And who is in charge? Linda Watt, Chief Operating Officer, is in charge. She needs to be held accountable for her hideous mismanagement of the story. She failed to use responsible communications that could have saved us this travesty.
Here's what Nathaniel Pierce wrote:
Nathaniel Pierce is correct. That would have been responsible and honest. But that’s not the course Linda Watt chose. Why didn’t she? Time and again, she opts for duplicity. Why does she never opt for transparency with our church?
... imagine a different scenario. The Church Center puts out a public statement in early January. It says something like this:
-- describes the RFP process
-- speaks candidly about the business issues involved
-- acknowledges D-047 passed by ... GC and its relevance to this situation
-- identifies the various issues which were weighed by TEC staff, especially union vs. non-union
-- announces decision; notes that new firm is minority owned, has a strong record of treating employees fairly
-- shares how the Church Center said good-bye to those who had served there, some for many years
Now then, what would have been accomplished by such a scenario?
1) TEC puts the story out there -- we are ahead of the curve (this is PR 101). This avoids being put in the position of reacting to a bombshell story.
2) TEC demonstrates its sensitivity to the issues involved, thereby avoiding the appearance of being deaf to the social justice ramifications
3) A feeling of openness and transparency is communicated to traditionally skeptical folks like me.
4) What is left to criticize? Decent folks clearly struggled with all the issues and then made a decision. I might disagree with the outcome, but would feel comforted by the fact that all the important issues were considered.
My friends, she has run rough-shod over many faithful employees at our Church Center. This is just the most recent in a long series of bad judgments.