January 2017 - Ws2-staff_acct

Reply to staff staff questions
by Klaus Stoll Feb. 1, 2017

Feb. 1, 2017

Dear working group members Greetings. Please find attached my first draft to reply to the staff questions. I wanted to just condense the text from text a but then thought it would be stupid to repeat everything. The key is that in the point of view of ICANN.org and its staff, the community role is now to support and aid ICANN.org and it's staff and not how it should be the other way round). I have decided to send you now what I have, otherwise I will write another 5 pages and my language. Hope it helps in one way or another Yours Klaus PS: Sorry I did not upload the text to the Google doc. I simply could not find it.

2 1

Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 Staff Accountability Subgroup Meeting #7_19January 2017
by MSSI Secretariat Jan. 23, 2017

Jan. 23, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Staff Accountability Subgroup Meeting #7 – 19 January 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/xJ3DAw A copy of the action items and notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Action Items · Participants to read A and B document by EOB Monday and provide comments for drafting team- JC to send reminder to list. · Staff to provide answer to sub-group on access to documents by 27 January 2017. · Klaus Stoll to draft answers to Staff Questions for consideration by group by 27 Janaury 2017. Notes (11 participants at start of call) 1. Intro: agenda review, attendance, SOI check Jordan Carter: Avri Doria will not be able to join the call today. 2. Detailed discussion-seeking feedback on working draft Document A v 1.3Document, open to comments and suggested edits, Jordan Carter: JC,AD and KS have cleaned up the document from the 5th of January - still needs a lot of tidying up to get it to first reading. Asking participants to post comments on the clean version of the Google doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wGRrJZ-i7WA0uYBIHaB5Q3ssqfRmbAcgHJwlQ6s… Klaus Stoll: Would ask everyone to read the document and comment so we can go into a final editing. Jordan Carter: (presentation of the structure document). Klaus Stoll: The first three sections are a rehash of existing document - as such asking a reader to go through 6 pages of introduction - so maybe we could bring our recommendations more at the beginning could be better. Jordan Carter: If a good idea we should be clear about what is standard and what is editorial from us. Anything on the Role Descriptions? (none). Anything on relationships? Pam Little: 1.3.1 Root or just the DNS? Jordan Carter: we should use standard language. Jeff Neuman: Community does not implement policy - is this correct and we should note the gNSO work on this. Jordan Carter: please share that link. So the language is not quite right yet. Back to Relationships section 2. Jeff Neuman: I will try to find a good reference Jordan Carter: Section 3 - any comments. Pam Little: second para - ending - "some important differences" could be removed as we are talking about similarities here. Jordan Carter: Section 4 - this needs quite a bit to tightening up. this gets close to the scope of this group and should be looked at in this light. Section 5 - Recommendations - I disagree with the financial indepence recommendation (registries and registrars should not fund ICANN). Pam Little: @Jeff - ICANN provided a detailed response to our questions. Jeff Neuman: I agree with removal of that bullet point Alan Greenberg: how would this funding recommendation work? Klaus Stoll: This financial relationship sometimes leads to conflicts and so we should look at better way to fund us to avoid this. Jeff Neuman: @Klaus - But you are assuming there is a problem Jeff Neuman: where is the evidence of that? Alan Greenberg: Agree there is an issue but would not resolve it this way. This resolution makes no sense as is. Klaus Stoll: If we do the second part we would be out of the scope of this sub-group. Jordan Carter: There is something there that could put pressure on staff to dealing with those participants who fund the company. Alan Greenberg: No problem with identifying the issue but the recommendation does not make sense. Jeff Neuman: We need to identify sources of information for sections 1 and 2 - otherwise causes confusion for the reader. Jordan Carter: the original longer version of this did have that and we have to bring some of that back. Phil Corwin: Agree that the financial recommendation does not make sense. Second the funds to come from registrants up though registrars and registrants. The funds are used to get a variety of participants in ICANN. We need a document that will identify remedies for issues with staff. Jordan Carter: That is for document A. Klaus Stoll: It would be good to make these comments in the documents would be very helpful. Jordan Carter: reminder to participants to please read and comment the document. 3. Initial discussion / seeking feedback on First Draft Document B - Avri is rapporteur on this Jordan Carter: Waiting for access to documents. Bernard Turcotte: Staff should have a response on thiss by the end of next week. Jordan Carter: We will not go into detail on this document here while we wait for access to the ICANN documents which would inform our work in drafting this further. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UnkJuukv0px-CfIDgLrjdDZa2CpBvSahPvAXdYY… 4. Volunteers for response to Staff Questions Avri has prepared a document for answers to the questions that staff asked the group Jordan Carter: Who would like to volunteer to draft some further answers? Klaus Stoll: The answer to these questions are mostly in sections 4 and 5 of our document. I could spend some time to attempt a draft answer for us to consider. Jordan Carter: Great thanks. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): we need to send / resend the links to docs again to our Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): list with reminder to contribute 5. Schedule check Jordan Carter: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ftd-Ps_qF46pf_iXf5foGjdUfCq64-St_43inFe… --- this is our Next Steps Jordan Carter: We are running a little late vs this schedule. We may not have docs A and B to the plenary prior to Copenhagen but should have one ready for Copenhagen. 6. AOB 1. Jordan Carter: AOB (none) – Adjourned Action Items: · Participants to read A and B document by EOB Monday and provide comments for drafting team- JC to send reminder to list. · Staff to provide answer to sub-group on access to documents by 27 January 2017. · Klaus Stoll to draft answers to Staff Questions for consideration by group by 27 Janaury 2017.

1 0

Please Contribute to these documents
by Jordan Carter Jan. 20, 2017

Jan. 20, 2017

Hi everyone This email hopes to encourage you to READ and COMMENT or share THOUGHTS or OPINIONS on the documents we are working on: *Document A - relationships between ICANN Board, Staff and Community* A clean version of the doc - please comment on this one: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wGRrJZ-i7WA0uYBIHaB5Q3ssqfRmbAcgHJwlQ 6scHZY/edit (Marked up from previous version at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wXuZw-VFeMLT3B5UHLU_nY1SWyzp6- VLeVZF1FY0UDk/edit) For Doc A it would be super helpful if you can add thoughts by end of Monday - a redraft will happen after that. Document B - systems etc at ICANN side - first draft Please add comments and thoughts: https://docs.google.com/ document/d/1UnkJuukv0px-CfIDgLrjdDZa2CpBvSahPvAXdYYTeHk/edit Response to Staff Questions Here is a place to help add answers https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ELuw6i3mGAjnZBe0Vc_ lraNQrWw5m_I6UyipEHaRJxc/edit Your input is vital! thanks all Jordan -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ * +64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) | Skype: jordancarter jordan(a)InternetNZ.net.nz | www.InternetNZ.nz *A better world through a better Internet*

2 1

Draft Agenda for 19 Jan call at 19h UTC
by Jordan Carter Jan. 19, 2017

Jan. 19, 2017

Hi all Please find below a draft Agenda for our next meeting, coming up in fifteen hours or so. Apols for the late circulation. Speak soon, Jordan CCWG WS2: Staff Accountability Draft Agenda - 19 January 2017 at 19h UTC (this agenda as a Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mxzAO2dIEpvV8N31tauknrT2dHatsqRRLHb27EF…) 1. Intro: agenda review, attendance, SOI check 2. Detailed discussion / seeking feedback on working draft Document A version 1.3. Document, open to comments and suggested edits, can be found at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wGRrJZ-i7WA0uYBIHaB5Q3ssqfRmbAcgHJwlQ6s… Marked up from previous version at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wXuZw-VFeMLT3B5UHLU_nY1SWyzp6-VLeVZF1FY… 3. Initial discussion / seeking feedback on First Draft Document B Avri is rapporteur on this document Available: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UnkJuukv0px-CfIDgLrjdDZa2CpBvSahPvAXdYY… 4. Volunteers for response to Staff Questions Avri has prepared a document for answers to the questions that staff asked the group, available at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ELuw6i3mGAjnZBe0Vc_lraNQrWw5m_I6UyipEHa… Who would like to volunteer to draft some further answers? 5. Schedule check 6. AOB -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ * +64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) | Skype: jordancarter jordan(a)InternetNZ.net.nz | www.InternetNZ.nz *A better world through a better Internet*

1 0

Document A (Board Staff Community) second draft
by Jordan Carter Jan. 18, 2017

Jan. 18, 2017

Hi all In prep for our meeting Thursday 19 January at 19h UTC, Avri and Klaus and I have been prepping a second draft of the Document A paper. This will be a main agenda item at the call. You can find a clean copy here: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wGRrJZ- i7WA0uYBIHaB5Q3ssqfRmbAcgHJwlQ6scHZY/edit#> Marked up from the last version, w lots of comments etc (and thus quite slow): <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wXuZw-VFeMLT3B5UHLU_nY1SWyzp6- VLeVZF1FY0UDk/edit> We think it needs a thorough edit to make it clearer and simpler to grab the key concepts, as at the moment it is quite long and opaque. *From this Thursday's call it would be great to get feedback and input from people, and your agreement to the possibility of another further edit. From there, the document can go into the CCWG once we do an online check for contentment.* What are your thoughts? Jordan -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ * +64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) | Skype: jordancarter jordan(a)InternetNZ.net.nz | www.InternetNZ.nz *A better world through a better Internet*

1 0

Staff's questions to subgroup on Staff Accountbity
by avri doria Jan. 17, 2017

Jan. 17, 2017

hi, Just wanted to remind us that we have a set of questions from the staff pending response: from: <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/59643290/Staff%20accountab…> Questions for the community: * What are some concrete examples of concerns that the community has with regards to staff accountability? Are the concerns about individual service delivery/individual staff, or about the potential that staff might cause a violation of ICANN policies, processes, or Bylaws? * In the staff accountability group, there have been suggestions that people within the ICANN Organization are afraid to speak to the community. Can you provide more detail to support these suggestions? Is the reluctance to speak based on perceptions of how the ICANN Organization will respond, or how the community will respond? * ICANN expects all people within the ICANN Organization to be respectful to the community in interactions. If the community is not treated with respect, that would clearly be an issue about which ICANN should be made aware. What is the expectation for the community in addressing members of the ICANN Organization? * Do you think that there should be areas where people in the ICANN Organization should be directly accountable to the community? What would this look like, and how could it be done in a way that does not interfere with the employer relationship? Are the enhancements of the Reconsideration and IRP Process, where staff action can be challenged directly, sufficient to address the subgroup’s concerns? How does one prevent inconsistent feedback to ICANN.org employees? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

1 1

Doc B
by avri doria Jan. 16, 2017

Jan. 16, 2017

hi, A few days late, and far short of what the doc needs to become, but a first draft can be found in: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UnkJuukv0px-CfIDgLrjdDZa2CpBvSahPvAXdYY…> The doc is open for text suggestions, recommended edits and comments. A pdf is attached. At this point i am the only person who has contributed to this doc. It needs more of a team effort than just that. I will try to get more time on it in the next days, but still need help. Also note that the request for access to staff documentation that is beyond the staff portal is still pending. thanks avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

1 0

Reminder - thoughts on doc A
by Jordan Carter Jan. 10, 2017

Jan. 10, 2017

Hi all A reminder from our last call - there's an action on participants in the Staff Accountability group to have a look at the working draft of the document that looks at relationships between Board, Staff and Community in ICANN: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wXuZw-VFeMLT3B5UHLU_nY1SWyzp6-VLeVZF1FY… It's my task to edit and reconcile those comments later this week. *If you are able to add your input by Midnight Wednesday UTC that would be helpful.* Thanks! Jordan -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ * +64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) | Skype: jordancarter jordan(a)InternetNZ.net.nz | www.InternetNZ.nz *A better world through a better Internet*

2 1

Agenda for meeting week 1 2017; 5 Jan 0500
by avri doria Jan. 5, 2017

Jan. 5, 2017

Agenda for meeting week 1 2017; 5 Jan 0500 * Meeting start items * Discussion of CCWG Staff Accountability working draft draft 1.2 - Jordon is lead rapporteur on this doc. * Schedule check * AOB Document, open to comments and suggested edits, can be found at: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wXuZw-VFeMLT3B5UHLU_nY1SWyzp6-VLeVZF1FY…> PDF attached, however pdf downloads from Drive do not show comments made to the text in the Drive doc. If you cannot make the meeting please take an opportunity to comment in the Drive document so the comments can be included in meeting discussion. If you cannot make comments directly in the drive doc, please send them to the list. Note, Google drive does have the capability of allow editing of documents offline. You need to be online for initial access and for posting the edits, but they can be made when offline. Works on most mobiles as well. Thanks avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

3 2

Should the Complaints Officer report into the General Counsel’s office?
by Pam Little Jan. 5, 2017

Jan. 5, 2017

Hi all, During today’s call, I noted that there have been some discussions on the list and in Hyderabad but not sure if the issue has been dropped or settled. I raised my concern over this newly created role reporting to ICANN’s General Counsel. My concern is twofold: potential conflict of interest and risks associated with concentration of power. I advocated for a separate Compliance & Ethics office be created within ICANN and would welcome thoughts and feedback from this group. There is no shortage of debate and diverse views on whether legal and compliance functions should be separate but thought this article (or the excerpt) might be of interest. https://globalcompliancenews.com/independence-day-the-separate-and-equal-co… Moreover, a joint Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics (“SCCE”) and NYSE Governance Services survey released in September 2014 found that only 8% of the 249 organizations surveyed placed overall responsibility for the ethics and compliance program with the general counsel or chief legal officer, while 56% placed it with a compliance and/or ethics officer.[4] Among the entities surveyed, only 18% of the individuals responsible for compliance reported to the general counsel, while 38% reported to the CEO, and 19% to the board of directors. Accordingly, well over half of the entities surveyed maintain compliance departments separate from, and certainly not under the direct control of, the general counsel. An annual benchmarking survey conducted by Deloitte and Compliance Week reveals a similar trend. Of the 364 respondents participating in their 2015 Compliance Trends Survey, 59% reported having a stand-alone CCO, representing a 9% increase from the survey’s 2014 findings and a 22% increase from the 2013 findings. Additionally, in 57% of the participant companies, the CCO reports directly to the CEO or board of directors. Kind regards, Pam Little From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of MSSI Secretariat Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 5:31 PM To: ws2-staff_acct(a)icann.org Cc: CCWG Accountability Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 Staff Accountability Subgroup Meeting #6_ 05JAN17 Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Staff Accountability Subgroup Meeting #6 – 05 January 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/wp3DAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. Kind Regards, Yvette Guigneaux Multi-Stakeholder & Strategic Initiative Assistant ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers 12025 Waterfront Drive, Playa Vista, CA 90094 yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org | www.icann.org[icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org_&d=DgMGaQ…> _____ NOTES 1. Meeting start items - review of agenda and other administrative items 2. Review and discussion of responses to Questions from ICANN - noted that some of the responses to the questions may lead to recommendations for the group to consider. - need to provide some responses to the quetions posed in the response noted documents available to the staff to describe codes and they are posted on ICANN.org web site, wondered if those documents are available for the community to review/read, assumption that they are not currently available for the community - are they private to the employess and not visible to the community? - noted the need for further review of the response - concerns raised that ICANN has a lot of process and documents in place, but who is looking into the practice of the process and what are the consequences of not following the process in place, example what happens when CEO exceeds power delegated to him, noted are things as good as ICANN would like us to believe - concerns on the devils in the details Action (Karen): see if it would be possible to have a follow-up discussion with HR - concerns expressed on the Compliance Officer being under the General Counsel's office. Action (Pam Little): send email to the list with suggestions on the Compliance Officer Questions for follow-up: - Are the staff documents/codes noted in the response privet to staff only or are they public for community review? 3. Discussion of CCWG Staff Accountability working draft draft 1.2 (Document A) - document seems to be longer than expected. - document is meant to look at the relationship between the Board, the community and the staff. - there might be perceived conflicts of interest. - there appears to be different expectations from the community of the roles of staff, board and community. - there is a basic gap between what is said and what happens in reality. - not sure what was descriptive and what was normative in this document. - concern over the isolation of the board, and isolation of the 3 groups from each other. - document is a first draft, and needs more work from the group. - competing interests within the ICANN community makes it challenging for staff to be held accountable Action (subgroup): review and edit the document by the middle of next week (Wednesday, Jan 11), add comments but also add drafting changes in suggestion mode. Jordan and Klaus will then edit the document before the next call. For document B: - hiring process should be more open 4. Schedule check - Goal is to try and close document A by the next meeting - Avri will be working on document B next week, and will send the URL to the group - sticking to the schedule discussed in the last call: · Call 19 January (19h UTC): Test agreed changes to draft Document A. Work through draft Document B · Call 2 February (13h UTC): Test agreed changes to draft Document B. Finalise Document A for CCWG Plenary. Can send A to CCWG Plenary. · Call 16 February (05h UTC): Finalise Document B for CCWG Plenary. Both Documents to CCWG Plenary · Call 2 March (19h UTC): (if necessary - incorporate feedback from Plenary?) · Face to Face Plenary - 10 March 5. AOB - Concerns raised over the fact that very limited group of people are participating. We can try to get more people involved through the plenary. -Suggestion to get emails of participants and send the URL link to participants.

1 0