Yes he has repaid the phone bill and i am told the card was taken back and arrangements are made to repaid the gas bill.

@ac
the BSTU has done a good job on their own at garnishing public favour against them

@david
keep that spotlight blazing!

@Yardbroom
well analysed and phrased

@balance
“FOR NOT TEACHING FOR A YEAR ”

—- actually it was an entire term.

“those persons whose procrastination has led to the present morass evident for some time in the administration of education in Barbados.”

—- completely agreed. Herein lies the bulk of the overall problem.

@Amused
stick and move. stick and move!

Mr. King would do well to follow others’ lead and leave the BSTU to its own devices. They are great at damaging their own image and cases.

I’m amazed that there are “secret meetings” and veiled threat letters when all fo Barbados undestands that this entire matter legally and statutorily lies with Wateman and the Commission. This attempt to short circuit the process either smacks of

a) zero respect for the COI and the process
b) zero faith in the MOE and the COI
c) zero original intention of an objective commission and findings or
d) all the above

Just Observing

You guys are amazing “what secret meeting” ameeting called under the circunstances solely for input and the organuisation of a badly wounded school .now another conspiracy theory right observing.? questions were asked so what? then alot of hyperbole been editoralise and over analyize by DAVID BU. with intent to burn the fire of doubt and suspicion even after there is no recomenadation of strike and ask for a necessary answer from MR. King. of clarity some body here needs to apologise

This blog “Ministry of Education Summons BSTU To Hastily Arranged Meeting Which Provoked ‘The Letter’” and the hastily published blog entitled “UPDATE On Alexandra School Matter – Strike Action LOOMS!” demonstrate what happens when special agendas take over.

The matters raised in the letter published under the BSTU’s letterhead bears no relationship or resemblance to the alleged report contained in the “Strike Action LOOMS!” blog.

This undue haste to condemn the BSTU on the basis of this “report” makes it hard to conclude other than that there is an agenda to discredit the union.

The only crediblity which is being damaged by the publication of this “information” in the manner is which it was done is that of Barbados Underground, which has argued so fervently that the blogs should be respected for their critical role in bringing matters to the attention of th public.

Sometimes it is appropriate to wait a while, rather than leaping to respond to each piece of gossip which is whispered quietly in our ears.

Authority should go hand in hand with responsibility.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Broomes is on record as having stated to the COI that he does not read correspondence which comes from the BSTU.

Pray tell me, how is it intended that he will manage the members of staff who are represented by this union? So many of us are required by the responsibilities of our job to read correspondence from, speak to and meet with persons we consider to be vexations to our soul. And yet we cope.

I believe that is called mature management.

Anything less is a recipe for disaster.

@should everything…..
Regardless of this letter, strike action always loomed. Remember, under oath the BSTU said they were not going to work with Broomes anymore. Separation and nothing less. PAdmore’s press release was the only thing that made it certain that it wasn’t going to happen.

“how is it intended that he will manage the members of staff who are represented by this union”

Will they commit to working with him professionally until the process has taken its course?

@ac
your powers of deduction and reasoning are astounding.

@balance
“but did not Mr Broomes perjure himself at the COI as well”

Is this a question or a statment?

@Should everything be published?……………….. | September 11, 2012 at 12:18 PM | In answer to your moniker, YES!

@balance | September 11, 2012 at 12:31 PM. “Pardon my ignorance but did not Mr Broomes perjure himself at the COI as well? just askin.” I echo Observing – are you asking a question? If, as I suspect, not, can you point us to this perjury that you allege on the part of Broomes?

@Should everything be published?……………….. | September 11, 2012 at 12:36 PM | “As a matter of fact, Mr. Broomes is on record as having stated to the COI that he does not read correspondence which comes from the BSTU.”

Well, as I have pointed out, why would he? He has no power to hire or fire. He did not have the power to suspend or discipline the woman Graves for failing to teach for an entire term. Therefore, there is no reason why the BSTU ought to be writing to Broomes and no reason why Broomes ought to waste his time reading their tripe. Therefore, correspondence directed to him by the BSTU is irrelevant and misdirected. Indeed, it can easily be argued that such correspondence is meant by BSTU to try to intimidate Broomes.

And you want me to tell you how he will manage the staff that are members of the Union? Well that is simple. He sets them work and ensures that they do it in accordance with the terms of his and their contracts. If they fail to do it, he writes a report to the MoE, which may or may not be lost or misplaced by the MoE, except from here on in I am sure that Broomes will be requiring the MoE to sign for receipt of anything he sends them. But to make it simple for you, if I have a business that I am the chief executive and MD of and I hire union people. I also have a supervisor/manager whose job it is to run the day to day operations, such as scheduling etc. Do you think that it would be the correct for the union to address matters pertaining to the employment of its members to me, who alone has the power to hire and fire and negotiate contractual terms, or to the supervisor/manager who has no authority over the terms and conditions of employment of the union members? And do you think that Manager/Supervisor ought to usurp my position by responding to correspondence directed to him/her by the union? Surely THAT would be your recipe for disaster.

@ac. So glad you think I am as funny as shite. I look forward to you returning the favour and giving me the amusement of reading the reply directed to you as an officer of the BSTU by Mr King to your letter to him of 02 September.

@Should everything be published?……………….. | September 11, 2012 at 1:36 PM | “Let us not jump the gun.” Afraid the gun has already been jumped – by the BSTU.

@balance. You don’t understand me. I always froth when I am enjoying myself, whether it be an orgasm or a good argument or a good dinner or a good game of cricket or, best of all, when I expel surplus beer – I really froth then.

Ms Greaves has a case to answer based on the evidence at the COI. Her explanation was not good enough why she withheld her services after week three.

Many of us say we don’t read the Nation Newspaper meaning we seldom do because of a dissatisfaction.

With respect to Broomes remark about not reading BSTU stuff, did he mean this in a literal sense?

There should be no problem using the credit card if the allowance was paid to the credit card.

@erice

You missed the point. The card can be used as the vehicle to pay overseas expenses and the allowance paid to the card account no? In this case it appears Maloney did not pay the allowance to the card account. This is where the problem was created. Not excusing a delinquent Maloney.

Just read the letter and have to agree with Yardbroom and Amused. It seems to me that the Union is was not happy with what transpired at the meeting.

Is it common practice in Barbados to put the subject line before the salutation, or was this indeed written by ac?

@David
don’t let erice win and divert a whole thread from BSTU’s belligerence and the MOE’s tacit incompetence to NUPW. Let them write a post and submit it!

@should everything…
since there is no standing in law/regultions/practice/history/precedent for a “special committee of management” what does that say about the person who
a) reccommended it and
b) sucked it all up only to have to write a letter for clarification on it, cc’d to all the people who didn’t know about it in the first place?

“Perhaps we could wait for the process to run its course”
Wise words that would have served a particular union well.

Just observing

@AC

if the union was seeking clarification, why was the letter cc to the Chief Personnel Officer? Was the Chief Personnel Officer present at the meeting, and if no, would the cc letter not appear in a vacuum to her.

One of the basis thing in letter writing, is, if you are using the saluation Dear Mr. King, you would have had to address him before, that is Mr. X KIng, Cjief Education Officer and continue. Did u write that letter, and was it written by a teacher who is tasked with teaching our children? God help us.

Just only asking

@balance | September 11, 2012 at 12:31 PM. “Pardon my ignorance but did not Mr Broomes perjure himself at the COI as well? just askin.” I echo Observing – are you asking a question? If, as I suspect, not, can you point us to this perjury that you allege on the part of Broomes”

I am indeed asking a question because i am not fully seized with all the direct information that came out of the hearing.

David wrote ” Ms Greaves has a case to answer based on the evidence at the COI. Her explanation was not good enough why she withheld her services after week three.”

David……..Is Ms. Greaves self employed ?

Am I to believe that a Principal allowed the students to sit in class without the designated teacher for a whole term ?

The only reason the two of them still have jobs is that Barbados has very complex and convoluted civil service rules and an army of lawyers and politicians who can turn a simple issue into mind boggling complexity yhat results in a Commission of deposits into Lawyers accounts at Taxpayers expense.

David wrote “but who are the bosses?”

Therein lies the problem. The more you assess this fiasco the more apparent it becomes that Barbados has serious “leadership” problems throughout the society.

Amused –look at the socalled union leaders in this whole affair and see all of them have fail to set good and propper examples for youth and these same persons are the first to attack the young people —-it begs where and who are the bosses in this whole matter —-the buck must stop at the MOE and all the UNIONS involved –they all fail to save the children who are the leaders of tomorrow —–

As David asked “Who are the bosses?” It seems that the tail is wagging the dog in this fiasco . Like Hants said “The more you assess this fiasco the more apparent it becomes that Barbados has serious “leadership” problems throughout the society.” You cant run an organization where everyone is a boss. There are procedures that should be adhered to and guidelines for employees. What I don’t understand is why those who have been hired should refuse to do their jobs. Everyone appears to be paralyzed from the head down. No one wants to mash corns to put things straight. Where the fcuk is MOE? Does the BSTU run the MOE? Does the BSTU have control of the island? Threatening tactics and coercing your bosses will and should get anyone fired. No one owes anyone a JOB.Our Education system is in shambles where are the good men and women to fix this?

There is a concerted effort on these pages to discredit the work of the COI before the findings are released. One can see it in the inflammatory subject titles (unsupported by facts) and the frequent postings by some who have assumed the role of prosecutor ,judge and jury on the blog.

First it was the raison d’être for the Inquiry, why do we need an inquiry etc. never mind that the whole issue has been a simmering volcano for 10 years. Then it was the costs ($600,000 we are told) which is deemed as too expensive. No one questions what the cost has been for the past 10 years of non productivity, of meetings, of bickering and of student disconnect and under achievement during that period. Can we put a value on emotional costs?

Then we hear the Commissioner has lost his marbles because of a comment he made during the inquiry, did he suddenly become a stupid or only on assumption of this position? Next we hear that the witnesses have perjured themselves.

What of the chief witness? He of the “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” and may I add “ do no evil” position. Based on the comments I think he is the reincarnation of George Washington ( I cannot tell a lie), a man who has seemingly left a slew of fractured relationships wherever he has laboured, who has been a shining example of the Peter Principle.

The age of “my way or the highway” is a relic which we are happy to have left behind, that some still see virtue in this attitude is an indication that we still have a long way to go.

Sizzling Sarge
Slide n ride boss…..but remember this …..is there any different in outcome….other than public exposure for a huge cost of $1 million? The final decision will still have to be made by the PSC….correct?

Bu then again as some have suggested or infered the final deciion/s will be made in the court

@ amused

well Broomes lawyers lost no time during the inquiry letting the commissioners know of their probale inteny of waging court through the court maybe in such binstance what’s good for the goose is also good for the gander. however the COI purpose was to collect information and present their findings .so all the wishy washy back and forth can’yt alter the testimony. so i guess it will be up to broomes lawyers to drag the matter on into eternity i am hoping that those teachers wo felt arggrieved by Broomes would countersuit him personally.

If the recommendations of the COI has no legal standing do you deny the ‘right’ of the Broomes team to protect the ‘rights’ of their client based on any decision which is taken arising from the COI report?

AC never once did i ever infer that broomes does not deserve the best and yes the most aggressive counsel necessary. however when the BSTU does similiar all hell breaks loose by those who is supporting Broomes. and a kangroo court is set up here on BU by some of his counsel outside of my opinions i will wager a bet that no lawyer have contacted BU or any BSTU officer has asked any special privilege of presenting the teachers side through articles on BU but that shows the difference in the bstu and their professionalism , can’t say the same for broomes counsel

david i expect that answer from you but it would be foolhardy to challenge it but i would reiterate that no counsel representing BSTU or its members have asked or requested of BU the publishing of any article in relation to the past six weeeks that the COI was commisioned and even as of now

@ac
“no counsel representing BSTU or its members have asked or requested of BU the publishing of any article in relation to the past six weeeks that the COI was commisioned and even as of now”

In this information and interconnectivity age that also shows their ignorance. Rest assured, were I a leader of an institution or organisation and people like ac waged an online propaganda war against it potentially to its detriment and that of its members, agenda or objectives I’d be duty bound to employ whatever tactics and information were necessary to set the record as straight as well I could. For transparency of course 🙂

@David
I see BarbadosToday (back page)took up the story with the letter and ran with it in this edition…You are leading the pack! Their headline is no more “salacious than yours!”

Just observing