[APAC-Discuss] Your Input Required by 21 May : Before APRALO Travel Policy Listening Call 23 May 6 UTC

Sat May 18 05:31:40 UTC 2024

Gopal and all please add in the Google Document, since comments/ concrete
suggestions will only be taken from there.

Thanks

Amrita

On Sat, 18 May 2024 at 10:47, Gopal Tadepalli <gopal.tadepalli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thank you Amrita.
>
> Towards late 2019, efforts to prepare "ICANN Community Travel Support
> Guidelines". The discussions were very illuminating. There was no
> travel possible very soon  due to COVID - 19, but a 30 page ICANN
> formatted document
> was done by 1 July 2020 !!!
>
> Some pertinent aspects:
>
> ICANN Travel Support does not select supported travelers. Supporting
> Organizations, Advisory
> Committees, review teams, the Nominating Committee, other supported
> groups (e.g., ICANN
> NextGen and ICANN Fellowship programs), and ICANN support staff
> arranging an approved
> ICANN event determine who receives travel support for a given event.
> These groups then
> communicate the names of supported travelers to ICANN Travel Support.
> ICANN encourages
> community groups to have a documented, open, and transparent process
> for selecting
> supported travelers.
>
> Suggestion:
>
> The budget for travel support needs to include the category of UIM and
> "Wild Card" entries however
> limited the exact budgeted amount is. Who will select the supported
> travelers ?
>
> It is easy to make a round trip travel with strict adherence to the
> ICANN Expected standards.The procedures
> related to claims is also streamlined with good support from the staff.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> Gopal T V
> 0 9840121302
> https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545
> https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Dr. T V Gopal
> Professor
> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
> College of Engineering
> Anna University
> Chennai - 600 025, INDIA
> Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340
>       (Res) 24454753
> Home Page : http://www.annauniv.edu/staff/gopal
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 10:21 AM Amrita Choudhury via APAC-Discuss
> <apac-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:
> >
> > Dear APRALO ALS and UIMs,
> >
> >
> > On 23 May during our monthly call at 6 UTC we will have a 30 mins
> listening session  on our initial thoughts on how  the travel policy should
> be formed from APRALOs perspective.
> >
> >
> > The ALAC leadership and  Melissa Allgood, from ICANN staff, would be
> participating to hear our views. Their aim is to take the feedback from the
> RALO on what should be the key criteria and indicators from APRALOs
> perspective while drafting a travel Policy.
> >
> >
> > If you recall, last month we organised an initial poll on what should be
> the key aspects of the APRALO Travel Policy. Please refer to the attachment
> and mail below.
> >
> >
> > Action Item:
> >
> > As the next steps, in preparation to the call and taking the parameters
> shared in the poll as a baseline, we  request you to  list in SUGGESTION
> MODE what should be  the Criterias  and Indicators for APRALO Travel Policy
> by 21 May 2024
> >
> > Please use this link to add your input
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Amrita
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Amrita Choudhury <amritachoudhury at ccaoi.in>
> > Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 at 13:28
> > Subject: Travel Policy Response Summary
> > To: APAC-Discuss <apac-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> >
> >
> > Dear APRALO Community,
> >
> > Thank you to all who submitted their response to the Travel Policy Poll.
> While the responses of the poll were shared in yesterday's APRALO Monthly
> call, sharing a summary of the same here.  34 people participated in the
> poll. As the poll was conducted prior to the Pilot Travel Policy being
> shelved (Ref: Mail from ALAC Chair). some of the responses will not be
> relevant.
> >
> > 76% respondents supported the APRALO LT position on the Pilot Travel
> Policy.
> > 63% opined that the Pilot Travel Policy should be rejected.
> > 82% respondents felt that  APRALO should have the discretion on how to
> use the 2 travel slots of the RALO
> > 94% felt that APRALO should be empowered to set APRALO specific metrics
> to evolve the  travel policy which is fair and accountable and where
> required people for the meetings are predictable
> > In terms of suggestions for what could be the  2 or 3  parameters APRALO
> should apply metrics on to establish the new travel policy program for the
> RALOs, were:
> >
> >                 Engagement and Participation Equity
> >                 Impact Assessment of Contribution (RALO, Community, IG)
> >                 Diversity & Inclusion
> >                 Incentive to engage
> >                 Prioritize travel slots for RALO members who have
> proposed specific session topics, workshops, or initiatives that align
> with ICANN's strategic objectives and tnterests of the At-Large community.
> >
> >
> > As a next step we will deliberate further in a small group on these
> metrics.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Amrita
> >
> > On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 09:54, Amrita Choudhury <amritachoudhury at ccaoi.in>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear APRALO members,
> >>
> >> We have a few questions where we need your inputs, related to travel
> policy.  Link: https://forms.gle/gabjf8fshuM7x1pZ7
> >>
> >>
> >> Sharing the background and recent developments first.
> >>
> >>
> >> The background
> >>
> >>
> >> As per the existing travel policy, there are 2 travel slots for each
> RALO and each of the 3 ALAC members travel to each meeting.
> >>
> >> A small team had been constituted at the At Large to discuss and evolve
> a more fair and transparent travel policy than the existing one which is
> performance and utility based. The small team had two online discussions.
> Most felt that the performance metrics need to be evolved which are
> flexible and creative and RALOs have the independence to create their own
> metrics. At a session at San Juan there was a discussion but it was
> inconclusive.
> >>
> >>
> >> Current developments:
> >>
> >>
> >> About two weeks ago the ALAC Chair sent an email  announcing a pilot
> where slots for travel to ICANN80 were assigned based on the utility of
> travel members. However the slots of each RALO was reduced from 2 to 1 and
> 5 slots were allotted to AFRALO travellers.
> >>
> >>
> >> This pilot has led to concerns in most RALOs. The main reason being it
> was a top down decision where before implementing it was not discussed in
> the small team or with the RALOs.
> >>
> >>
> >> Several RALOs such as AFRALO, LACRALO and EURALO have issued statements
> against it and asked to repeal it.
> >>
> >>
> >> APRALO LT position so far:
> >>
> >>
> >> APRALO LT had written back the following statement:
> >>
> >>
> >> "There had been no concluding discussions at San Juan on the topic of
> travel policy. Rather  the key takeaway was that there needs to be more
> deliberation and discussion before we agree on any new process. Therefore
> this proposal was a bit unexpected.
> >>
> >>
> >> While we from APRALO  are ok to go age will go with this proposed pilot
> travel policy, just as a one time PILOT, however we will  discuss it with
> the other RALOs and go with  what all the RALOs together decide upon.
> >>
> >>
> >> Further, we wish to add that,
> >>
> >>
> >> 1. Any  future travel policy needs extensive prior deliberation and
> agreement between all ALAC members and RALOs etc. Even for a pilot it is
> preferred there is deliberation.
> >>
> >>
> >> 2. We agree that metrics need to be implemented, but that would require
> further discussion and flexibility region wise. RALOs should have the
> discretion to fix their own metrics and allot the 2 seats they have. Once
> we have proper metrics in place  and  it is agreed by all, only then it
> should be implemented. It should not be enforced.
> >>
> >>
> >> 3. Additionally, while we have no issues with AFRALO being given
> additional slots, I hope the same will be reciprocated when we have
> meetings in other regions. The APRALO will definitely be keen to have more
> travel  slots during the Istanbul meeting.  Of course we will request that
> based on what sessions/ initiatives we propose for that meeting.
> >>
> >>
> >> 4. For the one seat allotted this time we will continue with the
> rotation system that we are following, at least for ICANN80 and Ali will
> attend it."
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The Situation now:
> >>
> >>
> >> Three of the RALOs have written back rejecting the Pilot Travel Plan.
> NARALO has not issued any statement. As mentioned above APRALO LT had
> stated that we will go ahead with whatever  all RALOs decide together.
> >>
> >>
> >> In that context we have a few questions where we need your view
> preferable by 17 April 2024 EOD.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Amrita
> >> on behalf of APRALO LT
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > APAC-Discuss mailing list
> > APAC-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
> >
> > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/apac-discuss/attachments/20240518/5e0589bc/attachment-0001.html>