Released on August 12,
2015 @ 21:00 EDT
Tag #: 681
Denial, Cover up and gross incompetence
Bigger already doomed.
Gravy train continually running through City hall.
Legal fees scam continues. Fowke
and Canapini behind the scheme
Bigger: Already doomed
Canapini: Bad legal advise , Fowke: Incompetent
Kevin Fowke, director of
human resources, is continually engaging in his favourite "sweet
deals" with the Toronto-based legal firm, for labour and employment
matters. The gravy train is continually running through City hall.
Recently another human
rights application (2014 HRTO 410) was filed against Fowke and other
corrupted bureaucrats. Many of the City’s employees have taken this
route to address their issues, as a "statement
case", to express their concern about City Hall's corrupted practices
but are not seeking resolution through the Ontario Human Rights Code.
Historically, the Ontario
Human Rights Tribunal has dismissed these applications due to lack of code
ground. As the Tribunal has it, they declare that discrimination falls
into bullying or unfair treatment. During the last decade 99.8% of
applications were dismissed. Furthermore, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction
over labour and employment matters. After reviewing applications it is
common practice to issue a "Notice of Intent to Dismiss" (“NOID”).
Traditionally, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal pay their special
interest into matters related to sexual harassment and disability issues.
Most importantly, the administrative tribunal, such as the Ontario Human
Rights tribunal, has very limited jurisdiction over issues and has no
power to determine discrimination related to labour and employment
matters. Additionally, it is completely unnecessary to hire a lawyer for
Human Rights Tribunal matters.
Despite these facts,
Fowke did not analyse neither the data nor the nature of the cases and
continually hired Toronto-based lawyer, Mireille Khoraych, to represent
him. A large sum of tax dollars was scammed in this way. This habitual
practice of his, added an additional burden on the city’s budget. Fowke
also retained Khoraych’s services for a recent human right case against
him (2014 HRTO 410). Her services were once again paid for by use of tax
dollars. Fowke sought out this unnecessary use of legal services without
even considering the traditional Tribunal decision to send a "Notice
of Intent to Dismiss" (“NOID”).
Khoraych behind the scam
Khoraych : City's cover-up lawyer
The legal service
department of the city consists of four lawyers and 11 staff members and
costs taxpayers 1.2 million dollars annually. In addition to this,
Fowke was surrounded by six human resources coordinators, yet he neglected
to utilize any of them to appear before the Human Rights Tribunal. With
this attitude, Fowke (not surprisingly but unforgivably) spent over
$400,000.00 in the 2014 year for labour and employment matters.
Furthermore, the City paid over 8 million dollars for a Sudbury based
legal firm. WikiLeaks Sudbury will not disclose any identifiable
information of Toronto and Sudbury based legal firms to protect third
party economic interests.
The Bigger administration
is henceforth struggling to save tax dollars and is heavily engaged in the
P6M project to save 6 million tax dollars. Fowke and Canapini, on the
other hand, have no respect for tax dollars and large amounts of tax
dollars have been wasted on their behalf. The recent case (2014 HRTO 410)
is an exemplary fact that proves their incompetence as well as the
unstoppable gravy train coursing through city hall.
The Bigger administration
must take swift action against those corrupted practices without any
further delays. Corrupted city hall bureaucrats have slipped by under the
radar unscathed and undisturbed for long enough. Taxpayers deserve change
and bureaucrats such as Fowke must step down without wasting any more
precious tax dollars.
Released on August 19, 2015 @ 17:00
initially published on Public
Administration and Development, 35, 113-127, (2015). Brief review and
excerpts of the article follows.
management : Organizational and worker performance
management (HRM) is critical to strengthening institutions and performance
by attracting and retaining well-qualified and talented people to work on
key issues and ensuring that leaders’ efforts contribute to
organizational and worker performance. Human resources management concerns
organizational practices and knowledge that address the relationship
between the individual and the organization with an eye to optimizing
effectiveness from the view of both the organization and individual.
The lack of clear roles
between senior public managers quickly undermines efforts of bureaucratic
leadership and is often accompanied in development settings by
officials’ corruption, resulting in further leadership deficiencies and
corruption to permeate through bureaucracies.
Strategic HRM is defined
as an approach to HRM that is concerned with long-term people issues and
macro concerns that directly or indirectly contribute to public
performance. Examples include leadership development, the pipeline of
talented employees and supervisors for future senior positions, and the
role of political officials and patronage appointments in giving direction
to government units.
An important leadership
task is ensuring civil servants’ enthusiasm for mission and performance,
and getting beyond de minimis
compliance/obedience motivation that are sometimes seen in public
agencies. In recent years, the term “employee engagement” has become a
popular, practice-based term, denoting employees who apply themselves
physically, cognitively, and emotionally during their performance. The
term employee “engagement” bridges internal states of motivation with
observable behaviours in the workplace and is linked to increased
performance and productivity. An engaged employee can be characterized as
enthusiastic and energetic about his or her work, but a one of the
researcher survey of 140 countries finds high levels of employee
engagement rather uncommon. The concept of “engagement” is different
from public service motivation (PSM) which addresses employees’
intrinsic motivation for the “public” character of public sector
pursuits, rather than their energetic pursuit of these; researchers state
that “PSM alone does necessarily lead to improved performance,”
requiring other HRM practices, indeed. PSM became popularized in the 1990s
before the above emphasis that bridges motivation to workplace behaviour.
management is obviously focused on engagement on productivity, and past
lessons strongly point to multi-pronged approaches. Money matters, but the
evidence on performance-based pay is inconclusive at best. Supervisory
relations matter greatly (it is said that people join organizations and
causes but quit their supervisors), but so, too, do job security and
career development opportunities. Engagement research points to feeling
valued and being meaningfully involved in decisions. Hence, SHRM
frameworks use comprehensive HR systems that reinforce behaviour and
incentives. For example, high-performance work systems (HPWS) in HRM,
which are associated with increased productivity and performance,
emphasize the following: (1) employment security; (2) high selectivity in
hiring new personnel; (3) using self managed teams and decentralization of
decision making as the basic principles of organizational design; (4)
competitive compensation contingent on organizational performance; (5)
extensive training; (6) extensive sharing of performance information
throughout the organization; and (7) reduced status distinctions and
barriers in organizations. There are no single bullets, and the trend is
towards comprehensive strategies that are implemented with sustained
commitment over time.
The time has come for
creative experimentation and intellectual framing of the management
challenge. Public agencies require leadership by political appointees and
senior public managers alike; there are many leadership tasks to be
undertaken. Many years ago, one of the researcher stated that the
“imperative is to institutionalize planning at all levels of management,
so that it becomes a prime element of every manager’s work.” The
challenge is doing so at the highest levels. First, political leadership
is needed that focuses on a small but salient number of politically
relevant priorities, and, second, public manager leadership is needed that
develops and executes strategic plans in all divisions, subject to
political accountability from bureaucrats. Agency
leadership is distributed in nature and requires an assessment of whether
it is sufficiently occurring, hence involving greater attention to role
expectations for political appointees and senior officials.
resources management : Organizational and worker performance
E. M. (2015). HRM In Development: Lessons And Frontiers, Public
Administration and Development, 35, 113-127.