[ALAC] Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation

[Alan Greenberg]

Regarding: 
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-amend-compensation-2014-05-02-en

As discussed on the ALAC call today, I will be posting the following 
statement (subject to minor editing) to the ICANN Public Comment.

I encourage anyone who supports this to submit a comment to 
<mailto:comments-bylaws-amend-compensation-02may14 at icann.org>Submit 
Comment to Forum. I also understand that the ALAC is itself may 
submit a statement as well (either support or a separate statement).

------------------

I am a member of the ALAC and the ALAC Liaison to the GNSO, but I am 
making this comment purely in my own capacity.

I believe that, subject to a number of related considerations, it is 
reasonable to compensate Board members, including Liaisons, and the 
level of compensation suggested is reasonable.

I do note that in the name of simplification, the report suggests an 
increase for Board members who are not Board Committee Chairs by as 
much as 29%.

However, the related considerations mentioned above, in my mind, 
cannot be ignored.

- One of the reasons always sited for such compensation is that 
having no compensation limits the available candidates who will make 
themselves available for the ICANN Board. Given that there has never 
been an AC/SO seat vacant due to lack of candidates, there is often 
competition for such seats, and the Nominating Committee regularly 
says that it has had to make very difficult decisions in selecting 
Board members since there was a surplus of eminently qualified 
candidates, in the name of transparency and accountability, it would 
be good to see hard evidence of the rationale.

- The introduction of Board compensation widened the gulf between 
Board members and other volunteers within ICANN. The proposed change 
widens that gulf further. There is no question that many Board 
members work very hard on behalf of ICANN, and that dedication eats 
into their other professional activities and personal life. However, 
the same can be said for many ICANN volunteers. There are many in the 
community who work equally hard and dedicate the same kind of hours 
as Board members. Indeed, it has been claimed that many in the 
community put in far more time and effort than some Board members. I 
believe that this claim is accurate.

SO and AC Chairs have been identified as meeting the above levels of 
commitment, and indeed many or perhaps all do. However, there are 
others who do not receive the existing benefits given to Board 
members and AC/SO Chairs who also dedicate unending hours and effort to ICANN.

Board and now Liaison compensation without any new consideration of 
the contributions of others denigrates the efforts of the rest of the 
ICANN volunteers. Such acknowledgment for non-Chairs need not be 
financial compensation - there are a host of other benefits that 
Board members get that other volunteers (and Chairs) would really appreciate.

Although I understand the difficulty of identifying those who put 
Herculean efforts into ICANN from those who are lower level 
contributors, we cannot continue to widen the gulf between the 
privileged few and the rest of volunteers and expect there not to be 
repercussions.