Submitted by Cherfleur
In two separate court hearings, these two iconic institutions said a lot about themselves. It explains where and why they are where they are in the scheme of progressiveness.
The Chair, no less than Velma Newton, Attorney-at-Law (I am told), advised the Court (through the Deputy Chair, Ms Denny) that the Hand-Book is not contractual. After six years of attempts at Mediation to make them ‘see the light’ BCC, through its Chair mounted a defense of using wrong form and no form (of some kind). That is all well and good. So what happens when the corrections are made?
A blunt refusal to read their Hand Book and learn. A blunt refusal to come to Mediation when they are as wrong as the sun setting in the east. What began as only a Breach of Contract has morphed into a Breach of Consumer Guarantees including false advertising. Of course, you’d only know this if you compare them to other colleges. BCC was not and I believe are still not accredited so they have programs that do not meet the basic requirements for Associate Degree level, they advertise one thing and offer another, they rob students the choice of electives in some programs, tamper with Transcripts/Records, issue Records with calculated errors and the list goes on. This matter has gone to appeal, or at least I filed something of the sort.
What 21st century Leader or Leader at all would expose their organization to such degradation and public scorn and ridicule?
Goodness, gracious. As Trustees of an entity as important as Employees Pensions Fund, CBC and its cohort ICB (back then) do not understand the workings of the Group Pensions Plan they are managing. They don’t know that Pensions is not Insurance. In fact, no one seemed to understand that minute peculiarity, but me and the young lady, the Pensions and Insurance Manager, at the Financial Services Commission.
Nevertheless, FSC’s Management and CBC’s Management are refusing to honour the Rights to Information Act and give a copy of the Master Plan for CBC/ICB Group Pensions Plan. Constitutional Rape! ICBL Attorney-at-Law advised, proudly, that as far as she knows a Named Beneficiary on ‘an Insurance” policy cannot be challenged. It would seem that this rubric she is using was from time memorial. That Law went into effect in 1997. But notice, I said Pensions. Nevertheless, this matter was heard and dispensed with since December 2020 but to date no Order is forthcoming.
Why? I shall appeal. Also, they don’t want to acknowledge that ‘likkle me’ understood the ICB Handbook and the Pension Scheme.
An appeal means Cost to the Defendant.
There would have been no Defendant if CBC’s GM and HRM at the time, knew what they were doing with the company’s Pension money.
That being said, here is why they won’t optimize to becoming global institutions. They lack structure and integrity. Perhaps vision too. That is because they are the Public Service operating in an island State aka Banana Republics.
In Arabia, a young Republic, UAE, is marching forward towards global status. The government is positioning its country and people at a national level through training. Every agency and institution is being positioned to take that country to its global capacity. Not just those in the monarchy but ALL. Intentions!
Global Government Summit.
Responsible Leadership for Infinite Success – Simon Sinek – Full Session – WGS 2019 – you have to listen to the end to the Question and Answer section.
“Are we there yet?”
Do we even understand what ‘Responsible Leadership’ is?
There are no Leaders among these ‘ears of corn’. We have people taking taxpayers’ dollars in monthly installments.
Rather than make good just decisions across the board, for the most part, the Public Service, first, is a dump for Party Poopers (square pegs in round holes) then wimps who merely do party biddings.
We Banana Republics cannot and will not optimize with these attitudes.
It would have been better for these institutions to learn from their errors and develop and progress but not even a slap on their wrists. So CBC continues as it always has, at a loss and ‘lost’ and BCC, dysfunctional as ever, perhaps is still offering and executing barren programs. You’d only know this if you had reason to compare it to a ‘real’, functional college.
But Velma engaged Pat Cheltenhan’s firm for the first round and will for the second, perhaps. Who is paying? The devil is in the details. I learned from one of the very errant Attorneys in another one of my cases that what the Judge assesses as Cost is not all that the Attorney’s fees is. Who is paying all of that?
At the end of all of this, BCC has to conform to a proper structure and delivery of its programs. Whether so that I benefit or just because the Accreditation Body demands.
But at what cost to taxpayers?
Not to mention that their inefficiencies are now a matter of public record.