Thanks to the taxwise Kay Bell at Don't Mess With Taxes, I've become aware of the firing of the CEO of the American Red Cross, Mark Everson. In case you didn't know, since the deaths of Washington Redskins Safety Sean Taylor and Gatorade inventor Dr. J. Robert Cade seemed to hog yesterday's spotlight, Mark Everson was forced to step down after having an affair with a subordinate. Everson, former commissioner of the IRS, had only taken his position with the Red Cross back in May, and lasted a mere six months as the CEO of the best-known not-for-profit organization in the country.
I found this article by Stephanie Strom, which seems to put more of a negative spin on the organization that fired him rather than Everson himself. Perhaps it is my military background, or my recent and ongoing ethics training, but I am quite in disagreement with this article. For those of you too busy to read it (or in case the link expires or becomes password-protected), the gist is that Everson shouldn't have been fired because it took the American Red Cross so long to hire him in the first place, and despite his actions, he should have only suffered a temporary suspension or a loss in pay. While I am not privy to the details in Everson's contract, I assume the author of this article is not either. I would safely assume there is a Code of Ethics that all paid employees are to follow and before accepting employment they must sign a contract agreeing to abide by this code. The CEO would, for sure, as he is the public face of the organization. People who work for any large company usually have to sign some conduct agreement, and members of the military have to abide by the UCMJ. That said, I don't exactly think the issue was unaddressed for Mr. Everson.
The reason for Everson's termination is that he had an affair with a subordinate, a woman who is the president of a Red Cross chapter on the gulf coast. Both Everson and his subordinate are married, and the latter is pregnant. Personal relationships with people with whom you hold a position of power are generally never allowed and certainly not between two married people. The American Red Cross may have acted quickly in firing Everson, though I don't believe they acted rashly. With great power comes great responsibility. All across the military you see commanders being relieved of their commands due to "a loss of confidence in their ability to govern." Off the top of my head the commanders of the Arleigh Burke, the Helena, the Higgins, the Hampton, the Halsey, VAQ-140, VFA-122, the Newport News, and the Minneapolis-St Paul have all been fired in 2007. I'm sure there are others I've forgotten, to say nothing of the rest of the military. My point is, while you'd certainly hope that the person you hand-picked to lead an organization possesses the skills, common sense, and good judgment necessary to get the job done, this is not always the case, and when someone shows their incompetence, they should be relieved of their command as quickly and quietly as possible. Simply having good business skills or leadership experience is not enough to head an organization as well-known as the American Red Cross. The Red Cross is funded by voluntary contributions from taxpayers. If they feel the organization is going to turn a blind eye to someone acting unethically or irresponsibly by abusing his power and betraying his wife, most people would donate their money elsewhere. Lord knows there are enough other charities begging for it.
Problems at the top have a funny way of filtering down through the entirety of an organization and can negatively affect its culture. While some people feel that ousting the head of a group is a harsh move, I believe it is the right one. Despite his "impeccable credentials," Everson proved he lacks the integrity and personal responsibility necessary to lead an organization that is more respected than the IRS.
No comments:
Post a Comment