Proposal for a full-time position for the RIPE Chair
Dear RIPE community members and RIPE Exec Board, As proposed during the GM in Dubai, I would like to discuss if it is possible to change the Chair position of RIPE into a full-time paid position. I would like to explain why this might be good for the community and my thinking behind it. As one might expect, being a RIPE chair, requires a huge amount of spare/private and vacation time and an employer (if not self-employed) that would see the value or benefit of employing the RIPE Chair.. and there is the ‘stress’ especially if it is busy at the office (day-job) and seeing issues that would demand your attention, with a community with its huge size … Currently it is my expectation that the RIPE chair position is consuming more than 14 weeks of work in its current way how Hans-Petter is running the position. And that is currently unpaid … Obviously not everything is covered in this by his vacation days .. and it is not that he is sitting idle on his hands at his day job. If the RIPE Chair position would be a full time position, it would allow the RIPE chair to attend more regional NOG meetings, member lunches, other RIR meetings or ICANN meetings or help with more Governance discussions with the various Governments that require our communities perspective. Or talks about GDPR or alike … It would be good for the community if the RIPE Chair would and could position/voice the community view, which may or may not be similar or be voiced differently in meetings with governments or ICANN meetings, apart from the view of the RIPE NCC itself. The RIPE community currently doesn’t have its own Governing entity .. we say, we are the community .. but the community doesn’t have its own entity. What I would propose, is to setup a separate entity … with a small separate board. The RIPE Community board role would be to act as a management oversight.. they would be make sure that the finances of the new RIPE Community entity are in balance and to assist with possible Chair rotations ( interviews for future candidates etc. ) but also act as peers in discussions for the Chair in certain more delicate situations / discussions that the Chair might face) Obviously should the finances in consolidated form, be open for the community. Currently we have a great Chair.. and I think Hans Petter is doing a stellar job, but it is my question if this particular point should be updated. And I think it should. What I like to see is that the Chair position is going to be funded by a 6 year grant from the membership fees via the RIPE NCC. And the position itself would be for an initial 5 year with 1 optional renewal of 5 year by RIPE Community Board approval. So a max of 10 years in total for the position per named person (Chair). The idea behind the 6 year rolling grant, is to make sure that the RIPE Chair will never get in a position where the RIPE NCC might cut the funding because of unpopular decisions towards the RIPE NCC. If the Chair (after being a Chair for 10 years) is rotated, I think the former Chair should have no problem getting another position, if one of his primary roles is to network or communicate with members in the community. His/her role should provide sufficient connections for other activities after the RIPE Chair position. As a Community, we have a voice and the community makes policy. And the RIPE NCC is the company that operates based on the guidance of those policy on behalf of the community and its members. I would personally like to see the community and membership, be embedded in the new RIPE community setup. If that would also mean that the new RIPE Community entity should hold (/obtain) the RIPE NCC (company) shares, is something that I like the Exec Board to discuss. How this should be setup in the governance model, is something I would like to ask the Exec Board to provide in a proposal, once the discussion looks positive … From a cost perspective, it is my expectation that it would be about 25 to 35 euro per LIR per year … While we look at a refund of 300 euro per year per LIR because of the budget surplus … I don’t think that the cost are going to be an issue. Regards, Erik Bais
This is a very interesting idea! I missed the Dubai meeting - was there a recorded discussion I could watch to see some more viewpoints? I'm curious what Has Petter thinks! Would people be willing to leave their jobs to do this full time? Would it be more of an ecouragement or a discouragement? FYI I am currently undecided, I would love to hear some others' thoughts to inform my own opinion. Leslie On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Erik Bais <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote:
Dear RIPE community members and RIPE Exec Board,
As proposed during the GM in Dubai, I would like to discuss if it is possible to change the Chair position of RIPE into a full-time paid position.
I would like to explain why this might be good for the community and my thinking behind it.
As one might expect, being a RIPE chair, requires a huge amount of spare/private and vacation time and an employer (if not self-employed) that would see the value or benefit of employing the RIPE Chair.. and there is the ‘stress’ especially if it is busy at the office (day-job) and seeing issues that would demand your attention, with a community with its huge size …
Currently it is my expectation that the RIPE chair position is consuming more than 14 weeks of work in its current way how Hans-Petter is running the position. And that is currently unpaid …
Obviously not everything is covered in this by his vacation days .. and it is not that he is sitting idle on his hands at his day job.
If the RIPE Chair position would be a full time position, it would allow the RIPE chair to attend more regional NOG meetings, member lunches, other RIR meetings or ICANN meetings or help with more Governance discussions with the various Governments that require our communities perspective. Or talks about GDPR or alike …
It would be good for the community if the RIPE Chair would and could position/voice the community view, which may or may not be similar or be voiced differently in meetings with governments or ICANN meetings, apart from the view of the RIPE NCC itself.
The RIPE community currently doesn’t have its own Governing entity .. we say, we are the community .. but the community doesn’t have its own entity.
What I would propose, is to setup a separate entity … with a small separate board.
The RIPE Community board role would be to act as a management oversight.. they would be make sure that the finances of the new RIPE Community entity are in balance and to assist with possible Chair rotations ( interviews for future candidates etc. ) but also act as peers in discussions for the Chair in certain more delicate situations / discussions that the Chair might face)
Obviously should the finances in consolidated form, be open for the community.
Currently we have a great Chair.. and I think Hans Petter is doing a stellar job, but it is my question if this particular point should be updated. And I think it should.
What I like to see is that the Chair position is going to be funded by a 6 year grant from the membership fees via the RIPE NCC. And the position itself would be for an initial 5 year with 1 optional renewal of 5 year by RIPE Community Board approval. So a max of 10 years in total for the position per named person (Chair).
The idea behind the 6 year rolling grant, is to make sure that the RIPE Chair will never get in a position where the RIPE NCC might cut the funding because of unpopular decisions towards the RIPE NCC.
If the Chair (after being a Chair for 10 years) is rotated, I think the former Chair should have no problem getting another position, if one of his primary roles is to network or communicate with members in the community.
His/her role should provide sufficient connections for other activities after the RIPE Chair position.
As a Community, we have a voice and the community makes policy. And the RIPE NCC is the company that operates based on the guidance of those policy on behalf of the community and its members.
I would personally like to see the community and membership, be embedded in the new RIPE community setup.
If that would also mean that the new RIPE Community entity should hold (/obtain) the RIPE NCC (company) shares, is something that I like the Exec Board to discuss.
How this should be setup in the governance model, is something I would like to ask the Exec Board to provide in a proposal, once the discussion looks positive …
From a cost perspective, it is my expectation that it would be about 25 to 35 euro per LIR per year … While we look at a refund of 300 euro per year per LIR because of the budget surplus … I don’t think that the cost are going to be an issue.
Regards,
Erik Bais
Hi Leslie, Sorry you missed the Dubai meeting. On this topic, the question by Nigel was to bring this to the ML ... So here it is ... Erik Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone
Op 25 nov. 2017 om 00:49 heeft Leslie <geekgirl@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:
This is a very interesting idea! I missed the Dubai meeting - was there a recorded discussion I could watch to see some more viewpoints?
I'm curious what Has Petter thinks! Would people be willing to leave their jobs to do this full time? Would it be more of an ecouragement or a discouragement?
FYI I am currently undecided, I would love to hear some others' thoughts to inform my own opinion.
Leslie
On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Erik Bais <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote: Dear RIPE community members and RIPE Exec Board,
As proposed during the GM in Dubai, I would like to discuss if it is possible to change the Chair position of RIPE into a full-time paid position.
I would like to explain why this might be good for the community and my thinking behind it.
As one might expect, being a RIPE chair, requires a huge amount of spare/private and vacation time and an employer (if not self-employed) that would see the value or benefit of employing the RIPE Chair.. and there is the ‘stress’ especially if it is busy at the office (day-job) and seeing issues that would demand your attention, with a community with its huge size …
Currently it is my expectation that the RIPE chair position is consuming more than 14 weeks of work in its current way how Hans-Petter is running the position. And that is currently unpaid …
Obviously not everything is covered in this by his vacation days .. and it is not that he is sitting idle on his hands at his day job.
If the RIPE Chair position would be a full time position, it would allow the RIPE chair to attend more regional NOG meetings, member lunches, other RIR meetings or ICANN meetings or help with more Governance discussions with the various Governments that require our communities perspective. Or talks about GDPR or alike …
It would be good for the community if the RIPE Chair would and could position/voice the community view, which may or may not be similar or be voiced differently in meetings with governments or ICANN meetings, apart from the view of the RIPE NCC itself.
The RIPE community currently doesn’t have its own Governing entity .. we say, we are the community .. but the community doesn’t have its own entity.
What I would propose, is to setup a separate entity … with a small separate board.
The RIPE Community board role would be to act as a management oversight.. they would be make sure that the finances of the new RIPE Community entity are in balance and to assist with possible Chair rotations ( interviews for future candidates etc. ) but also act as peers in discussions for the Chair in certain more delicate situations / discussions that the Chair might face)
Obviously should the finances in consolidated form, be open for the community.
Currently we have a great Chair.. and I think Hans Petter is doing a stellar job, but it is my question if this particular point should be updated. And I think it should.
What I like to see is that the Chair position is going to be funded by a 6 year grant from the membership fees via the RIPE NCC. And the position itself would be for an initial 5 year with 1 optional renewal of 5 year by RIPE Community Board approval. So a max of 10 years in total for the position per named person (Chair).
The idea behind the 6 year rolling grant, is to make sure that the RIPE Chair will never get in a position where the RIPE NCC might cut the funding because of unpopular decisions towards the RIPE NCC.
If the Chair (after being a Chair for 10 years) is rotated, I think the former Chair should have no problem getting another position, if one of his primary roles is to network or communicate with members in the community.
His/her role should provide sufficient connections for other activities after the RIPE Chair position.
As a Community, we have a voice and the community makes policy. And the RIPE NCC is the company that operates based on the guidance of those policy on behalf of the community and its members.
I would personally like to see the community and membership, be embedded in the new RIPE community setup.
If that would also mean that the new RIPE Community entity should hold (/obtain) the RIPE NCC (company) shares, is something that I like the Exec Board to discuss.
How this should be setup in the governance model, is something I would like to ask the Exec Board to provide in a proposal, once the discussion looks positive …
From a cost perspective, it is my expectation that it would be about 25 to 35 euro per LIR per year … While we look at a refund of 300 euro per year per LIR because of the budget surplus … I don’t think that the cost are going to be an issue.
Regards,
Erik Bais
Hi Erik!
On 25 Nov 2017, at 00:15, Erik Bais <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote:
As one might expect, being a RIPE chair, requires a huge amount of spare/private and vacation time and an employer (if not self-employed) that would see the value or benefit of employing the RIPE Chair.. and there is the ‘stress’ especially if it is busy at the office (day-job) and seeing issues that would demand your attention, with a community with its huge size …
Currently it is my expectation that the RIPE chair position is consuming more than 14 weeks of work in its current way how Hans-Petter is running the position. And that is currently unpaid … Obviously not everything is covered in this by his vacation days .. and it is not that he is sitting idle on his hands at his day job.
If the RIPE Chair position would be a full time position, it would allow the RIPE chair to attend more regional NOG meetings, member lunches, other RIR meetings or ICANN meetings or help with more Governance discussions with the various Governments that require our communities perspective. Or talks about GDPR or alike … It would be good for the community if the RIPE Chair would and could position/voice the community view, which may or may not be similar or be voiced differently in meetings with governments or ICANN meetings, apart from the view of the RIPE NCC itself.
The role as RIPE chair is in many ways very similar to the AD / IESG membership positions in the IETF except they are virtually full time. I am not convinced about your idea for a number of reasons. First, I am not sure we need a separate body that work on GDPR etc as we have the NCC staff working on that. Duplicating this doesn’t seem like a good use of funds and resources. Secondly, if we employ a chair it would have to be more static as few people would leave an existing job for a five year contact and I worry that will limit the selection pool. Last, creating a legal entity that represents the RIPE community requires a lot more formalisation of how that legal entity registers members, policy etc. and I am not convinced we want that. I think it is great you raise this issue as we should explore it but for me the negatives currently outweighs the positives. Best Regards, - kurtis -
Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
The role as RIPE chair is in many ways very similar to the AD / IESG membership positions in the IETF except they are virtually full time. I am not convinced about your idea for a number of reasons. First, I am not sure we need a separate body that work on GDPR etc as we have the NCC staff working on that. Duplicating this doesn’t seem like a good use of funds and resources. Secondly, if we employ a chair it would have to be more static as few people would leave an existing job for a five year contact and I worry that will limit the selection pool. Last, creating a legal entity that represents the RIPE community requires a lot more formalisation of how that legal entity registers members, policy etc. and I am not convinced we want that.
this doesn't solve the problem that anyone who might be interested in performing RIPE Chair duties either needs to do so on zero income or else needs to find an employer who is happy to subsidise this position for several years. This also limits the pool of available candidates. Regarding the comparison between RIPE Chair and IETF AD / IESG, it's viable although busy to have a day job when holding AD / IESG positions, but I get the impression that the RIPE Chair position is more demanding time-wise due to the travel commitments. Nick
On 24 Nov 2017, at 23:15, Erik Bais <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote:
Dear RIPE community members and RIPE Exec Board,
As proposed during the GM in Dubai, I would like to discuss if it is possible to change the Chair position of RIPE into a full-time paid position.
I have mixed feelings about this. I think the post could be a paid one, but perhaps on a part-time rather than full-time basis. Chairman of RIPE takes up a lot of time and it doesn’t seem right that whoever has that position needs to rely on the goodwill of their employer if they happen to have a day job. This could also diminish the pool of candidates to pick from whenever there’s a vacancy: only those with a generous and supportive employer need apply. Or when the ideal choice is able to arrange unpaid leave from $dayjob, they’d need compensation for that loss of income. So maybe this is where NCC support could help. I also think we’re well past the point where certain leadership responsibilities can expect to be operated on a volunteer, best-efforts basis. [This is true across the Internet sector, not just at RIPE. Someone here mentioned the IETF’s Area Directors for example.] We need to adapt as circumstances change. The RIPE community today is a very different thing from what it was in its early days. The role of a volunteer, unpaid Chairman we had back then might well be unsustainable now. On the other hand, this approach further blurs the boundaries between RIPE and RIPE NCC. That’s probably a bad thing. It will also create conflicts of interest. Suppose the RIPE Chairman has to ask the NCC to do something that the RIPE community has agreed but isn’t fully accepted the NCC membership. Imagine the difficulties at the NCC AGM, assuming the RIPE Chairman was allowed to attend: “Why are we paying your salary to propose stuff we don’t accept?”. If the NCC pays the RIPE Chairman’s salary, this will create undesirable opportunities for the NCC membership to interfere and micro-manage. For instance demanding the RIPE Chairman obeys or is somehow accountable to the NCC membership instead of the RIPE Community. That could get awkward even when the NCC membership and RIPE Community are in violent agreement about everything. We should think *very* carefully before going down that path. Turning this into a paid position is likely to attract unwelcome candidates for the job. ie They want to become RIPE Chairman for the lavish salary and fine dinners rather than to represent the interests of the RIPE community. This will be even more of a concern if we end up making the mistake of using elections to appoint Hans Petter’s successor. Perhaps the best approach here would be a lightweight mechanism like the one available to ICANN board members: another volunteeer position with very demanding commitments. Stipends are available to board members who ask for them. These payments cover (part of) the salaries from their dayjobs and ICANN gets board members who in theory are able dedicate enough of their time to those duties. That way, board members are not limited to those who have understanding employers that can underwrite their employee’s ICANN board duties. IIUC not all ICANN board members get paid by ICANN. Maybe we could try something similar?
Hi, I wanted to provide a small update on this as some of us probably just got through their email backlog from the holidays. On the Exec Board minutes (yes, someone actually reads them … ), there is an action item that will provide some more insight on the duties of the Chair. https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2017/minutes-115th-exe... ➢ ACTION EB389 / 14/12/2017 / NT ➢ Nigel Titley to send an email to the RIPE community, inviting discussion on the topic of remuneration for the RIPE Chair. I have read the remarks of some of the community members, but will wait to respond until we get more details on this from Nigel. Regards, Erik Bais
There are two separate strands to Erik’s proposal so it’s best to split these into discrete threads.
On 24 Nov 2017, at 23:15, Erik Bais <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote:
Dear RIPE community members and RIPE Exec Board,
The RIPE community currently doesn’t have its own Governing entity .. we say, we are the community .. but the community doesn’t have its own entity.
What I would propose, is to setup a separate entity … with a small separate board.
No. Emphatically not. This is a remarkably bad idea. [1] RIPE is not incorporated anywhere and has no legal identity, just like the IETF. This is deliberate. It’s also very, very important. RIPE can’t be sued or enter into contracts or get taxed or have to file audited accounts. Creating a governing entity would destroy that. [2] It’s far from clear what this new body’s board would do (or how) or how they’d be appointed. Trying to clarify these issues will open up zillions of rat-holes and provide endless opportunities for shed-painting. These may well never get resolved. [3] It’s not clear at all what problem(s) this new body would solve. Or if those problem(s) are worth solving. Or how the new body would/could/should be better than what we already have. Which IMO is working just fine, is not broken and doesn’t need fixing. [4] Creating this new board will create unnecessary process bloat, new prospects for mission creep (budgets, general meetings, etc) and even more sclerotic decision making. Remember the golden rule of every bureacracy is to ensure its continued existence. The best (only?) way to stop that is not create the bureaucracy in the first place. [5] The community should simply just appoint the RIPE Chairman (and vice Chairman?) and trust them to get on with it. Our Dear Leader doesn’t need to be overseen by yet another committee => more bureaucracy => yet another baroque temple to procedures/process.
Erik, Thank you for taking the time to bring up this discussion both at the GM and here. I don't think that my feelings from the GM have changed, however. I do not think that making the RIPE Chair a paid, full time, position is a good idea. A number of people have raised some of these points in this conversation already. While there is a huge amount of privilege inherent in either being wealthy enough to not need to work a full time job while being RIPE Chair or working in a job that enables the position, I believe this is the lesser of two evils. Whether the money is coming directly from the NCC or through some complicated corporate structure including Dublin, Amsterdam and the Cayman Islands the money would still be coming from somewhere, or rather, some people. This would dramatically change how the RIPE Community is seen and how it can be influenced. I can envisage all sorts of worse case scenarios here, but even in the normal course of events it raises the question of who this paid Chair would answer to; the Community or the funders? I also (and yes, I know this will shock Jim) see no reason for yet another structure in our community, yet another Board (and are they being compensated for their time) etc. etc. I also fear the trickle down here as other active members of the Community start to look at how much time they spend on activities and we start to talk about direct compensation there as well. A volunteer RIPE Chair is not a perfect situation and I agree with many of the issues you raise, but I don't believe a full time, paid, position is a better situation. Brian Brian Nisbet Network Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 On 24/11/2017 23:15, Erik Bais wrote:
Dear RIPE community members and RIPE Exec Board,
As proposed during the GM in Dubai, I would like to discuss if it is possible to change the Chair position of RIPE into a full-time paid position.
I would like to explain why this might be good for the community and my thinking behind it.
As one might expect, being a RIPE chair, requires a huge amount of spare/private and vacation time and an employer (if not self-employed) that would see the value or benefit of employing the RIPE Chair.. and there is the ‘stress’ especially if it is busy at the office (day-job) and seeing issues that would demand your attention, with a community with its huge size …
Currently it is my expectation that the RIPE chair position is consuming more than 14 weeks of work in its current way how Hans-Petter is running the position. And that is currently unpaid …
Obviously not everything is covered in this by his vacation days .. and it is not that he is sitting idle on his hands at his day job.
If the RIPE Chair position would be a full time position, it would allow the RIPE chair to attend more regional NOG meetings, member lunches, other RIR meetings or ICANN meetings or help with more Governance discussions with the various Governments that require our communities perspective. Or talks about GDPR or alike …
It would be good for the community if the RIPE Chair would and could position/voice the community view, which may or may not be similar or be voiced differently in meetings with governments or ICANN meetings, apart from the view of the RIPE NCC itself.
The RIPE community currently doesn’t have its own Governing entity .. we say, we are the community .. but the community doesn’t have its own entity.
What I would propose, is to setup a separate entity … with a small separate board.
The RIPE Community board role would be to act as a management oversight.. they would be make sure that the finances of the new RIPE Community entity are in balance and to assist with possible Chair rotations ( interviews for future candidates etc. ) but also act as peers in discussions for the Chair in certain more delicate situations / discussions that the Chair might face)
Obviously should the finances in consolidated form, be open for the community.
Currently we have a great Chair.. and I think Hans Petter is doing a stellar job, but it is my question if this particular point should be updated. And I think it should.
What I like to see is that the Chair position is going to be funded by a 6 year grant from the membership fees via the RIPE NCC. And the position itself would be for an initial 5 year with 1 optional renewal of 5 year by RIPE Community Board approval. So a max of 10 years in total for the position per named person (Chair).
The idea behind the 6 year rolling grant, is to make sure that the RIPE Chair will never get in a position where the RIPE NCC might cut the funding because of unpopular decisions towards the RIPE NCC.
If the Chair (after being a Chair for 10 years) is rotated, I think the former Chair should have no problem getting another position, if one of his primary roles is to network or communicate with members in the community.
His/her role should provide sufficient connections for other activities after the RIPE Chair position.
As a Community, we have a voice and the community makes policy. And the RIPE NCC is the company that operates based on the guidance of those policy on behalf of the community and its members.
I would personally like to see the community and membership, be embedded in the new RIPE community setup.
If that would also mean that the new RIPE Community entity should hold (/obtain) the RIPE NCC (company) shares, is something that I like the Exec Board to discuss.
How this should be setup in the governance model, is something I would like to ask the Exec Board to provide in a proposal, once the discussion looks positive …
From a cost perspective, it is my expectation that it would be about 25 to 35 euro per LIR per year … While we look at a refund of 300 euro per year per LIR because of the budget surplus … I don’t think that the cost are going to be an issue.
Regards,
Erik Bais
On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 12:15 AM, Erik Bais <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote:
Dear RIPE community members and RIPE Exec Board,
As proposed during the GM in Dubai, I would like to discuss if it is possible to change the Chair position of RIPE into a full-time paid position.
I have _very_ mixed feelings about this suggestion. I will explore it in two different direction I see in it... 1.) First off, when you say "full-time paid position" we are talking about a _job_, a job need some sort of formal instruction and formality around it. It is really just the first step in re-creating RIPE NCC, are we that unhappy with what they do? We could change from "full-time paid position" to let's say "compensated position" and it is a bit better but it's still just the first step in re-creating RIPE NCC. After the chair (whoever it is) it is only a question of time before the chair need a personal assistant to keep up with the work, organize things, and in general help out. Then we pay for 2 people. With 2 people onboard - what's next? you also talked about a board, even more formality.. 2.) If that position require that much time as it is now, are we, RIPE community on the wrong road? Are we doing too much on our own? Shouldn't RIPE NCC really be the one that does all the hard work so we can focus on the discussion and policies? Are we asking too much from the chair? .... I don't have any answers really - but it is a understandable suggestion, but it's a very slippery and problematic road to start on... -- Roger Jorgensen rogerj@gmail.com / roger@jorgensen.no
participants (7)
-
Brian Nisbet -
Erik Bais -
Jim Reid -
Kurt Erik Lindqvist -
Leslie -
Nick Hilliard -
Roger Jørgensen