Saturday, June 26, 2010

Irish Red Cross staff in stunning vote of rejection

Staff of the Irish Red Cross have issued a stunning rejection to the organisation. In a vote which was on a variety of proposals related to terms and conditions staff voted 19 Against the proposals and Zero for.

A unanimous vote by staff sends a strong and unequivocal message to the Board of the Irish Red Cross that there is a major crisis at the head office, one that needs urgent addressing before there are dire consequences for the whole Society.

The vote of 19-0 is an overwhelming rejection of the organisation's proposals and questions must be asked why staff voted so. Staff of the Irish Red Cross head office are all highly educated, well qualified and experienced professionals who are not prepared to accept certain types of treatment and behaviour. They are also highly committed and dedicated to the Irish Red Cross and work very long hours and regularly work weekends. They despair that the organisation they are passionate about is slowly unravelling. Trust between staff and the organisation has irretrievably broken down and cannot be recovered. This Blog has for seven months warned of such problems. This Blog has in numerous articles outlined examples of the atmosphere that now exists at head office. This Blog also has alot more information but for a variety of reasons is not in a position to publish it at this juncture.

In numerous articles written the Blog authors have advised the urgent need to recruit a Secretary General who both understands but also equally importantly is interested in the work of the Irish Red Cross. The current temporary arrangement is highly unusal and alot of questions are being asked. The process of recruitment needs to commence immediately and must be conducted transparently and handled by a professional recruitment firm. Statements issued by the Irish Red Cross to the media in December 2009 clearly stated that a permanent Secretary General would be recruited in the latter half of 2010. This process must therefore be initated in order to have someone in place before the end of the year.

Failure to address the deteriorating situation at head office will eventually see the rapidly rising tensions spill over in to the public domain and possibly into the Courts.

Surely members of the Executive will recognise the 19-0 vote as a desperate cry for help by staff and once and for all act decisively. Failure to do so will leave staff no option but to defend themselves as best they see fit. And this they are perfectly entitled to do if the Executive Committee abandons them.


  1. Anonymous3:07 PM

    This is obviously written by a member of Staff as this is information that even many senior volunteers DO NOT have. Stop posing to represent us volunteers, grow up and sort out your internal disputes like adults. If a fair attempt was made by staff to resolve their issues maybe the national volunteer membership would hold you in a higher regard but at the moment I feel the lot of you need to get off your cushy seats and do a proper days work to justify the overpayment your receive as wages. If the volunteers had control of the running of the society the lot of you would be actively seeking employment.

    Advice from the volunteers:
    ENJOY your current board and management structures because as soon as the goverence is passed you will be working for a lot less than what your earning now.

  2. Anonymous2:55 PM

    Excellent use of grammer in that comment...please learn the difference between "you're" and "your" before posting again.

  3. Anonymous3:56 PM

    I assume the second comment is by the original Blog poster. If not - apologies in advance.


    The first comment is fair and reasonable do you not think. Even if they are wrong in the assumption of the identity of the blogger, their comments are obviously a personal belief. Are they not entitled to express such a belief. The blogger expresses his or her belief's strongly and at great length (often engaging in personal comments and attack) in the posts on this blog. How are the first commenter's views any less valuable or relevant. To flippantly dismiss such comments because of a grammatical mistake is petty and unbecoming of whosoever posted the second comment.

    I will say that the bloggers grammar, structuring and use of language is very impressive - but not everyone can attain such high standards or devote time to proof reading every line.

  4. Anonymous4:17 PM

    It is not the grammar or punctuation of the first comment that is striking but the clearly threatening tone. The poster is obviously one of the targets of this blog who wishes to reassert their superiority and remind everybody that they will seek to bully, harass and ultimately remove from the organisation, any dissenters. This kind of behaviour has been going on within in the Irish Red Cross for years now as anybody with access to newspaper archives can attest.
    While I condemn the poster of the first comment, the blogger is not without blame as, in clearly insinuating that his or her's opinions are representative of Irish Red Cross staff, has left the staff open for this bullying and threatening behaviour.

  5. Anonymous2:51 PM

    Well, I do feel that the first respondent did lower the tone of their post somewhat by the final paragraph. I wouldn't call it Threatening as such, but perhaps we will agree to differ on this point.

    As regards the bloggers identity - on the balance of probability I would suspect you are not a member of staff. If relations are at the point you describe, any member of staff would be foolhardy to weaken any position they may wish to take in future legal proceedings by posting on such matters.
    Given your use of language, and the way in which you present your case, you are a person of some intelligence and would not make such a mistake.
    I may not be of one mind with you on these matters, but I will acknowledge the clarity of your message.

    But, such matters are semantics... !

  6. Anonymous1:55 PM

    Blogger it is fairly funny that you decided to turn on the first comment posted by a volunteer. I am a volunteer also and agree 100% with the first comment. It is a pity that this blog is actively encouraging us to turn against the staff of this organisation. And certainly telling a commenter to check grammer is an insult to that person. The tone you use is no better than the commenter.