When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I attended the PCA webinar tonight presented by Ken Laborde, as PCA Insurance/Risk Management Chair, but he is also the General Counsel. The webinar covered PCA's insurance coverage and the proper use of waivers, etc. Nothing out of the ordinary and it was informative if you want to know how to run events.
Just as the webinar was ending a notification popped up letting Ken Laborde know that the meeting organizer had started the next meeting titled "Whistle Blower."
I anticipated that those who caused my issue would try to steer the whistle blower investigation so I had wrote the following in my original complaint letter:
Why is the General Counsel of PCA being invited to a meeting titled "Whistle Blower" when he is one of the people who is the subject of my complaint? It is only through this ridiculous mistake, which I am sure that they won't make again, that I can see that the people who caused this issue are going to try to control the investigation.
They had two and a half months to try to find a solution for me, and told me I needed to wait weeks before they would even speak about my matter again, but ONE DAY after I file my whistle blower complaint they find the time to have a meeting. You cannot make this up!
The investigation is starting off on a corrupt note!
It is ABSURD that the people in the complaint would not recuse themselves. And equally ABSURD that they could set a meeting so quickly to address your whistleblower complaint but not make any effort to resolve the actual problem itself!
All they’ve proven at this point is that if they want to have a meeting they can make it happen and if they don’t care about your issue, they’ll push you off for as long as they care too and hope that you just go away quietly.
Hey Aaron! We all know that you’re reading this thread, what are you going to do? Please don’t be the kind of leader that hides behind the shadows and covers this whole thing up as if it never existed!
Last edited by Mike Roblin; 05-22-2024 at 10:04 AM.
I attended the PCA webinar tonight presented by Ken Laborde, as PCA Insurance/Risk Management Chair, but he is also the General Counsel. The webinar covered PCA's insurance coverage and the proper use of waivers, etc. Nothing out of the ordinary and it was informative if you want to know how to run events.
Just as the webinar was ending a notification popped up letting Ken Laborde know that the meeting organizer had started the next meeting titled "Whistle Blower."
I anticipated that those who caused my issue would try to steer the whistle blower investigation so I had wrote the following in my original complaint letter:
Why is the General Counsel of PCA being invited to a meeting titled "Whistle Blower" when he is one of the people who is the subject of my complaint? It is only through this ridiculous mistake, which I am sure that they won't make again, that I can see that the people who caused this issue are going to try to control the investigation.
They had two and a half months to try to find a solution for me, and told me I needed to wait weeks before they would even speak about my matter again, but ONE DAY after I file my whistle blower complaint they find the time to have a meeting. You cannot make this up!
The investigation is starting off on a corrupt note!
What a mess. This must be how DJT feels (sorry, it was there).
Keep fighting the good fight Todd.
Lots of folks are behind you and have your back. Clearly, you have struck a nerve if they’re reacting so quickly with the whistleblower meeting.
Keep up the good work and fight the good fight.
The more they dig their heels in the stronger you get. Stay the course and hopefully change is on the horizon.
Rennlist Hoonigan which cost no drachmas Lifetime Rennlist Member
Rennlist Site Sponsor
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,725
Likes: 1,019
From: Manchester, NH
That is completely inexcusable and really unbelievable. I"m not an expert on the by laws, Region Procedures, and MNPP, but I can't see how having a person named in the letter being in a meeting would be acceptable at any point.
From the PCA Code of Ethics:
Other potential conflicts of interest, in which an officer, employee, or member must weigh his immediate and personal potential for gain against the best interests of PCA, require special thoughtful attention. Transparency in all actions is desirable. Nothing must be allowed to compromise the integrity, credibility, and best interests of PCA in the making of decisions that affect the club.
From the Conflict of Interest Policy:
PCA Board members, PCA National Staff, employees and volunteers will recuse themselves from a PCA transaction or decision if their interests, affiliation, or involvement with another entity or organization conflicts with that of PCA. No PCA Board member will participate in the discussion of, or vote on an agenda item for which he or she has a conflict of interest. Those with a conflict of interest on a particular agenda item will abstain during the respective Board of Directors vote on that matter. Board members and the National Staff will sign a statement annually acknowledging their compliance to the intent and spirt of this policy, which will be filed with the National Office
Just as the webinar was ending a notification popped up letting Ken Laborde know that the meeting organizer had started the next meeting titled "Whistle Blower."
This is a screenshot from the "Whistle Blower" hearing. Please avert your eyes from the Big Board:
OK, devils advocate here... .MAYBE they had to have an emergency meeting to discuss exactly WHAT they can and can't do, who can and can't be involved, how to proceed, etc.
Remember, they are all volunteers and have probably never run into something like this, so maybe they just need to discuss proper procedure - not the actual topic itself. And of course, Ken would be involved as the legal council to advise who can and can't do what.
And if you take away the EC, legal, medical, etc...who's left to actually coordinate anything?
Maybe that's what they're discussing....
Just a thought??...
(I am not an attorney and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night, so the above commentary may be completely off base)
Rennlist Hoonigan which cost no drachmas Lifetime Rennlist Member
Rennlist Site Sponsor
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,725
Likes: 1,019
From: Manchester, NH
Originally Posted by NaroEscape
OK, devils advocate here... .MAYBE they had to have an emergency meeting to discuss exactly WHAT they can and can't do, who can and can't be involved, how to proceed, etc.
Remember, they are all volunteers and have probably never run into something like this, so maybe they just need to discuss proper procedure - not the actual topic itself. And of course, Ken would be involved as the legal council to advise who can and can't do what.
And if you take away the EC, legal, medical, etc...who's left to actually coordinate anything?
Maybe that's what they're discussing....
Just a thought??...
(I am not an attorney and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night, so the above commentary may be completely off base)
This has been done before at least once in which many of these policies were put in place after. I believe there is also some overlap in the people involved.
OK, devils advocate here... .MAYBE they had to have an emergency meeting to discuss exactly WHAT they can and can't do, who can and can't be involved, how to proceed, etc.
Remember, they are all volunteers and have probably never run into something like this, so maybe they just need to discuss proper procedure - not the actual topic itself. And of course, Ken would be involved as the legal council to advise who can and can't do what.
And if you take away the EC, legal, medical, etc...who's left to actually coordinate anything?
Maybe that's what they're discussing....
Just a thought??...
(I am not an attorney and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night, so the above commentary may be completely off base)
This is not a first for them...
Edit: Romanowski beat me to it...again!!! You are a quick one Matt.
OK, devils advocate here... .MAYBE they had to have an emergency meeting to discuss exactly WHAT they can and can't do, who can and can't be involved, how to proceed, etc.
Remember, they are all volunteers and have probably never run into something like this, so maybe they just need to discuss proper procedure - not the actual topic itself. And of course, Ken would be involved as the legal council to advise who can and can't do what.
And if you take away the EC, legal, medical, etc...who's left to actually coordinate anything?
Maybe that's what they're discussing....
Just a thought??...
(I am not an attorney and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night, so the above commentary may be completely off base)
It's a fair point, and if I were dealing with fair and reasonable people I would think differently, and again, if I were dealing with fair and reasonable people we would never have gotten to this point.
For a case in point about how PCA treats people who questions them please consider Burt Propp, who joined PCA in 1960, and was a past president. Burt also happened to be a CPA and questioned PCA's accounting. I can't get into the correctness or veracity of Burt's claim, because its not relevant to this discussion, but as a CPA and past president he felt that something was wrong.
You'll see that after an investigation where PCA cleared itself of all charges, they expelled Burt of his efforts. This is someone who had been awarded Lifetime Membership in PCA for all that he did for the club and they expelled him because they didn't like what he said. If you scroll down you will see an addendum where they reverse course and then restore him to avoid any addition problem.
The fact of the matter is that when you go up against PCA they protect themselves ruthlessly and I have a feeling at the upcoming Board Meeting they were looking to suspend me.
None of these people have acted in good faith and they think I am the one who is embarrassing PCA. I'm not! PCA is embarrassing themselves.
If you want even more ridiculousness you can go to the 2019 Summer BOD Minutes where they hold a hearing on three members who were expelled, by their region, for posting a picture of a few members flipping the bird in a picture posted online. Obsessively, flipping the bird was hostile as there was infighting in their region.
What is amazing is that while two members who appealed were reinstated, the third member, who did not appeal, was expelled from PCA. For flipping the bird!
If they expel someone for flipping the bird and disagreeing with PCA's financial practices than what chance did I have without making a claim.
It's a fair point, and if I were dealing with fair and reasonable people I would think differently, and again, if I were dealing with fair and reasonable people we would never have gotten to this point.
For a case in point about how PCA treats people who questions them please consider Burt Propp, who joined PCA in 1960, and was a past president. Burt also happened to be a CPA and questioned PCA's accounting. I can't get into the correctness or veracity of Burt's claim, because its not relevant to this discussion, but as a CPA and past president he felt that something was wrong.
You'll see that after an investigation where PCA cleared itself of all charges, they expelled Burt of his efforts. This is someone who had been awarded Lifetime Membership in PCA for all that he did for the club and they expelled him because they didn't like what he said. If you scroll down you will see an addendum where they reverse course and then restore him to avoid any addition problem.
The fact of the matter is that when you go up against PCA they protect themselves ruthlessly and I have a feeling at the upcoming Board Meeting they were looking to suspend me.
None of these people have acted in good faith and they think I am the one who is embarrassing PCA. I'm not! PCA is embarrassing themselves.
If you want even more ridiculousness you can go to the 2019 Summer BOD Minutes where they hold a hearing on three members who were expelled, by their region, for posting a picture of a few members flipping the bird in a picture posted online. Obsessively, flipping the bird was hostile as there was infighting in their region.
What is amazing is that while two members who appealed were reinstated, the third member, who did not appeal, was expelled from PCA. For flipping the bird!
If they expel someone for flipping the bird and disagreeing with PCA's financial practices than what chance did I have without making a claim.
PCA plays some pretty dirty pool when pushed.
Just a thought here, but maybe you should flip them the bird? Seems to lead to reinstatement, yes?
It's a fair point, and if I were dealing with fair and reasonable people I would think differently, and again, if I were dealing with fair and reasonable people we would never have gotten to this point.
For a case in point about how PCA treats people who questions them please consider Burt Propp, who joined PCA in 1960, and was a past president. Burt also happened to be a CPA and questioned PCA's accounting. I can't get into the correctness or veracity of Burt's claim, because its not relevant to this discussion, but as a CPA and past president he felt that something was wrong.
You'll see that after an investigation where PCA cleared itself of all charges, they expelled Burt of his efforts. This is someone who had been awarded Lifetime Membership in PCA for all that he did for the club and they expelled him because they didn't like what he said. If you scroll down you will see an addendum where they reverse course and then restore him to avoid any addition problem.
The fact of the matter is that when you go up against PCA they protect themselves ruthlessly and I have a feeling at the upcoming Board Meeting they were looking to suspend me.
None of these people have acted in good faith and they think I am the one who is embarrassing PCA. I'm not! PCA is embarrassing themselves.
If you want even more ridiculousness you can go to the 2019 Summer BOD Minutes where they hold a hearing on three members who were expelled, by their region, for posting a picture of a few members flipping the bird in a picture posted online. Obsessively, flipping the bird was hostile as there was infighting in their region.
What is amazing is that while two members who appealed were reinstated, the third member, who did not appeal, was expelled from PCA. For flipping the bird!
If they expel someone for flipping the bird and disagreeing with PCA's financial practices than what chance did I have without making a claim.
PCA plays some pretty dirty pool when pushed.
Oh, I am not questioning or disagreeing with your actions at all, please don't misunderstand.
It was only the "Whistle blower" meeting you happened upon. Just saying maybe they are making sure everyone knows the playing field and follows the rules (as it relates to the bylaws, no the rules of common sense here).
As an attorney, wouldn't you talk to your client before they say or do something stupid that gets them in more trouble then they already are?
And there's A LOT more to the Burt Propp story, but you're point is valid.
Last edited by NaroEscape; 05-22-2024 at 02:13 PM.
From: Mid-Atlantic (on land, not in the middle of the ocean)
Originally Posted by LuigiVampa
It's a fair point, and if I were dealing with fair and reasonable people I would think differently, and again, if I were dealing with fair and reasonable people we would never have gotten to this point.
For a case in point about how PCA treats people who questions them please consider Burt Propp, who joined PCA in 1960, and was a past president. Burt also happened to be a CPA and questioned PCA's accounting. I can't get into the correctness or veracity of Burt's claim, because its not relevant to this discussion, but as a CPA and past president he felt that something was wrong.
You'll see that after an investigation where PCA cleared itself of all charges, they expelled Burt of his efforts. This is someone who had been awarded Lifetime Membership in PCA for all that he did for the club and they expelled him because they didn't like what he said. If you scroll down you will see an addendum where they reverse course and then restore him to avoid any addition problem.
The fact of the matter is that when you go up against PCA they protect themselves ruthlessly and I have a feeling at the upcoming Board Meeting they were looking to suspend me.
None of these people have acted in good faith and they think I am the one who is embarrassing PCA. I'm not! PCA is embarrassing themselves.
If you want even more ridiculousness you can go to the 2019 Summer BOD Minutes where they hold a hearing on three members who were expelled, by their region, for posting a picture of a few members flipping the bird in a picture posted online. Obsessively, flipping the bird was hostile as there was infighting in their region.
What is amazing is that while two members who appealed were reinstated, the third member, who did not appeal, was expelled from PCA. For flipping the bird!
If they expel someone for flipping the bird and disagreeing with PCA's financial practices than what chance did I have without making a claim.
PCA plays some pretty dirty pool when pushed.
I view these as mainly the decisions and actions of a few individuals, not PCA as a whole. Unfortunately, they're in positions where they're effectively actively acting on behalf of PCA, and there don't seem to be any checks and balances to control them.
Oh, I am not questioning or disagreeing with your actions at all, please don't misunderstand.
It was only the "Whistle blower" meeting you happened upon. Just saying maybe they are making sure everyone knows the playing field and follows the rules (as it relates to the bylaws, no the rules of common sense here).
As an attorney, wouldn't you talk to your client before they say or do something stupid that gets them in more trouble then they already are?
And there's A LOT more to the Burt Propp story, but you're point is valid.
No, it's all good and I understand your point, but wasn't clear in my answer.
The real issue I have is that I was left twisting in the wind for months, but the minute I file a claim, they jump on it within 24 hours. Now, you could say I am putting them in a position of "damned if you do and damned if you don't", but at the very least it is ironic in the difference a day makes on their response.
Ken may be General Counsel but I think he is walking a line with the conflict of interest rules, and the optics of all this, if he is part of the discussion. That is why companies hire outside counsel for internal investigations. The PCA MNPP does not provide for a situation where there is a whistleblower complaint and the general counsel is involved. Maybe they should have thought of that.
In regards to Burt Propp, I was hesitant to bring it up because I am aware that it is a rabbit hole and I don't know enough to agree or disagree with Burt. I also don't know enough about his actions, but from what I have heard and read, he just seemed to be pushing back at PCA. Sometimes a little aggressively, and I can't say I agree with how he reacted at times, but expelling this older gentlemen was really just retaliation at its worst.
Originally Posted by Manifold
I view these as mainly the decisions and actions of a few individuals, not PCA as a whole. Unfortunately, they're in positions where they're effectively actively acting on behalf of PCA, and there don't seem to be any checks and balances to control them.
The fact is there were rules and they just didn't follow the rules. I read all the rules, and if the rules said I was wrong, or even if the rules just weren't clear and I was only arguing my side of it, I would have just gone away. I'm a lawyer so if I felt I had no case I would have just taken my ball and gone home!
I'm not ready to release my letter at this time, because even though I have been treated unfairly, I want to be fair in this process. If my letter does get released at some future point, which I reserve the right to do, I would find it strange for anyone to disagree with me.
Its going to take some extreme mental contortions for PCA to keep arguing that they are right, and the more they do that, the more ridiculous their position becomes.
The funny thing is that OSA doesn't really make me tired - its this stuff that just drains the life out of me!
05-22-2024 | 09:59 AM
