<html>
<body>
I am obviously missing something here.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
Regardless of the details, as the steward of the names function, is not
likely to be inclined to take action to sabotage things.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
At 29/05/2016 07:48 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
Greg <br><br>
<br>
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Gomes, Chuck
<<a href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com">cgomes@verisign.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<dl>
<dd>Good questions Alissa.<br><br>
<dd>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.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
<dd>Chuck<br>
</font><br>
<dd>-----Original Message-----<br>
<dd>From:
<a href="mailto:iotf-bounces@icann.org">iotf-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:iotf-bounces@icann.org" eudora="autourl">
mailto:iotf-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Alissa Cooper<br>
<dd>Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 2:12 AM<br>
<dd>To: Alissa Cooper via Iotf<br>
<dd>Subject: [IOTF] Question on PTI implementation approach<br><br>
<dd>Hi all,<br><br>
<dd>Apologies that I have not been able to make the last few
calls.<br><br>
<dd>I was reviewing the PTI implementation approach document and I
noticed that Section 2.3 says:<br><br>
<dd>"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.”<br><br>
<dd>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?<br><br>
<dd>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)?<br><br>
<dd>I read through the transcript for call #10 but did not see these
questions raised on the call.<br><br>
<dd>Thanks,<br>
<dd>Alissa<br>
<dd>_______________________________________________<br>
<dd>IOTF mailing list<br>
<dd><a href="mailto:IOTF@icann.org">IOTF@icann.org</a><br>
<dd><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf</a><br>
<dd>_______________________________________________<br>
<dd>IOTF mailing list<br>
<dd><a href="mailto:IOTF@icann.org">IOTF@icann.org</a><br>
<dd><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf</a><br><br>
</dl><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<br>
Content-Disposition: inline<br>
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>
1;SN1PR0301MB2030;9:0+ZiF373MgecgwhfjdnXDj9HBCxQlxBfcYlS6xEgVnnZsuI8gFRsXN/m+rAP6oPjL+vN+5XlPhm/+EVYFquY8LJBrCmI4P+SUs/O8moMS3LX/znyb34B3xoIJbiSSwuTdOrLmtt24VsigyO6F5MHw0/nQ6D5Za/ieTviw6oJQbAmSIAzS38lY4IxJeAnFWMw<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
IOTF mailing list<br>
IOTF@icann.org<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf</a></blockquote></body>
</html>