2010 Board Report

[CrazyEel]

A good read, it will no doubt ease the concerns of many voting members in the wider community out there but doubt it will have any effect on the combatants on these forums.

As with all the media stories people pick and choose and believe whatever supports their emotions and just disregard anything else.

 

[eels81236]

What do you think of the rorts of the previous board?

With all due respect... WTF does that have to do with Bart's opinion of this current board?

 

[ParraAds]

A good read, it will no doubt ease the concerns of many voting members in the wider community out there but doubt it will have any effect on the combatants on these forums.

As with all the media stories people pick and choose and believe whatever supports their emotions and just disregard anything else.

Ease the concerns? Did you vote for Labor as well?

 

[ParraAds]

IMHO, they have made a huge (and amateur) mistake in commenting at all on matters which are currently the subject of hearings before the Supreme Court and Fair Work Australia.

They have also erred in reporting as 'fact' matters which are subject of both proceedings.

The highlighting (in bold) of the words 'unlawful' and 'inappropriate' in the leadup to discussion of both matters is clearly designed to bring attention to, and elicit a predetermined perspective by the reader, of both matters.

I'm sure that the board report will now become a part of both proceedings, and will not show the board in a good light.

Exactly, publishing this kind of document on website is just insanity. Look at how many names are mentioned there, it seems to me that you can't just broadcast your 'version' of a persons dismissal like this. Whether there are elements of truth to each one is not relevant, the complete lack of discretion in broadcasting these stories to the 'world' reeks of desperation and if I was one of the names mentioned I'd be having a good long chat to my lawyer.

Combine this with the fact that it conveniently leaves out so much information about other employment matters (i.e. hiring process of current seniour management) as well as the dismissals of several others who I assume couldn't be justified. I think 'our board' will deeply regret this move.

 

[Jake the snake]

With all due respect... WTF does that have to do with Bart's opinion of this current board?

You seem upset.

 

[Gronk]

You seem upset.

You seem obsessed.

 

[Ollie Webb]

Originally Posted by Parrads

Combine this with the fact that it conveniently leaves out so much information about other employment matters (i.e. hiring process of current seniour management) as well as the dismissals of several others who I assume couldn't be justified. I think 'our board' will deeply regret this move.

Why are you so concerned about the hiring of current senior managment?
Was the former COO who conveniently failed to tender for building contracts or overspent by $2.6m on the new building recruited via an extensive recruitment exercise. Don't think so!
Did the previous Boards appoint the former CEO via a recruitment exercise? NO! It is not uncommon for internal appointments in business.

The new facilities manager has been on the Club's property and assets commitee for more than 10 years, with both post and current administrations! He also has extensive experience in the building industry, skills I would have thought appropiate to the job.

Boards don't need to get the approval of members on recruitment processes or terminations!

 

[ParraAds]

Originally Posted by Parrads

Combine this with the fact that it conveniently leaves out so much information about other employment matters (i.e. hiring process of current seniour management) as well as the dismissals of several others who I assume couldn't be justified. I think 'our board' will deeply regret this move.

Why are you so concerned about the hiring of current senior managment?
Was the former COO who conveniently failed to tender for building contracts or overspent by $2.6m on the new building recruited via an extensive recruitment exercise. Don't think so!
Did the previous Boards appoint the former CEO via a recruitment exercise? NO! It is not uncommon for internal appointments in business.

The new facilities manager has been on the Club's property and assets commitee for more than 10 years, with both post and current administrations! He also has extensive experience in the building industry, skills I would have thought appropiate to the job.

Boards don't need to get the approval of members on recruitment processes or terminations![/QUOTE]


Then why are they now trying to justify the terminations of all those people mentioned? Maybe to get some approval from the members you reckon?

I suppose desperate times call for desperate measures, this attempt at being proactive will just cause more problems for your heroes on the board.

 

[CrazyEel]

Ease the concerns? Did you vote for Labor as well?

Of course it does, the fickle majority out there didn't want to get bogged down in all the he said she said crap anyway so a short official "don't worry" is all they ever wanted. Like it or not most members just don't care about the politics enough to let it affect them for more than a week, they have moved on already.

Besides, you understand how chinese whispers work anyway ;-)

 

[Maroubra Eel]

I agree ParraAds. It's pretty obvious what's going on with this Ollie Webb poster.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Lol the new facilities manager has been on a committee for 10 years. Obviously qualified!

 

[eels81236]

You seem upset.

Not at all, mate. I just thought your answer may help me make what I consider a valid point. You may appreciate it.
It would be near on impossible getting you to perhaps see reason as your hatred of DF appears to be clouding your vision. Atleast that is what I am getting from reading your posts of late. Perhaps you and I together could help you see more clearly?

I didn't think that a "hatred" of DF and a "love" of 3P were mutually exclusive.

I thought you could be glad that DF is gone but still not concede the sun shines out of the current boards collective arse. On the other side of the coin, I thought that you could be totally unhappy with 3P's performance yet still not want DF and co. back.

Maybe it is just me, but when I sit back and try to think about it logically I can obviously see a little more grey than your constant black and white view on the politics that is Parra Leagues.

 

[CrazyEel]

Not at all, mate. I just thought your answer may help me make what I consider a valid point. You may appreciate it.
It would be near on impossible getting you to perhaps see reason as your hatred of DF appears to be clouding your vision. Atleast that is what I am getting from reading your posts of late. Perhaps you and I together could help you see more clearly?

I didn't think that a "hatred" of DF and a "love" of 3P were mutually exclusive.

I thought you could be glad that DF is gone but still not concede the sun shines out of the current boards collective arse. On the other side of the coin, I thought that you could be totally unhappy with 3P's performance yet still not want DF and co. back.

Maybe it is just me, but when I sit back and try to think about it logically I can obviously see a little more grey than your constant black and white view on the politics that is Parra Leagues.

I agree with you but to be fair to jake he is not doing anything that is not being done by his opposites, there are quite a few with no shades of grey.

 

[eels81236]

I agree ParraAds. It's pretty obvious what's going on with this Ollie Webb poster.

Security don't even ease themselves into the joint these days. Straight for the jugular.

 

[eels81236]

I agree with you but to be fair to jake he is not doing anything that is not being done by his opposites, there are quite a few with no shades of grey.

Agreed. But in Jakes case... The squeakiest wheel gets the grease.

 

[CrazyEel]

Agreed. But in Jakes case... The squeakiest wheel gets the grease.

Mate he's not the squeakiest, not by a long shot, since I've consigned the squeakiest to my "ignore list" most threads fit on a single page :lol:

 

[lingard]

I agree ParraAds. It's pretty obvious what's going on with this Ollie Webb poster.

He`s come here for a bit of social discourse, and to enjoy the cameraderie of other people who share his interest in football? :sarcasm:

 

[eels81236]

Mate he's not the squeakiest, not by a long shot, since I've consigned the squeakiest to my "ignore list" most threads fit on a single page :lol:

Well I can't put him on ignore. I'm not as rude as you ;-). I will say that it has been a long time since I've gotten to line 3 of his posts. :lol:

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Why are you so concerned about the hiring of current senior managment?
Was the former COO who conveniently failed to tender for building contracts or overspent by $2.6m on the new building recruited via an extensive recruitment exercise. Don't think so!
Did the previous Boards appoint the former CEO via a recruitment exercise? NO! It is not uncommon for internal appointments in business.

The new facilities manager has been on the Club's property and assets commitee for more than 10 years, with both post and current administrations! He also has extensive experience in the building industry, skills I would have thought appropiate to the job.

Boards don't need to get the approval of members on recruitment processes or terminations!

Just as an aside, shouldn't positions like that of CEO be tendered out in order to find the best candidate for the job?

Our former COO failed to tender and this has apparently resulted in poor decisions that have cost us. So if failing to tender can lead to such negative results, isn't it dangerous to fail to tender for such important positions as CEO?

Now, I'm not speaking out against any current employee of our Club via this post but you seem unaware of the fact that you are criticising in one area but endorsing the same practise in another area despite the fact it could lead to the same results.

 

[bartman]

What do you think of the rorts of the previous board?

I'm still digesting the report. I need to give it another read before forming and typing an opinion, rather than just spouting the first thing that comes into my mind. So far, I think Gronk's post is the best analysis I've read on here.

With all due respect... WTF does that have to do with Bart's opinion of this current board?

It's Jake, he's still stuck in Fitzy-hate land... without wanting to realise the current board have to be judged on their own performances this time around.

You seem upset.

:lol: Very childish response. Maybe come back when you have something to add other than to flag-wave for your 3P heroes?