RE: [council] Personal submission to Public Comment on Board member compensation

["Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Alan,

 

Thoughtful submission.

 

A point for the record, in case another inference is taken from the below,
the GNSO Chair receives no compensation for the role.

There is one distinction made with regard to travel support in that flights
funded are in business not economy class, so to that extent, there is a
benefit.

As far as I am aware, that is the only such distinction afforded in support
of the chair.

 

As for commitment, it is indeed sizeable.  I would say it would be difficult
to do a thorough job (in the Chair) without committing 50% of one's time to
the role. Often more.

 

Jonathan

 

From: Alan Greenberg [mailto:alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: 05 June 2014 05:23
To: GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] Personal submission to Public Comment on Board member
compensation

 

Perhaps of interest to some, I recently submitted a statement to the Public
Comment on Board Member Compensation. I believe that it is in line with many
statements made related to the need to encourage volunteer efforts in the
policy development process and more specifically to not limit acknowledging
the hard work that many do solely by giving them a piece of paper in a blue
folder when they leave.

In essence, I am saying that it may be fine to increase the number of Board
members receiving fees, and the size of that fee, but that we must ALSO look
at innovative ways to thank and reward other dedicated volunteers who put in
efforts commensurate with those on the Board.

I believe that the ALAC will be submitting a statement supporting the
positions that I have taken.

The Public Comment can be found at
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-amend-compensation-2014-05-02-e
n and it closes next Thursday, June 12th.

My comment is copied below. If anyone else feels so included, please make a
comment of your own.

Alan

=======================
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 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.