The Grenville Phillips Column – Finish Your Training

Regardless of what we are pursuing in this life, we all need encouragement to keep going.  If no one is encouraging you, then be encouraged by someone who reached the mountain top and was able to put life in perspective.  The following is my paraphrase of Simon Peter’s final letter (2 Peter) written shortly before he was executed for speaking the truth.

My dear fellow Trainees:

Our Employer has graciously given us everything that we need to complete our training, and He has promised us that all the training exercises are achievable once we start with the right attitude.  If you are committed to becoming productive employees, then please read the employee manual so that you may understand the Employer’s standards of work and behaviour.  With this knowledge you can then begin practising the exercises.  You may find them challenging at first, but please do not become discouraged.  They will eventually become easier if you persist with them.

Once you have become proficient in the exercises, then please encourage your work colleagues and teach them everything that you have learnt.  Your own training will be complete when you have unselfishly helped to train enough of your colleagues.

Please try to encourage those who find the exercises challenging, especially if they seem discouraged.  If they give up, they may never develop the confidence that comes with completing an exercise, and will probably develop a fear of failure or a crippling belief that such exercises are unachievable.

I have completed my training and will shortly be leaving this department.  However, before I go, allow me to give you some important advice. I hope that after I am gone, you will reread this letter to remind and encourage you during your own period of training.

Firstly. Please understand that the Company is not a myth or a cunningly devised fable. I personally know the Chief Executive Officer, and I heard when the Employer confirmed his appointment. The Employer Himself actually dictated the employee manual for your benefit.

Secondly. Please be aware that some members of your class may not appreciate the purposes of the training exercises, or they will think that the exercises are too challenging, irrelevant, or unachievable.  They will then try to promote their own low standards of productivity.  Unfortunately, this will only ensure that they and those who they mislead are unprepared for the work of the Company, and they will find themselves unemployable after their time of training has expired.

If those promoting low standards are able to influence most of the class in unproductive behaviour, then the Employer may have to take drastic measures.  He has had to do this at least three times in the past.

The first time was when a vice-president and some associates attempted to take-over the Company and they were fired.  The second was when the entire student body rejected the training and the Employer had to wash down the facility.  The third was when a class engaged in abominable behaviour and the Employer had to sanitise the classroom.  However, if you remain faithful to your training, despite the unproductive influences around you, then you will be retained.

Those who try to frustrate your training are ignorant, presumptuous and self-willed.  Most of them only attend the training classes to impress and seduce those of the opposite sex with smooth words. They continually try to entice others away from their training and promise them a fun time, while they are actually addicted to corrupting behaviour that prevents them from attaining any reasonable level of productivity.

Both the enticer and the enticed will become unemployable, just like those who refuse to start training and instead, waste all of their precious time on the playground.  If a person starts training and then becomes addicted to corrupt practises, then it is better if they had not commenced training at all.

Thirdly. Please remember that the Employer’s expansion project will commence. However, He is waiting patiently, and He will suffer delays and be inconvenienced for as long as practically possible for you. You see, He has no desire that those who are not training properly, or those who are not training at all should be destined for unemployment. He is desperately hoping that those on the playground, and those playing the fool in the classroom will commence and complete their training respectively.

Since the expansion project will start, please prepare yourself for the wonderful responsibilities that you will receive upon completion of your training, and do not be distracted by those who have no interest in your future.  Above all, grow in the favour and knowledge of our Chief Executive Officer, Jesus Christ.

Good-bye.

Grenville Phillips II is a Chartered Structural Engineer and President of Solutions Barbados.  He can be reached at NextParty246@gmail.com

22 comments

  • Grenville you have taken to writing in parables?

    Like

  • Lynette Eastmond has made some great points in a thought provoking piece called ‘Letter to the Father of Independence’.Excerpts from it have been carried in Barbados Today online newspaper.

    Lynette if you are reading this – do like Grenville and use this medium to get more mileage for your viewpoint and send these articles to Barbados Underground.

    You continue to plod on and offer an alternative view and ignore the naysayers. Barbados needs more like you. .

    Like

  • I think this is an appropriate time to alert BU to an article which describes a self image of many who blog here.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-redmon/success-and-motivation_b_4258405.html

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ the Honourable Blogmaster

    This man is indeed an idiot and has decidedly gone off the deep end.

    How de badword can you mix up an anecdote about a corporate entity WITH A CLASSROOM OF STUDENTS and figure that you are making sense?

    But it is your fault though?

    In another blog you asked this madman to comment on the abdication of Solutions Barbados members to Atherley’s fold.

    Obviously it has driven him mad and he is commingling three things

    1.the free classes that he is running

    2.the parable in the Bible

    3.and the fact that his followers whom he considered his employees and for whom he was the CEO.

    He refers go them as the vice president of the Solutions Barbados company

    Or something like that

    I gots to be real careful doah causing ef de ole man correctly interprets his ingrunce, NOT ONLY I GINE BE A CONSPIRACIST BUT I GINE BE A MAD CONSPIRACIST AT THAT.

    I REALLY SORRY for Grenville Phillips though.

    He is too young to be mad as badword

    @ Senator Caswell Franklyn

    Check your email please.

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ the Honourable Blogmaster your assistance please with an item here thank you

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ the Honourable Blogmaster

    Quite recently a fellow blogger noted that Ambassador Rihanna Fenty was suing her father.

    That tangential blog though quite instructive, did not even attract a follow up comment to what I believe was posted by Brother Hants.

    I may be wrong about the author and lest I am, I apologise early BECAUSE YOU KNOW HOW AGGRESSIVE THESE AUTHORS ARE.

    But here is the real irony of this lawsuit.

    1.One would figure that it is her father AND THAT SHE WOULD NOT HAVE SUED HIM SO PUBLICLY

    2.One would further posit THAT IN LIGHT OF HER AMBASSADORSHIP, she would have thought a while about the negative fallout of such an act

    And

    3.Given what transpired just a few months back YOU CAN APPRECIATE THE COMPLEXION THAT ACTION PUTS ON *** especially when you consider ***

    4.Tell me now why, when you look at Sid Boyce’s comment nearly said dribble, through that lens of your so recent first hand experience, tell de ole man how you feel about that “compromise” statement vis a vis that “all or nothing” attitude of the party in question

    Oh yeahhhhh since Grenville is talking in parables, and Boyce is talking in proxy, and de ole man in CONSPIRACY drivel, you can feel free to do you ting…

    Like

  • Sid Boyce,

    Good article. There was a period of time when I was like that. Not any more.

    Like

  • Sir Simple Simon, P.C.

    @pieceuhderockyeahright January 23, 2019 8:36 AM “1.One would figure that it is her father AND THAT SHE WOULD NOT HAVE SUED HIM SO PUBLICLY. 2.One would further posit THAT IN LIGHT OF HER AMBASSADORSHIP, she would have thought a while about the negative fallout of such an act.”

    Can you explain to us how to sue someone privately?

    What has her honorary ambassadorship got to do with her company, her way of earning her living? Since the Ambassadorship is very likely unpaid, she has to protect her company/her income/her livelihood from others, yes even from her own parent. Rihanna has to go to the shop too, just like the rest of us, to buy groceries, she has to pay her light and water and phone bills just like the rest of us. She can’t take an honorary ambassadorship to the shop you know.

    She has a right to protect her financial interest against others, yes even from her father.

    But as a daughter she has a responsibility to her parents, especially if they are disabled, or when they become elderly.

    But no evidence has been presented that her dad is either elderly or disabled.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Ms. Fenty is right to ask her father to “cease and desist” or whatever method she chose to use in defending her interests. Oftentimes it is not those who are strangers who can harm you it is those who are close and have familial ties, didn’t some cousin try to market counterfeit shoes as products endorsed by her? If Ms. Fenty allowed her father to continue to trade on her name and the mission goes down in flames (as they usually do) guess who the people wounded will look to for redress? They are going to look at the one with deep pockets on the grounds that she knew what her father was doing and turned a blind eye to his shenanigans.

    Yessiree Bob don’t try to trade on people’s celebrity even if they are your own blood.

    Liked by 2 people

  • Vincent Codrington

    There is a Bajan aphorism that goes some thing like this:” Friends and business do not mix.”.
    If the item is not fake news, obviously parental love and theft of children’s property is morally correct; and the child being provoked to wrath should not protect her property from theft. She should be guided by another moral compass that of honouring her father. What a twisted piece of logic. How did we arrive at this sorry pass?

    Like

  • BTW

    Is this some stream of consciousness exercise from GP that has been substituted for a column ………

    Like

  • What is interesting about Fenty vs Fenty is that the man cannot use HIS SURNAME in a business venture because his daughter is a business mogul .

    It would be interesting to get an opinion from Jeff Cumberbatch.

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ the Ambiguously Titled sir/Dame Simple Simon

    You WERE NOT AND ARE NOT THE INTENDED RESPONDENT FOR THE QUERY And of a truth, one does not anticipate that the target will respond.

    “..but one can catch a whale with a spray can one not?…” as your answers have proven

    I will excuse your obvious ignorance of LAWSUIT and the fact that

    A.if your matter, while being laid in court, is de facto an instance of a “quiet” rather non existent lawsuit IF IT IS NEVER HEARD

    B.if your matter is not made public, as per such matters, like the litigation afforded the estate of Ermine Atwell, then it becomes a quiet matter and in such “quiet” ruling are made against the true owners.

    C.did you ever hear of the legal issues which attended Princess Margret ‘s attempt to marry Townsend? Or why she and he ultimately never married? Depending on who you are, certain level issues are NOT MADE PUBLIC and sheeple like us hear nothing of it.

    But let me continue with your responses.

    You spoke of the fact that the ambassadorial position was an intangible THAT COULD NOT SPEND.

    You went on further to say that she
    had the right to protect her financial interest.

    You went on to say that since it was and is her livelihood at stake, she was within her rights because she would be supporting herself as well as her family.

    It is such a response that shows the hypocrisy of people like you Simple Simon when wunna does rush to defend certain people in this society who, when they are similarly engaged with other similar matters DO THE SAME TEIFING.

    But enough of that prattle…

    Back now to this wishy washy article BY the same pretend Christian who does be talking bout “he doan hold grudges against people cause of his love of God” but in this here parable is displaying all the anger and ire he has for his former colleagues that he calls trainees.

    HE IS clearly castigating some of them and referencing their sexual harassment practices in the workplace.

    But I guess you with your simple self ent read dat causing you got a hardon for de old man heheheheh

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @Hants,
    Mr. Fenty CAN use his surname in a business venture. There are several businesses in Barbados which use “Fenty” in their name:
    * FLOOD FENTY VENTURES
    * FENTY ENTERPRISES
    * FENTY’S APARTMENTS
    * FENTY’S FREIGHTING & LANDSCAPING
    * FENTY’S MAINTENANCE SERVICES
    * FENTY’S PHOTO SERVICES
    * FENTY METALWORKS

    What he cannot do is misrepresent himself as managing parts of his daughter’s business; that is simply telling lies.

    Liked by 1 person

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ The Honourable Blogmaster your assistance please with my response to Sir Simple and others here, Sargeant, Mr Vincent Codrington and Brother Hants who will understand de old man’s drift.

    AS DO YOU, MOST DEFINITELY YOU.

    You see why, unlike sid Boyce’s drivel, there can be no compromise!

    I wonder if you were able to speak freely, how you would be able to comment on the pure hypocrisy of this matter.

    @ Sargeant

    Grenville’s drivel was too high for exploration so de ole man expanded rather, reprinted his drivel.

    I had promised to do that with him didnt I?

    This is part of the same matter he was asking Jeff about recently, I can bet that but he is just dressing it up lest it be said “Vrenville is not so holy after all AND IS PRONE TO BADTALKING FORMER POLITICAL COLLEAGUES”

    Like

  • @Hants
    What is interesting about Fenty vs Fenty is that the man cannot use HIS SURNAME in a business venture because his daughter is a business mogul
    +++++++++
    That may be the legal team at work, they like to cover all the bases, get a blanket injunction so they dont have to address it at a later date when something slips through a loophole.

    She has trademarked the name for her business, she has established a multi -million dollar business in that name, anything associated with “Fenty” in the commercial sphere as it relates to beauty products or related items (I’m told lingerie is in the offing) will be seen as endorsed by her or related to her, without her “Fenty” is just the name of a Toronto Bishop. I believe there is legal precedent in her corner I seem to recall a famous hair sylist (think it was Sassoon) who sued another hairdresser who opened a hair salon under his name which happened to be the Sassoon and the Courts ruled in favour of the original.

    I’m sure they are others but they don’t get the same publicity…… …..

    Liked by 1 person

  • I can not understand how this GP ii idiot has decided on a weekly basis to demonstrate his ignorance of the Holy Bible.

    Every serious Bible student knows that 2 Peter 2 corroborates the teaching of Jude 4-19 on the subject of APOSTASY

    Every serious Bible student knows that 2 Peter 3 is a SECOND COMING CHAPTER

    IN ADDITION THE HIGHLIGHT OF 2 PETER AS NOTED BELOW IS THE SUBJECT OF CANONICITY

    16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

    17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

    18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

    19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

    20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

    21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

    WHY DOES GRENVILLE PHILIPS NOT WRITE HIS WEEKLY RUBBISH, AND LEAVE HIS PENCHANT TO WRONGLY DIVIDE THE WORD OF TRUTH OUT OF HIS DRIVEL.

    HIS ERRONEOUS REFERENCES TO THE SCRIPTURES ADDS NOTHING TO HIS DROPPINGS, EXCEPT TO DEMONSTRATE HIS IGNORANCE OF THE SCRIPTURES.

    Like

  • We have two issues that will follow Grenville 1). The name of the professional who validated the Solutions Barbados plan and 2). When will the press release come to explain the exodus from his political party.

    Like

  • Fenty is a beautiful name isn’t? And we all are related somehow … the name Fenty appeared in Barbados in the 1700s … Brought to island by two Irish brother … Fenty then moved to Guyana, Jamaica and then New York State both white and black …but the name Fenty was predominantly white

    Like

  • The attached article offers up some very valid reasons why Rihanna is focused on protecting her name and commercial interests
    Here is an excerpt:

    Is Rihanna the Coco Chanel of the 21st century?
    Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton LVMH, the parent company of Dior, Givenchy and Fendi, apparently thinks so. It is in the midst of a deal to back her in a fashion brand, making her the first female designer of color at the largest luxury conglomerate in the world

    Like

  • Sir Simple Simon, P.C.

    @pieceuhderockyeahright January 23, 2019 11:23 AM “C.did you ever hear of the legal issues which attended Princess Margret ‘s attempt to marry Townsend? Or why she and he ultimately never married?

    Actually that was a bit before my time. But according to Wikipedia “Townsend, who had been previously married and divorced, proposed marriage to Princess Margaret, who was initially inclined to accept him. Divorcees suffered severe disapproval in the social atmosphere of the time and could not re-marry in the Church of England if their former spouse was still alive. Their relationship was considered especially controversial as Margaret’s sister, Queen Elizabeth II, was the Church’s Supreme Governor.”

    I guess she could have defied her sister, the head of the Church of England, but very likely that would have caused an alienation from the family, including alienation from the Royal family’s extensive wealth. And back in the day a Princess was not expected to take up her basket and hoe and earn a living for herself and her children. The Princess was born around the same time as my eldest sibling. Somehow my sibling managed to marry as she damn well pleased, work full time for 47 years raise a few children, and is still alive and well.

    Somehow we expect less, much less of princesses, and I am too simple to know why.

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s