Judgement time

Latest from the Spec.  What a shocker ….

When does an error in judgement cost someone their job? It depends.   

If it is Gladys Berejiklian, you are safe. If it is Laura Tingle, you are safe. But what about Christine Holgate, Australia’s Postmaster in Chief? 

It was reported yesterday that Holgate gave ‘luxury’ watches as presents to a number of her senior staff as a reward for completing a task. Total cost of $12,000 for four watches. 

and the conclusion ….

Judgement. The universal get out of jail card. Perhaps the moral to the story is that the smaller the scandal the higher the penalty.  

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Judgement time

  1. Arnost

    Fox commentary team on the debate is Chris Williams, Donna Brazile and Juan Williams. LOL. Fox is dead.

  2. Arnost

    OOPS – wrong thread. Sorry.

  3. H B Bear

    Better yet. Don’t have a scandal on a slow news day.

  4. H B Bear

    Senate Estimates usually provides some theatre about the cost of paper clips while the house burns down around them.

  5. stackja

    Gough never faced consequences.
    Carmen never faced consequences.

  6. min

    Timing all in the timing haha

  7. Herodotus

    She earns enough to pay for those watches herself, and the execs who got them lare likewise not short of cash.
    The posties have to do overtime to make their pay passable.

  8. notafan

    I had a parcel that took exactly one month to go 30km.

    I can see why Cartier watches were in order.

    Job well done.

  9. Jock

    We know this from ofarrels bottle of grange.

  10. stevem

    We know that the big wigs of Australia Post are often given bonuses (that’s another question of itself). If a $3k watch was given in lieu of $5k cash I can’t see why it should raise any concerns. It’s just the “impression” that a watch is excessive, but the cash isn’t

  11. Bruce of Newcastle

    Spartacus – Tell me, then, all about a $3,000 bottle of wine.

    On that metric Ms Holgate should resign four times over…

    Anyway she hasn’t resigned, just been “punished” by a forced month of leave with pay abasement, ie nothing.

  12. Mique

    It used to be considered to be at least a breach of professional ethics to misuse company funds for personal purposes. But with the scary types identifying as, and being widely quoted in the media as “ethicists” these days, with their weird political opinions being sold as “ethics”, it’s not surprising that people seem no longer to have serviceable moral compasses when they need one.

  13. Eyrie

    Nothing to see here, move along. Just the Nomenklatura continuing to loot the country as usual.

  14. FelixKruell

    Mique:

    It used to be considered to be at least a breach of professional ethics to misuse company funds for personal purposes.

    Personal purposes? What personal purposes? This was reward for employees, approved by the board. It’s common across the private sector. The only weird thing here is that it was in the form of a watch, rather than the usual cash or gift cards or holiday.

  15. nilk

    Who wears watches these days? I own plenty but never wear them because they’re not as practical for me as my phone in a side pocket.

  16. candy

    It is puzzling, who’s “in” and who’s “out” of some magic circle with rules no-one understands.

    But the AP lady was attacked verbally quite brutally by the PM through the media for something that is not illegal and told to resign immediately.

    Putting aside the issue of over generous salaries/bonuses, I feel sympathy for her being treated that way. It is not Australian. Where is tact and privacy these days. I’m not seeing her as a criminal, but she is being painted as one.

  17. The Sheriff

    Holgate should resign over spending $12k on watches only when 90% of the Ministry and the Parliament resign for the billions they have wasted at our collective expense.

  18. Rob

    Is this what happens when affirmative action gets out of control?

  19. Surely the furore over the watches relates to the proverbial “pub test”. Neither Holgate nor her predecessor would earn any accolades from those in the community who still depend on delivery to their letterbox.

    Sure, the world has changed and delivery companies fill suburban roads. And yes, AP has responded to the challenge of the COVID age. This is why are surprised Holgate declared that “we are a commercial enterprise”, or words to that effect.

    But when did the public declare that they wanted a hybrid that is a public service underwritten by the the taxpayer, but also a commercial enterprise?

  20. Spurgeon Monkfish III

    Who wears watches these days? I own plenty but never wear them because they’re not as practical for me as my phone in a side pocket.

    Me, Nilk. Funnily enough, I didn’t wear a watch for about 20 years before I started wearing them again about 15 years ago. As far as I’m concerned it’s a hell of a lot easier to simply glance at my wrist than go fishing around for my phone.

  21. The executives in question have very generous bonus schemes to reward them for doing their job (40%+ of base), this is the mechanism for rewarding performance, the bonuses have clear objectives and measures, providing rewards outside these mechanisms (particularly where public funds are involved) is open to abuse, and we’ve seen plenty of it. Rewarding these people for their efforts in delivering value is fine, doing it outside the agreed methods is not. $12k is nothing compared to the bonuses, and more than likely in reality it’s a paltry amount to them. But it’s not to a postie, it’s not to a mail centre worker, and it’s not to Joe Average. Dishing it out arbitrarily shows a tin ear – to think anything else is disconnected from reality.

Comments are closed.