Tweet
Re: AFL targets Essendon Royalty
Here's an article from Emma Quayle, on Dean Robinson's part in this couple with his dismissal:
Looking through it, there's no hiding that EFC was terribly governed. Robinson's performance is devalued due to the injury count (soft tissue), though he's basically claiming he was coerced or acting under pressure.
EFC don't seem to understand what the words corporate governance mean when applied consecutively in that order.
Say for instance, I'm a contract manager in the transport industry and I bring on a client that has specific operational requirements to ensure they're serviced properly, where manual handling is involved.
I devise a set of parameters that would see the client serviced well, and engage a floor supervisor or team leader to ensure these parameters are met safely and efficiently. If the floor supervisor or team leader employ practices that expose my workers to unnessecary risks whilst completing the manual handling tasks, and somebody gets injured can I walk away and claim the supervisors and team leaders held direct responsibility over the task and are therefore accountable for any of the issues that arise?
Or, will I and the managers who are supposed to be supervising me wear a large portion of the blame?
We all know it's the latter.
Robinson may well have been acting out, though what EFC don't understand (nor their boofheaded supporters) is that management is completely responsible for what happens on the ground. Ignorance is never an excuse.
Here's an article from Emma Quayle, on Dean Robinson's part in this couple with his dismissal:
Looking through it, there's no hiding that EFC was terribly governed. Robinson's performance is devalued due to the injury count (soft tissue), though he's basically claiming he was coerced or acting under pressure.
EFC don't seem to understand what the words corporate governance mean when applied consecutively in that order.
Say for instance, I'm a contract manager in the transport industry and I bring on a client that has specific operational requirements to ensure they're serviced properly, where manual handling is involved.
I devise a set of parameters that would see the client serviced well, and engage a floor supervisor or team leader to ensure these parameters are met safely and efficiently. If the floor supervisor or team leader employ practices that expose my workers to unnessecary risks whilst completing the manual handling tasks, and somebody gets injured can I walk away and claim the supervisors and team leaders held direct responsibility over the task and are therefore accountable for any of the issues that arise?
Or, will I and the managers who are supposed to be supervising me wear a large portion of the blame?
We all know it's the latter.
Robinson may well have been acting out, though what EFC don't understand (nor their boofheaded supporters) is that management is completely responsible for what happens on the ground. Ignorance is never an excuse.
Comment