[ripe-list] Proposal for a full-time position for the RIPE Chair

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 at 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
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
>