Sorry, I didn’t notice any counter arguments. Were there some?
A couple.
Must have missed them.
1 Like
My vague sense is the incumbents are expected to be reinstated. Fingers crossed (from my practice anyway) 
He wasn’t employed as the effing bootstudder, he was appointed CEO. That’s a direct responsibility of the board. If they haven’t got time for diligence on such an appointment they shouldn’t be on the board. He should never have even been considered for the role because he conducted the review. At any point pre-appointment a board member could have and should have raised concerns, “Ah hang on, maybe this isn’t a good idea”.
But nothing. They all sat silent? And still avoid responsibility?
It gives zero faith in anything they do moving forward.
3 Likes
It wasn’t his religion, it was his leadership position within an organisation that publicly advocated for legislative change in line with its discriminatory world-view. I feel like by this point anyone not understanding that is doing so deliberately.
7 Likes
Nope you’ve just completely made that up.
He sued us, we settled and apologised. Just because he was a leader doesn’t mean he can be discriminated against due to his religion.
We stuffed up both the appointment and the sacking.
3 Likes
I wonder if I’d get a settlement and a cheque from my employer if I led an organisation that was overtly anti-gay?
It’s worth a crack
2 Likes
Could’ve been so easily avoided if we had any form of governance, you simply should never appoint anyone thats part of a review as a ceo, rank amateurism
8 Likes
100% agree with that.
If it was the no gays allowed club, you’d get fired and get squat.
If you were on the board of your local Catholic school, you’re sweet. Settlements galore.
Dorothy Hisgrove was largely responsible for the Thorburn debacle.
Remains in the job because she has powerful friends.
10 Likes
lol if he wasn’t the leader we wouldn’t have sacked him. I’m not claiming the club got it right legally, and they don’t deserve the credit of saying they got it right morally given his record with the Royal Commission. But they made the right decision, albeit it too late to do it correctly.
That article is hardly reputable given they state Barham took over from Tanner not Brasher.
Kind of important I would’ve thought given it was Brasher who initiated the Thorburn led review that triggered the Barham coup and Rutten sacking.
At the end of the day Barham’s board appointed Thornburn and ■■■■ knows how he didn’t get the ass sooner.
Ex-NAB boss Andrew Thorburn appointed Essendon AFL CEO - ABC News Ex-NAB boss Andrew Thorburn appointed Essendon AFL CEO - ABC News
You’re absolutely correct in saying that merely being religious is fine. And his stauncher views cannot legally play a part in the recruiting process. That hurdle is easy to get over, though.
Consultants: Sorry Mr Thorburn, you missed out on this one.
Thorburn: Ohhh… was it because you think I lacked experience?
Consultants: Uhhh… yeah! You’re lack of experience! That was it!
The ■■■■-chucking apes that carried out the ‘hiring process’ got paid heaps to screw us over.
1 Like
Depends if they sacked you for it.
I guess we’ll find out.
Joining Barnaby and Pauline are we 
2 Likes