Re: [802SEC] +++ 10 Day EC Email Ballot +++ Exec Secretary T&L Funding
All,
I vote DISAPPROVE.
[1] I don't for one moment question the value our IEEE 802 Executive
Secretary provides us - but for the majority of Working Group participants
focused on the technical work of developing standard and removed from the
logistical and operational challenges of IEEE 802 plenary meetings this
might not be so apparent - so I believe an opportunity needs to be given
to explain why the motion is being considered. Added to this a number of
participants in my Working Group have recently been unable to attend
meetings due to budget restrictions.
Based on the above I personally want to have the chance of a full
discussion with my Working Group before providing expense support
retrospectively for the November meeting - as well as for the whole of
2010 - from the IEEE 802 budget to one of the SEC members. I personally
believe that such a discussion is more effective at a meeting rather than
through email reflectors and therefore support Geoff's proposal to only
consider the one action that can't be delayed to March.
[2] I don't see this as the same as the IEEE 802.20 Chair situation as in
that situation we were instructed by the IEEE-SA Standards Board - a
parent body - to provide the expense support. In this situation we are
choosing to do this ourselves and it's duration is also under our own
control. May I also I respectfully point out that the text of the IEEE 802
motion from the closing SEC meeting in November 2006 reads 'without
creating precedent' (see full text of motion below) so it seems to me we
shouldn't be now trying to use it as a precedent.
---ooo000ooo---
10.09 MI Approval of T&E funding for 802.20 chair (non-conflicted EC vote)
http://www.ieee802.org/minutes/nov2006/Minutes%20-%20Friday%20November%2017,%202006.pdf#Page=271
Moved: In order to meet the requirements imposed on us by the SASB, and
without creating precedent: to cover the SASB appointed 802.20 chair’s
reasonable and customary expenses (e.g. registration, travel, hotel,
meals) using 802 resources until the end of the November 2007 plenary, or
until the chair is replaced, whichever is sooner.
- includes 2007 Jan, Mar, May, Jul, Sep, Nov sessions
- Estimated not to exceed $3.5k per session, averaged over the year
---ooo000ooo---
[3] I agree with Tony in relation to a transition plan - therefore based
on that would like to see as part of the motion an indication of the way
forward that is proposed. I would support either of the two proposals made
by Tony in his recent email - either [a] make the Executive Secretary role
part of the meeting planning function or [b] split the job in two.
Best regards,
David
***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org>
wrote on 12/01/2010 10:24:46:
> Geoff -
>
>
>
> I believe the two situations to be closely similar insofar as in both
cases,
> there was/is a piece of work to be done that was/is believed to be
essential
> to the continued conduct of our business, and that the prospect of
fixing
> the problem any other way was/is small.
>
>
>
> In the case of Arnie and his funding, it is not at all clear to me that
the
> situation was truly imposed upon us (although I will grant you, there
was a
> lot of pressure for us to accept it); we could have chosen to refuse - I
> don't believe that the SASB can have any legitimate basis upon which to
> require us to spend our membership's dollars in any particular way of
their
> choosing - but we did not. However, as you say, the question of
precedent vs
> bad idea is a discussion that must take place.
>
>
>
> Looking beyond the limited horizon of the March meeting, my personal
view is
> that it is vanishingly unlikely that we will find someone to fill Buzz's
> shoes unless we (802) are prepared to fund the position in some way. In
the
> present financial climate, it is hard enough to find sponsors that will
> commit their resources (either human or financial) to our technical
work,
> let alone to provide the level of commitment that is involved in the
> Executive Secretary role as it is currently defined. So, it would seem
to me
> that we are going to have to re-define the role somehow. Two obvious
> alternatives spring to mind (there are probably others):
>
>
>
> - Make the exec sec role part of the overall meeting planning
> function that we currently contract out to F2F, and remove it as an EC
> function altogether;
>
> - Split the job into a non-funded oversight role that retains
EC
> membership (and that involves much more limited time commitment), and an
> operational role that is contracted out as part of the overall meeting
> planning function.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Tony
>
>
>
> From: Geoff Thompson [mailto:thompson@ieee.org]
> Sent: 12 January 2010 8:09 AM
> To: tony@jeffree.co.uk
> Cc: IEEE 802 Executive Committee List
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++ 10 Day EC Email Ballot +++ Exec Secretary T&L
> Funding
>
>
>
> Tony-
>
> Thanks for the support.
>
> I'm not sure that I agree with you regarding the extent to which Arnie
> really set the precedent. Arnie was really a "hired gun" from the
outside
> that the SASB imposed on us and required us to cover his costs. True
that
> there was money involved but I seen it as a very different situation.
>
> But whether it actually was different or not and whether we should
accept
> that incident as a ground breaking precedent or an experiment that was
> perhaps a bad idea (or anything in between) is exactly why we should
have
> the discussion in a face-to-face setting.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Geoff
>
> On 1/11/10 11:25 PM, Tony Jeffree wrote:
>
> Geoff -
>
> I believe your re-wording of the motion as described and justified below
is
> appropriate, and so I am changing my vote to "disapprove" pending such a
> re-wording.
>
> However, at least part of the discussion so far has suggested that such
> actions would create a precedent, put us on a slippery slope, etc. etc.
The
> reality, in my opinion, is that that precedent has already been set by
the
> actions we took some while ago to support the then Chair of 802.20.
>
> Regards,
> Tony
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
> [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Geoff Thompson
> Sent: 12 January 2010 1:22 AM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++ 10 Day EC Email Ballot +++ Exec Secretary T&L
> Funding
>
> Colleagues-
>
> Some further thoughts of mine on this motion.
>
> I think it is a bad idea for several reasons.
> For some of these reasons, I hope that Paul will rule it out of order in
> its current form.
>
> 1. I think paying Buzz for his expenses for past meetings is a bad idea
> and a bad precedent. Buzz (like the rest of us) should decide to come
> to meetings or not on the basis of whether or not it is affordable to
> him, either through sponsorship or out-of-pocket. I don't think Buzz (or
> anyone) should pay for attending a meeting on the speculation that he
> might get 802 to pay for it afterwards as an unbudgeted expense.
>
> Therefore I believe that paying for Buzz's expenses for November 2009
> should be declared to be out of order or, at a minimum, a separate
> motion to be considered at an in-session meeting (presumably March).
>
> 2. I see no urgency in the decision as to whether we pay for the
> reimbursements under discussion for July and afterward. Therefore, that
> portion of the motion and the discussion thereof should be declared
> out-of-order for this e-mail ballot and deferred until March.
>
> If those actions were followed, then the only appropriate action for
> consideration at this time would be a one-time motion (hopefully not to
> set a precedent):
>
> *To provide for reimbursement of reasonable and customary expenses
> (e.g. airfare, hotel, meals, etc) of the Executive Secretary for the
> March 2010 Plenary Meeting.*
>
>
> I strongly believe that paying for officer expenses sets us up for a
> major change in the way 802 operates and that further operation in this
> mode should not take place without an explicit and considered change to
> our by-laws to allow 802 to pay for certain specified expenses for
> particular officers. This should not be done without full discussion in
> the Working Groups and with an accompanying financial impact analysis.
> We will be setting a precedent that others will rush to take advantage
> of. Many of our officers have been self-employed at one time or
> another, myself included.
>
> The fallout of something like this is that effectively 802 could end up
> paying the expenses of all of its officers except for those whose
> employers decide to cover expenses. This would significantly change the
> nature of 802 as well as have a significant upward impact on meeting
> fees. This would also have to be approved or at least allowed by the
> IEEE-SA.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Geoff
>
> Geoffrey O. Thompson
> Chair, 802 Emergency Services EC Study Group
> Member Emeritus, 802 Executive Committee
> GraCaSI Standards Advisory Services
> <mailto:thompson@ieee.org> <thompson@ieee.org>
> +1.540.227.0059 (Google Voice)
>
>
> On 1/11/10 7:06 AM, John Hawkins wrote:
>
>
> Dear EC members,
>
> I should have brought this up in November, but alas it didn't get
> done. Apologies in advance for cluttering your inboxes with another
> email ballot.
>
> Paul has delegated the conduct of the IEEE 802 EC 10-day ballot on the
> following motion to me.
>
> Motion:
> The EC approves the use of IEEE 802 resources for reimbursement of
> reasonable and customary expenses (e.g. airfare, hotel, meals, etc)
> for Buzz Rigsbee, the IEEE 802 Executive Secretary, for the following
> plenaries, or until he is replaced, whichever is sooner:
>
> - 2009 November plenary
> - 2010 March, July, November plenaries
>
> Such reimbursement will be not to exceed $1,000 per plenary, averaged
> over the period
>
> Moved: John Hawkins
> Seconded: Steve Shellhammer
>
> Start of ballot: Tuesday 12th January, 2010
> Close of ballot: Friday 22nd January 2010, 11:59PM EDT
>
> Early close: As required in subclause 3.1.2.2 'Electronic Balloting'
> of the IEEE project 802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee (LMSC) Operations
> Manual, this is notice that this ballot may close early once
> sufficient responses are received to clearly decide a matter.
>
> Rationale:
>
> - As most of you are aware, Buzz has now formally retired from Boeing
> and therefore has lost them as source of support for attending our
> meetings. Fortunately for us, Buzz is willing to continue his service
> as Executive Secretary for the IEEE 802. Given the complexity of this
> function, and the significant time and commitment involved, this is a
> positive for us.
>
> - The motion proposes that we cover his expenses, at least in part.
> Mostly these would consist of airfare and local transportation, but
> may also involve hotel/meals in certain instances. Note that hotels
> often "comp" Buzz's room expenses given his role in negotiating
> contracts on our behalf, but there could be an exception here or there
> so I'm leaving the motion open to that possibility. Note also that we
> are limiting the commitment to actual expenses, not to exceed $1,000
> per plenary on average and would be limited to the listed sessions
> requiring new approval thereafter. This is modeled after the approach
> we used with supporting Arnie's T&L a few years ago, and certainly is
> a level we can handle within our current budget.
>
> - I have communicated with Paul and Buzz and we agree that this is
> not a long-term solution, as Buzz will someday desire to "retire"
> from IEEE 802 as well. We agree that a succession plan is needed and
> are investigating the best way forward there. This will be a difficult
> function to fill with a volunteer, as it involves little
> technical/standards work, and yet consumes significant time and
> commitment. Since Buzz is willing and able, I think this is a wise
> investment of a limited amount of our funds in the short term.
>
> Regards,
> John
>
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
This
>
>
> list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
This
> list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.