[ALAC] Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation

[Alan Greenberg]

What I thought Olivier saidwas that I would post 
my original statement to the wiki, and then based 
on the other input, the ALAC would either support 
the statement or would create a different statement of its own.

If the former is chosen, I can certain draft the 
"The ALAC supports Alan's statement".

If it is to be different, then that is not in my 
court - I already said what I think was important.

Maybe I got it wrong.  Olivier??

Alan

At 28/05/2014 12:49 PM, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
>Dear Alan,
>
>What I understood from yesterday’s call is that 
>you make a first draft (on the wiki) not on your 
>behalf, but on behalf of ALAC, and people 
>comment. If there is consensus, ALAC will send it as ALAC position. Am I wrong?
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Tijani BEN JEMAA
>Executive Director
>Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
>Phone:  + 216 41 649 605
>Mobile: + 216 98 330 114
>Fax:       + 216 70 853 376
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
>[mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg
>Envoyé : mardi 27 mai 2014 16:59
>À : ALAC Working List
>Objet : [ALAC] Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation
>
>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.
>
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC mailing list
>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki: 
>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>
>
>
>----------
>Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus 
>ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection 
><http://www.avast.com/>Antivirus avast! est active.