OFFICIAL Wests Tigers Unite: Call to Arms

Status
Not open for further replies.
We definitely need to be able to hear the questions at these type events , same for the after game interviews with coach and captain , I hate it when you get an answer of ,
Yes that was not right ( .? What’s was not right )
Yes very poor decision that one ( what one ). Etc etc
Also I would have asked Charlie when was he informed he had made the board , just to confirm all the potential time lines this board was set up , prior to Xmas , etc , one new director didn’t even make it , ( Rushed maybe )
 
dazza65 said:
For what it’s worth, I applied for one of independent board roles. I’m currently on two other boards after being a CEO for 20 years in medical/healthcare. Life long tigers supporter as well as a level 2 coach and player for 20 odd years. Not directly involved in sport in a management role but have been on different committees over the years, one being with Balmain back with George Stone, if anyone remembers him.
Anyway,I didn’t expect to be appointed but I’m very interested, obviously, with the way the wt have been managed lately at board level and I thought I would see the process. I must say it seemed fairly thorough and I actually interviewed 3 times. In the end their position was even though I was “eminently qualified” as an independent board memberI didn’t fit the bill in sports experience and what I believe they meant as “networked” enough.
The only thing I would say is that, from general discussions, I think they had already decided on several positions and that it would be 50/50 gendered. My impression,not their comments, instead of the best 4 applicants, regardless of gender etc.
Overall I’m relatively happy with the appointments, we shall see.
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing
 
GCfan said:
Surely you’re not claiming that outcomes can’t be controlled despite the term “independent”?

Elevate are being paid by someone, certain outcomes can be influenced / delivered if there is a desire to do so.
Click to expand...

Had a chuckle when old mate said he was a life long 'Wests Tigers' fan...
Musta been born at 30 odd.
 
Quotas is a slippery slope and creates a lot of angst in the workforce whether it be based on gender, race or any other form of discrimination. If I have the law rigth you can't positively discriminate; ie only select a person based on them having a minority representation in an organisation; however, you can take positive action. If there is an under represented group and you want to increase participation you can select a less represented person only if they are equally fit for the job.

I expect with the growth of female participation in Rugby League trying to get to 50% participation at the top of the tree whene the decision making occurs is worthwhile. I don't have any issues with the perssonnel selected for the board or the makeup, of course providing we aren't missing out on talent or opportunities (which would be a breach of the law).

The problem occurs when quotas become something that have to be achieved so that manager X is seen as supporting diversity so they can move up the laddder. I have personally been affected by having a less qualified, but definitely capable, individual selected before me. Chatting with the individual afterwards they felt bad because they didn't think that they were promoted on merit so we both had a bit of a sour taste in our mouth. They went on to be successful in the role - but I didn't get to bring home additional salary to look after my family better. A casualty of positive action to make the world a better place I guess.

On the other side of the coin I worked in the US where they definitely have positive discrimination as policy in many institutions. Where I worked you had to rate the staff, regardless of how good they were, as being above and below the line: 50% either side. However, if you had members of a certain races or gender they had to be split above and below that line as well. So if you had two underperforming members of a certain group and four good to excellent employees from another group one of the underperformers would be classed as above the line. This affected promotion opportunites, take home pay etc. In time some of the underperforming personnel ended up being promoted - where they stuffed up badly, but could not be seen to be sacked, so were usually promoted to a position where they could do "less damage".

While I was working there (as an instructor) I was also hauled over the discrimination coals because of the number of unworkable/fails I had dished out to certain groups. I had to explain myself to the grown ups - fortunatley I had records and could explain the decisions and was providing after hours mentoring to get them up to speed. I'm pretty sure the only reason I got away with it was because I was a foreigner on exchange. Had I been a US citizen I think they would have been moved to a less prominent/demanding job.
 
Last edited:
Jolls said:
Quotas is a slippery slope and creates a lot of angst in the workforce whether it be based on gender, race or any other form of discrimination. If I have the law rigth you can't positively discriminate; ie only select a person based on them having a minority representation in an organisation; however, you can take positive action. If there is an under represented group and you want to increase participation you can select a less represented person only if they are equally fit for the job.

I expect with the growth of female participation in Rugby League trying to get to 50% participation at the top of the tree whene the decision making occurs is worthwhile. I don't have any issues with the perssonnel selected for the board or the makeup, of ocurse providing we aren't missing out on talent ot opportunities (which would be a breach of the law).

The problem occurs when quotas become something that have to be achieved so that manager X is seen as supporting diversity so they can move up the laddder. I have personally been affected by having a less qualified, but definitely capable, individual selected before me. Chatting with the individual afterwards they felt bad because they didn't thank that they were promoted on merit so we both had a bit of a sour taste in our mouth. They went on to be successful in the role - but I didn't get to bring home additional salary to look after my family better. A casualty of positive action to make the world a better palce I guess.

On the other side of the coin I worked in the US where they definitely have positive discrimination as policy in many institutions based. Where I worked you had to rate the staff, regardless of how good they were, as being above and below the line: 50% either side. However, if you had members of a certain races or gender they had to be split above and below that line as well. So if you had two underperforming members of a certain group and four good to excellent employees from another group one of the underperformers would be classed as above the line. This affected promotion opportunites, take home pay etc. In time some of the underperforming personnel ended up being promoted - where they stuffed up badly, but could not be seen to be sacked, so were usueally promoted to a position where they could do "less damage".

While I was working there (as an instructor) I was also hauled over the discrimination coals because of the number of unworkable/fails I had dished out to certain groups. I had to explain myself to the grown ups - fortunatley I had records and could explain the decisions and was providing after hours mentoring to get them up to speed. I'm pretty sure the only reason I got away with it was because I was a foreigner on exchange. Had I been a US citizen I think they would have been moved to a less prominent/demanding job.
Click to expand...
I’ve been in on some lower level administrative meetings in rugby league and it’s a dinosaur fest.

There was an obvious need for women in the running of the code.

I’m sure this is same at the higher levels.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 505 (members: 44, guests: 461)
Back
Top