ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100

2017-01-31 07:37:58
You can buy trip insurance many times from the company from whom you've
purchased the ticket (at least in the US).   It's a nominal fee and covers
a portion of the change fee, etc.

I personally can't fathom that IETF would be responsible for your change
fees, but I'm also not a lawyer.  I'd be curious to see legal precedent as
a quick search I found implies that airfare is not refundable if an event
is cancelled.  Certainly, the meeting fee should be totally reimbursed with
no cancellation fee.

Regards,
Mary.

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 7:20 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <
jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es> wrote:

I don’t think it is relevant if this happens to 2 participants or 20 or
200. For those that pay from their own pocket the traveling expenses and
IETF registration fee, saving a 10-20% or whatever is the saving, is very
relevant and it is our right to do so.

When IETF makes an official announcement of a venue, according to law, IT
IS a contractual announcement and is liable for damages and expenses if
that’s changed.

I’m not a lawyer, however, I checked this with an American lawyer a few
years ago, when I suggested the first time for the need to the insurance,
and I was working in the first version of the venue-selection-criteria ID.
I don’t think laws changed in those years about this.

Even if it is a refundable ticket, the expenses to change or refund that,
will be also responsibility of the IETF, unless there is what laws call
“overwhelming force”, which it most of the cases will be only accepted by
courts if there is no chance for 99% of the participants to held the
meeting (venue collapsed because a fire, earthquake, or something similar).

I think at that time, somebody suggested that it will be cheaper for IETF
to cover those expenses (in case of cancellation) to those that may claim
it than paying for the insurance for each meeting, but I’m not really sure
that’s correct. Have we tried to get quotes for that insurance?

Regards,
Jordi


-----Mensaje original-----
De: ietf <ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> en nombre de Yoav Nir <
ynir(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
Responder a: <ynir(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
Fecha: martes, 31 de enero de 2017, 13:41
Para: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es>
CC: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100


    > On 31 Jan 2017, at 11:56, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <
jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es> wrote:
    >
    > I was referring in general, not a specific meeting.
    >
    > For the 2018 SF meeting, I will buy my ticket around July-August
2017. I always do one year in advance, same for the hotel if I can book a
cheaper nearby (to the venue) hotel.

    I’m pretty sure you’re in a minority doing that. I can’t even get the
OK for making the trip more than 4 months in advance.

    > Most of the airlines, according to my experience, sell lower price
non-refundable tickets 11-12 months ahead.

    Buying non-refundable tickets is your choice. I don’t see why it needs
to become a cost for the IETF (whether through refunding or through
insurance). My employer (and I’m sure many others) only buys refundable
tickets so they are free to cancel my trip on short notice.

    > So, we should rule something in the line that an IETF cancellation
insurance must cover the expenses of bookings for that. If we can’t cover
that, we MUST NOT cancel a meeting,

    “MUST NOT”?  What if Earth’s youngest volcano is standing where the
venue used to be? Still MUST NOT? San Francisco is always at risk of an
earthquake. It doesn’t even have to be “the big one” to make it impossible
to meet. Still MUST NOT?  And the eastern US has hurricanes, Europe has
frosts and Japan has Kaiju. Do we still meet?

    > otherwise, the participants that made that expense, have the legal
right to claim to the ISOC/IETF the associated expenses, and I’m sure they
will get it, if a court is involved.

    Meeting fee? Probably. Travel expenses? I doubt it.

    > This brings to the idea that, when we select countries for hosting
the IETF, we should consider, political changes that may affect
participants. Of course, we don’t have the crystal ball, but in the case of
actual US situation, I think the chances were so high, that we made a
mistake going to Chicago. As it may affect a significant % of participants.

    I don’t think this was at all predictable.

    > Now, we have, depending on the contract signed for SF, the chance to
move that meeting, but only if we do it right now, not in 6 months from
now, as that will impact people that may have already booked flights and
hotels.

    I don’t think our meetings committee should be constrained like that.
There might be some guidance to be given by mtgvenue for this, but I don’t
think that this should be a considerations if changes are made at least 6
months in advance.

    Yoav






**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>