[IOTF] Question on PTI implementation approach

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Mon May 30 00:49:59 UTC 2016


I am obviously missing something here.

In that case of "separation" ICANN would still be 
the steward of the IANA names functions. It would 
be the entity contracting with the successor of 
PTI. So it could well make arrangements for the 
employees to continue with the successor 
organization. Or not if the employees were in fact part of the problem.

Regardless of the details, as the steward of the 
names function, is not likely to be inclined to take action to sabotage things.

Alan

At 29/05/2016 07:48 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:

>I think it does mean that ICANN will allow its 
>seconded employees to leave the employ of ICANN 
>and go to PTI or to a successor (if that's the 
>way the separation is occurring).  I can't see 
>any other interpretation.  As Chuck points out, 
>it also seems to assure these ICANN employees 
>that, if they do not want to join PTI/successor 
>or are not offered a job there, that they will 
>have the option of continuing as ICANN employees.
>
>The secondment scenario does create some concern 
>that ICANN could encourage these employees to 
>stay with ICANN in the event of a separation (or 
>to put it another way, discourage these 
>employees from moving from secondee to employee 
>within the IANA provider (PTI or 
>successor)).  This could have negative security 
>and stability impacts.  We may want an assurance 
>from ICANN that it will not solicit or otherwise 
>encourage the seconded employees to remain ICANN 
>employees rather than continue to be part of the 
>IANA provider.  I could see some awkward moments otherwise.
>
>Greg
>
>
>On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Gomes, Chuck 
><<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>cgomes at verisign.com> wrote:
>Good questions Alissa.
>
>It seems to me that with or without the sentence 
>you quote, the affected employees would have the 
>three options assuming that the applicable 
>organizations gave them the employment 
>option.  Like you say, ICANN may not have any 
>control over what the successor might do, but it 
>is at least committing to offer employment to 
>the seconded employees if they want it so this 
>clause may be of some assurance to those employees.
>
>Chuck
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: 
><mailto:iotf-bounces at icann.org>iotf-bounces at icann.org 
>[mailto:iotf-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alissa Cooper
>Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 2:12 AM
>To: Alissa Cooper via Iotf
>Subject: [IOTF] Question on PTI implementation approach
>
>Hi all,
>
>Apologies that I have not been able to make the last few calls.
>
>I was reviewing the PTI implementation approach 
>document and I noticed that Section 2.3 says:
>
>"In the event of separation, ICANN commits to an 
>effectuating an orderly transition, including 
>providing the seconded employees the option of 
>employment with the affiliate, the successor, or 
>ICANN. This commitment will be reflected in the 
>naming function contract between ICANN and PTI.”
>
>What does it mean for ICANN to provide the 
>option of employment with the successor? I 
>assume by "successor" what is meant is the new 
>operator to replace PTI, for one or more IANA 
>functions. In that case, ICANN wouldn't likely 
>have the option of offering employment by the 
>successor -- the successor would be a separate 
>organization altogether, which is the point of 
>separation. Does this mean ICANN won't prevent 
>PTI employees from being employed by the 
>successor (e.g., it won’t impose some sort of 
>non-compete agreement)? If that is not what it means, what does it mean?
>
>Also, given that the second sentence says that 
>this commitment will be reflected specifically 
>in the naming function contract, does that mean 
>it will not also apply to the seconded employees 
>performing the other two functions (to the 
>extent that employees are assigned wholly to 
>either or both of the other two functions)?
>
>I read through the transcript for call #10 but 
>did not see these questions raised on the call.
>
>Thanks,
>Alissa
>_______________________________________________
>IOTF mailing list
><mailto:IOTF at icann.org>IOTF at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf
>_______________________________________________
>IOTF mailing list
><mailto:IOTF at icann.org>IOTF at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf
>
>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Disposition: inline
>X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
> 
>1;SN1PR0301MB2030;9:0+ZiF373MgecgwhfjdnXDj9HBCxQlxBfcYlS6xEgVnnZsuI8gFRsXN/m+rAP6oPjL+vN+5XlPhm/+EVYFquY8LJBrCmI4P+SUs/O8moMS3LX/znyb34B3xoIJbiSSwuTdOrLmtt24VsigyO6F5MHw0/nQ6D5Za/ieTviw6oJQbAmSIAzS38lY4IxJeAnFWMw
>
>_______________________________________________
>IOTF mailing list
>IOTF at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iotf/attachments/20160529/0bb19b4e/attachment.html>


More information about the IOTF mailing list