - e.g new gTLDs, IDNs, and WHOIS - that allowance be made for up to three face-to-face meetings a year separate from the normal ICANN meetings - that funding be provided for: -- the chair of the committee/task force -- one representative from each constituency (not including the chair) -- one of the three appointees from the Nominating committee (not including the chair) -- each representative would need to apply to the Council for funding, and provide information on the outreach conducted by that representative, as well as a written summary of material that will be used as part of the physical meeting. This application would be public. If an application was inadequate the Council could decide to deny funding. - the location of the face-to-face meetings have a studio-quality audio-visual environment that allows for effective remote participation
The intent is that meetings may be rotated around the major regions of the world, and that representatives that are located close to the location for the meeting would receive no funding for that meeting. Each rep would also typically have the opportunity to be funded once per year, assuming that the role is rotated.
Please let me know any feedback, before I submit to Kurt Pritz.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
participants (5)
-
Bruce Tonkin -
Marilyn Cade -
Philip Sheppard -
Ross Rader -
Sophia B