Travel Support policy document
- To: travel-support-draft@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Travel Support policy document
- From: Adam Peake <ajp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 22:20:40 +0900
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the travel support proposal.
I support Olga Cavalli's comment
The policy proposes that there should no longer be a travel
support distinction between Nomcom selectees and other
counselors with respect to travel support.
I am concerned that NomCom appointees might no longer be guaranteed
travel support. Any such policy should be coordinated with the NomCom
review. I have been involved in four NomComs, and based on that
experience I think it would be extremely difficult to recruit high
quality candidates for non-Board positions unless there was an
assurance that travel and accommodation expenses would be provided.
All NomCom appointees are expected to travel and participate in ICANN
meetings, a commitment to do is a condition of becoming a candidate.
Travel procedures must carefully consider the role of NomCom
appointees in the ICANN, their role in representing the public
interest rather than those of the concerned industry and how any
weakening of their role might affect ICANN.
All current NomCom appointees, and I believe also those who have
submitted applications during the current 2008 process, did so with
the expectation that their expenses for attending ICANN meetings
would be covered. This document
<http://nomcom.icann.org/positions-2008.html> explains most
conditions to candidates, it hasn't changed much over the years.
"All NomCom appointees are expected to travel and participate in
ICANN meetings. Reasonable expenses incurred in attending meetings
will be reimbursed."
Other similar text, this for GNSO but it's common for most positions:
"As stated in the ICANN Bylaws, such support shall not include an
obligation for ICANN to fund travel expenses incurred by GNSO
participants for travel to any meeting of the GNSO or for any other
purpose. However, ICANN has customarily furnished travel expenses for
Nominating Committee appointed Council members to ICANN meetings.
This custom is planned to continue, but is subject to the Bylaw
statement. [Bylaws Article X, Section 4, see
I doubt many would apply if there was not a very strong expectation
that expenses would be covered.
Board appointees are not effected by the draft travel support
proposals, but other positions the NomCom selects are. The ccNSO is a
three year appointment, ALAC and GNSO two years so it will take some
time for any new policy to work its way through.
About the mechanics of the procedure. It would be cheaper if tickets
were bought further in advance. Why 45 days rather than, for
example, 60? If volunteers who are expecting to work at the meeting
are to be denied travel, then less than 45 days may not enough notice
for them to consider other options, or for committees to rearrange
As someone who has benefited from travel support, I strongly suggest
the procedure allow least cost upgradeable fares and permit some
flexibility to use frequent flyer plans. Booked well in advance these
are not greatly more expensive, booking conditions also tend to be
slightly more flexible, i.e. lower cancellation fees, changeable
Past experience suggests ICANN's travel agent is not necessarily
cheap. This may have changed since I used that service. However,
ticket prices vary greatly by region. Has ICANN investigated lower
cost travel services, there are many that specialize in serving the
international non-for profit sector.
The travel procedure should be considered along with the new
proposals on reforming ICANN meetings. As the dates of ICANN
meetings to October 2010 are known, why can't the deadline for
deciding the location be at least 12 months before to allow
negotiation of cheaper accommodation?
Editorial: The NomCom has an associate chair not vice chair.