Re: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ Exec Secretary March T&L Funding
I vote APPROVE, but with reservations.
Regardless of the bungled "without precedent" wording in the motion, or even
the intended meaning behind it, I would respectfully point out that whatever
decisions we make, and however we might try to ring-fence them with weasel
words, they DO create a precedent - they are decisions that one way or
another inform what we do subsequently. We're not operating in a court of
law; that being the case, the legal definitions around precedent don't
apply, so all a precedent is in the context of the EC is a decision that we
made in the past. So attempting to say "We decide X without creating a
precedent" is futile and totally ineffective. In reality all we have are
good decisions and bad decisions; hopefully, we can figure out which are
which and not repeat the bad ones. So frankly I could care less about the
"Without precedent" words - even if the wording had been "correct", they
would have no binding force of any kind upon any later EC decisions.
The decision we made over Arnie's reimbursement had an aspect which I don't
much like - and that was our tacit decision to accept that the SA has the
right to dictate how we spend our constituents' money, which I believe was a
bad decision and one that we should not repeat. The principle should have
been "no representation without taxation"; i.e., we should have rejected the
SA's attempt to force us along the path of their choosing as it wasn't their
money to spend. We should have treated their direction as a suggestion only,
and then decided the situation on its merits. My guess is that we would
likely have reached the same conclusion (to fund Arnie), because we didn't
have many (any?) other alternatives on the table, but at least we would have
done it for the right reasons. So I don't think the decision to fund Arnie
was a bad one in itself; however, the reason we took the decision was a bad
one.
Whatever decision we take in this case will be a bad one from some point of
view. If we fund Buzz's attendance in March, then we may have to deal with
future demands of the form "You funded him, so why not fund me too?", but
actually, we are already there as a result of the decision over Arnie, and
the fact that we have made N bad decisions in the past is never a reason to
make a N+1th bad one in the future. If we decide NOT to fund Buzz, we make
life difficult for ourselves in the running of the March meeting, and
arguably run the risk of losing more than the proposed $1000 on the cost of
the meeting. So on balance, I think funding Buzz's expenses is the least
worst option that we have in front of us. However, if we continue on through
the rest of the year without fixing this problem in an acceptable way (i.e.,
establishing part or all of the Exec Sec job on a properly contracted and
funded basis), then we are going to create a train wreck of major
proportions.
I believe the discussion around endorsement letters and what those mean in
terms of obligations etc. is a red herring - all such a letter can ever be
is an indication of best intentions, not a firm commitment to support. Stuff
happens - 2 years ago, the world was very different from how it is today.
On the subject of travel policies, I support Geoff's view - we shouldn't use
the IEEE staff travel policy as the basis for deciding what is acceptable. I
have no problem with the wording of the motion as it stands in that regard -
I'm sure that if Buzz claims for expenses that we believe are not
"reasonable and customary", I have no doubt that we will let him know.
Regards,
Tony
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-
> SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John Hawkins
> Sent: 27 January 2010 7:20 PM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ Exec Secretary March T&L
> Funding
>
> Folks,
>
> Paul has authorized the following motion for your consideration. Based
> on our previous discussion on the topic, this is what I think can get
> us an answer to this question to cover the next meeting. Much more
> discussion will follow in Orlando on the longer term solution. For
> now, please vote your preference one way or the other.
>
> Motion:
> Without precedent, the EC approves the use of IEEE 802 resources for
> reimbursement of reasonable and customary expenses for Buzz Rigsbee,
> such that he may continue to execute his duties as the IEEE 802
> Executive Secretary, for the March 2010 plenary. Such reimbursement
> will be not to exceed $1,000
>
> Moved: John Hawkins
> Seconded: Steve Shellhammer
>
> Start of ballot: Tuesday 27th January, 2010
> Close of ballot: Saturday 6th February, 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.
>
> ----------
> 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.