Thank you for posting the facts and I was pleased to see the construction issue is addressed in the contract with the hotel. On Aug 11, 2014, at 6:48 AM, Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Aug 9, 2014, at 2:06 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> >> --On Saturday, August 09, 2014 13:42 -0400 Ray Pelletier >> <rpelletier@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Mary >>> >>> Thanks for the questions. >>> >>> There is construction at the Hilton Hawaiian Village, but >>> during IETF 91 there will be no construction Monday through >>> Thursday. Construction will resume on Friday. >> >> Ray, >> >> I hate to ask this question but how confident are you about >> those promises? Several of us have not-very-fond memories of >> what I assume was a large rotary hammer/ drill at the Fairmont >> (or several of them) but I'd assume the hotel would consider >> that "a little drilling" or "preparation for the next round of >> construction" not "construction". So > > The construction referred to at Fairmont was not actually construction > being conducted by the hotel, but by the City of Toronto. > >> >> (1) Do you have a clear agreement about what constitutes >> "construction" in the contract, ideally one that you would be >> willing to share with us? > > There is no definition of construction in the contract. The agreement states: > > “The Hotel has received confirmation and agrees to stop construction > during the dates of November 10 - 13, 2014, inclusive. Construction will > resume on Friday, November 14, 2014, from 09:00 to 5:00pm; normal > construction schedule is Monday through Friday, 09:00am - 5:00pm. > There will be no construction on Saturday and Sunday.” > >> >> (2) If there is any ambiguity in that agreement, does the hotel, >> an outside contractor, or we get to decide whether something is >> "construction" or not? (Clearly we didn't have much useful >> input at the Fairmont because they were drilling/hammering all >> week). > > This was not a Fairmont issue. Construction was being conducted by the > City of Toronto and not within our control or within the control of the Fairmont. > > There will be no construction over the weekends or between Monday > through Thursday of our event. > >> >> (3) Are the provisions of that agreement strong enough that, if >> the prohibition were violated, the hotel would feel serious >> pain, not just, e.g., the guarantee that we would never return >> and/or the need to discount a few rooms? > > There is no “serious pain” penalty provision in the contract addressing > violation of the Hotel’s agreement to cease construction during our meeting. > Our long-standing relationship with Hilton and their commercial interest in our > continued/repeat business is our leverage. > >> >> Finally, if they are able to postpone construction for >> Monday-Thursday, what is the plan for the meetings, classes, and >> side-events that normally occur on Saturday and Sunday? We've >> been in hotels with "no construction during the meeting days" >> promises before when the pre-meeting weekend has been completely >> disrupted. > > As indicated above, construction will not be conducted on Saturday or Sunday. > >> >> Finally, has the IESG agreed to not schedule WG meetings for >> Friday? If not, what is the justification for an agreement that >> could result in its being impossible or at least terribly >> difficult for WGs scheduled on Friday to get work done? > > Or mildly difficult, or not difficult at all just to round out the possibilities. > > The construction itself is not in the buildings where our meetings are being held, > but in another part of the property. Our meeting space is located in the Mid-Pacific > Conference Center, which is separated from the construction site by the Tapa > Convention Center and the Tapa Tower. > > We will discuss the nature of the construction work being done to see if we can > further minimize any impact on Friday’s sessions. > > Ray > > >> >> john >> > >