Re: [802SEC] 802.20 appeal panel action: plan for EC action
Paul,
I'm thinking through the process to see if it is bullet-proof. I've
come up with one issue:
*Regarding "Each non-confirmation vote must be accompanied by the
rationale for the vote", what if it isn't? Is the vote disqualified?
This could be considered implied in the statement, but I think we
should be clear in advance. I propose that it be disqualified and not
counted as a vote cast.
I'm also wondering, more generally, who has decided on this
particular ballot mechanism? Was it an IEEE-SA team effort?
Roger
At 18:08 -0500 03/11/06, Paul Nikolich wrote:
>Dear EC members,
>
>This note is intended to clarify the responsibliies and
>indemnification rights of EC members regarding the 802.20 appeal
>panel action. It also defines a process to implement the CS-SAB
>appeal panel action.
>
>1) Geoff and I did not fully agree with with the appeal panel
>findings and actions and asked the IEEE-SA if we (and the EC) could
>get support to appeal the appeal. We were notifyied that, as
>officers of 802, we, nor any EC member, can appeal the panel's
>findings or action. The EC simply must implement the action. This
>directive was unexpected by me, hence may be unexpected by other
>members of the EC. If you require a more detailed, in depth
>explanation, you must discuss it directly with Judy Gorman.
>
>2) As a result of the directive in (1) above, the EC shall hold a
>separate reconfirmation vote for each candidate.
>
>3) The current slate of opening EC agenda items is scheduled to be
>complete at 10AM. I will place confirmation votes on the opening EC
>meeting agenda to start at 10AM, which give us 30 minutes to
>complete this as the last items on the agenda, (10 minutes per
>candidate.)
>
>4) To comply with the appeal panel direction to document the
>rationale for non-confirmation, the vote will be conducted via
>secret paper ballot. Each non-confirmation vote must be accompanied
>by the rationale for the vote. The ballot's will be tallied by an
>IEEE staff person (probably Karen Kinne). If the candidate is
>confirmed, the ballots will be destroyed. If the candidate is not
>confirmed each non-confirmation vote rationale will be entered into
>the minutes verbatim. If confirmed, the candidates take office
>at the end of the plenary session, as per the customary process
>followed in 802.
>
>5) Given that the EC must hold a re-confirmation vote, and the
>outcome may be subject to appeal yet again, I wanted be sure the EC
>members are indemnified by the IEEE-SA. To that end, I requested
>the SA management unambigously define the terms and conditions under
>which the EC members will be indemnified. This is to ensure the EC
>members fully understand any risks and liabilities associated with
>their participation in the re-confirmation vote. The response from
>IEEE management is copied below.
>
>I believe the above points address the bulk of the concerns I am
>aware of and is the best and proper way to move forward on this
>matter.
>
>Regards,
>
>--Paul Nikolich
>Chairman, IEEE 802
>
>"----- Original Message -----
>From: <<mailto:j.gorman@ieee.org>j.gorman@ieee.org>
>To: <<mailto:Paul.nikolich@worldnet.att.net>Paul.nikolich@worldnet.att.net>
>Cc: <<mailto:k.rupp@ieee.org>k.rupp@ieee.org>;
><<mailto:don@lexmark.com>don@lexmark.com>;
><<mailto:j.carlo@ieee.org>j.carlo@ieee.org>;
><<mailto:ghpeterson@ieee.org>ghpeterson@ieee.org>;
><<mailto:bjohnson@thermon.com>bjohnson@thermon.com>;
><<mailto:deese.pamela@dorsey.com>deese.pamela@dorsey.com>
>Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 1:30 PM
>Subject: Indemnification wrt IEEE P802.20 activity
>
>> Paul,
> > Below please find an answer to your question about indemnification.
>>
>> The members of the 802 SEC are indemnified as long as they follow the
>> rules. Further, while their discretion and care in how they formulate their
>> rationales are matters of personal preference, if they want to avoid any
> > questions about indemnification, they should probably be very factual and
>> not subjective in the way they craft their rationales. IEEE in the end
>> makes choices about who and how much to insure. That is done by the IEEE
> > Insurance Committee in concert with the Executive Committee. Bottom line:
>> no one is absolutely assured of full (meaning "insured through to the end
>> of the issue and its resolution") indemnification, even if he or she is
>> following all the rules and behaving completely ethically and perfectly. To
>> further clarify the matter of indemnification, if the SEC, in failing to
>> confirm all or part of the slate of officers, acts in an arbitrary,
>> illegal, or potentially defamatory fashion, indemnification would be
>> questionable. As officers, it is anticipated that they will carry out
>> their duties responsibly and rationally. These duties include whether or
>> not to confirm a slate of officers, and their decision must be rational and
>> not arbitrary, illegal, or defamatory.
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> Best,
>> Judy