Response to President Bailey
The following is in response to Toronto YMCA President Rich Bailey's message of August 3:
From: "Uriel Wittenberg" <uw@urielw.com> Since 1997, managers have told us: "Trust us. We made the right decision." Now your committee seeks to settle the issue by telling us: "the responsibility for YMCA resources lies with Management." In other words: "Trust them. They made the right decision." Ed Dewar and I both emphasized the simple facts repeatedly to the committee: (1) The racquetball courts are empty; (2) the squash courts are busy; (3) locating Cycle Fit on a squash court patently makes no sense. It defies the Y's own usage statistics. It defies logic and the evidence of our senses. It has been going on before our eyes for years. Sixty seven of us have signed the most recent petition in protest. Still an explanation is refused? This is accountability? Back in May, Lesley told us: "The removal of a racquetball court at this time will drive the racquetball access up a level similar to the one that squash players do not find acceptable now." Your "independent committee" regurgitates the same erroneous viewpoint: "The suggestion that the Cyclefit class be moved to a racquetball court would be as unfair to those participants playing handball and racquetball as [Mr. Wittenberg] has stated the disputed decisions were to squash players." My response to Lesley last May was: "I don't think so. I have scanned a whole week's reservation sheets several times. I have never seen both racquetball courts booked for the same time slot. However, as you must know, every night we have all 3 squash courts simultaneously booked for multiple time slots.... Have you taken a look at the reservation sheets?" I posed this question to Lesley publicly, on behalf of 67 petitioners. Lesley ignored the question and we never got a reply. Indeed, the question cannot be answered, since it is impossible to defend her statement. Now your committee presents us with the same impossible-to-defend statement. But this time, as things have been arranged, no one has to defend the statement. I cannot question the committee. And I cannot question you, since you refuse to discuss the issue. Your committee, you say, has already settled the matter. And as you stressed again and again in our meeting yesterday, the committee is "INDEPENDENT of management." You told us (Sean O'Brien and me) yesterday that, since you might have been accused of bias, it had been preferable for a committee to address our concerns. However, this also means you are now free to say, "I had nothing to do with the decision," and avoid taking responsibility for this fresh rejection of our petition. I foresaw this when, last May, you insisted that YMCA procedures prevented you from addressing our complaints. "I have no choice," you told me. I asked you at the time for documentation of these procedures. You never produced any such documentation. I daresay producing such documentation is another impossibility. But even in cases where there is no "independent committee" to point to, I regret to note you are unwilling to take responsibility for YMCA actions. You concede, for example, that you were "involved" in the decision to hire a lawyer to threaten me with a libel suit. Is it your impression, in that case, that I have uttered an untrue statement about the YMCA or its employees? I asked you this question repeatedly in our meeting yesterday. You staunchly refused to reply. This raises very grave issues: Have you contemplated instituting a lawsuit against me based on grounds you do not believe are genuine? Have you contemplated using YMCA funds to do this? Mr. Bailey, our grievance began with an allocation error which it would have been trivial for management to correct. As we have escalated our complaint, management's tactics in defending the original error have become more and more extreme and outrageous. When your assistant called me to arrange our meeting, I was certain that the affair was finally over. I fully expected an amicable exchange in which you would show leadership, make a simple acknowledgement of past errors, and promise a fresh start. Instead, you have been attempting to fortify your untenable position, walling the errors off behind an "independent committee" that cannot be questioned. How long can you stand by decisions that no one can defend? I and a growing number of my fellow members are watching with increasing incredulity as the small circle of people who wield power within the YMCA show every willingness to overturn all of the organization's core values in putting their personal loyalties to each other uppermost. You appear to be prepared to have the YMCA undergo unlimited damage to its reputation and its standing in the community, rather than admit error and change course. The errors will have to be faced sooner or later. Why not now?
|