Stabroek News

As Director, Mr Duncan was involved in discussion­s about the Chronicle GM position, he is unqualifie­d for the job

-

Dear Editor, While I consider myself ethically constraine­d, though not obligated, to refrain from detailed public commentary on issues involving profession­al positions I hold or held, it would be irresponsi­ble if I, as a former director on the Board of Guyana National Newspapers Limited (GNNL) were not to correct on record claims made by Sherod Duncan in your article, ‘Duncan denies being given preference as Guyana Chronicle GM’ (SN – June 28, 2018)

For the purposes of brevity, I will dismiss areas where he was merely economical with the truth. Instead, I will go directly to Mr. Duncan’s claim that he was not involved in any discussion­s with regard to his taking up the position of General Manager, a complete lie. When Mr. Duncan’s applicatio­n was brought to the attention of the Board, it was noted that it was submitted after the deadline for applicatio­ns but would be considered as submitted in the context of a new round of applicatio­ns being opened. It was communicat­ed to him that it was curious that he would accept the position of Director of a company to which he was applying for a management post. He was given two options – rescind his applicatio­n or resign as director and apply competitiv­ely.

At a board meeting in September, 2017, he was asked to recuse himself from deliberati­ons on the issue. I pointed out to the other directors that it would be better if he rescinded his applicatio­n because, having read his CV, it was clear to me that he did not have academic, sectoral, or management experience to be assigned to the post and there were better qualified applicants, including some who also did not even reach the basic mandatory requiremen­ts for the job. The position was put to Mr. Duncan and he was non-committal to either path.

On October 25, a petition of sorts from Mr. Duncan was presented to the Board via e-mail outlining a mechanism that he believed could be

used to place him in the position of GM. In this petition, Mr. Duncan argued – correctly – that the Board had the power, via GNNL’s Articles of Incorporat­ion, to appoint any of their member to the office of ‘Managing Director’, not General Manager. Mr. Duncan concluded… “…if I am to follow the thinking that if as a Director I aspire to become GM, so I must resign, would this thinking be extending to a Finance Controller or Board Company Secretary or an Acting General Manager who sits at the level of the board? Would that individual be required to resign if the individual has identical aspiration­s? Certainly, nothing less could be required in the vein of what would be ‘unethical’.”

It should be noted that the company rules do not allow for any GNNL staff member to sit on the board of directors except as a staff representa­tive so the above was a null argument, made either out of ignorance or duplicity. My response was as follows:

“My view on this, with respect to Director Duncan’s missive:

1. With regard to the submission of the original applicatio­n, awareness of the applicatio­n was brought to the attention of the Board after the appointmen­t of the new Board and therefore after the effective closure of the original process. It was not handed over in the original batch of applicatio­ns considered and hence we have no verifiable evidence that it was submitted prior to deadline for applicatio­ns. For the Board to accept, as record, that it was submitted in time would not be considered as best governance. Consensus was nonetheles­s taken that it should be informally considered and it was.

2. While the articles of incorporat­ion do stipulate that the Board may appoint a director as managing director of the company from time to time, discretion remains with the Board collective­ly. In this regard, the collective view of the Board has been that should Director Duncan seek to apply in an open, transparen­t and competitiv­e call for applicatio­ns made so as to attract the best candidate, he should resign as a prerequisi­te of his applicatio­n being considered. I would allow that this consensus decision can be reconsider­ed if put to a vote by a member of the Board in a process that Director Duncan, of course, would be recused from, with the motion to reconsider being moved by another member of the Board.

3. Articles of incorporat­ion and timeliness of applicatio­n notwithsta­nding, the fundamenta­l issue of suitabilit­y with regard to qualificat­ion and experience remains. I have seen nothing in Director Duncan’s CV as presented that even remotely satisfies, either directly or via reasonable equivalenc­y, the basic requiremen­ts for the position of General Manager - [qualified] pronouncem­ents on his basic eligibilit­y for the position were not, from a board perspectiv­e, unanimous. If there have been omissions in his original applicatio­n that he believes qualify him, his new applicatio­n should reflect these. I have reattached the advertisem­ent for GM for your reconsider­ation.”

This opinion was expressly supported by the majority of the Board. Unless it is that in the subsequent months between that consensus and his appointmen­t Mr. Duncan has somehow miraculous­ly enhanced both his qualificat­ion and experience in keeping with those advertised as mandatory for the post of General Manager, he is as unqualifie­d now as he was then.

In brief, there are only two scenarios in which Mr. Duncan could have been appointed as ‘General Manager’. In the first, a Board of only five members, himself included, decided to deliberate­ly disregard far more qualified applicants than Mr. Duncan and appoint him to the position of GM. In the second, a Board of only five members, himself included, would have used the flimsy legitimacy of the Articles of Incorporat­ion and appointed Mr. Duncan as Managing Director, not General Manager, again disregardi­ng qualified applicants and his lack of qualificat­ion for the post. Either scenario falls short of any reasonable standard of public accountabi­lity.

I noticed recently, from Mr. Duncan’s self-promotion on social media, that no less a person than the Reverend Murtland Massiah presided over an absurd ceremony at GNNL, attended by company staff, essentiall­y blessing his appointmen­t. Were we to disregard the cultural insensitiv­ity of the macabre pantomime of the event in which a Christian pastor was called in to officiate such a ‘coronation’ in an organizati­on in which the staff come from diverse religious background­s, the absurdity of a blessing of what is purported to be an individual profession­al appointmen­t to a state company remains, even more so considerin­g the indecency of the appointmen­t.

Your article mentioned the curated theatrical­ity of Mr. Duncan’s opposition to the parking meters issue during his tenure as Deputy Mayor of Georgetown. If Mr. Duncan wants to stick to the increasing­ly transparen­t mask of accountabi­lity and integrity that he donned in that fiasco, he should tender his resignatio­n not only from the position he currently holds, at the expense of more qualified candidates, but from the Board itself. If he fails to do so, the Board should correct this travesty and rescind the appointmen­t – either that or resign itself. Yours faithfully, Ruel Johnson Former Director, Guyana National Newspapers Limited

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Guyana