I've yet to see in any of the reporting point this out, I'm not aware there is a formal disclosure processthey did not disclose the information to the haitian government, uk government, european commission or any other governments that give them money and to whom they have to report these things
You can't stop someone resigning, and as disciplinary investigations end with the resignation I'm not sure how you go about reporting someone who's guilty of nothingthey also allowed the main executive at the center of it all to quietly resign and go work for another NGO where he did the same thing
Times reported that, during Stocking's tenure, Oxfam allowed three men to resign and sacked four others for "gross misconduct" after an inquiry concerning sexual exploitation, the downloading of pornography, bullying, and intimidation by Oxfam's staff in Haiti.[11] The Timesstated that an internal, confidential report was produced by Oxfam in 2011. It found that there had been “a culture of impunity” among some staff in Haiti and concluded that "it cannot be ruled out that any of the prostitutes were under-aged."[11] Among the staff who were permitted by Oxfam's leadership to resign without further actions taken against them was the charity's country director, Roland van Hauwermeiren. According to Oxfam's internal report, van Hauwermeiren admitted using prostitutes at a villa whose rent was paid with Oxfam funds means for charity. Stocking, Oxfam's CEO at the time, offered Hauwermeiren “a phased and dignified exit” invoking her concern that sacking him risked “potentially serious implications for the charity’s work and reputation."You can't stop someone resigning, and as disciplinary investigations end with the resignation I'm not sure how you go about reporting someone who's guilty of nothing
I don't trust the Telegraph reporting on this, there is an effort to destroy foreign aid spending on this country from the right win press. I belive they are making more of this than there isalso, refer to that post for more details of the cover up
all the information is coming from an internal oxfam report and employees who blew the whistleI don't trust the Telegraph reporting on this, there is an effort to destroy foreign aid spending on this country from the right win press. I belive they are making more of this than there is
Stocking isn't ceo and that blokes gone, so why burn the whole thing down?Times reported that, during Stocking's tenure, Oxfam allowed three men to resign and sacked four others for "gross misconduct" after an inquiry concerning sexual exploitation, the downloading of pornography, bullying, and intimidation by Oxfam's staff in Haiti.[11] The Timesstated that an internal, confidential report was produced by Oxfam in 2011. It found that there had been “a culture of impunity” among some staff in Haiti and concluded that "it cannot be ruled out that any of the prostitutes were under-aged."[11] Among the staff who were permitted by Oxfam's leadership to resign without further actions taken against them was the charity's country director, Roland van Hauwermeiren. According to Oxfam's internal report, van Hauwermeiren admitted using prostitutes at a villa whose rent was paid with Oxfam funds means for charity. Stocking, Oxfam's CEO at the time, offered Hauwermeiren “a phased and dignified exit” invoking her concern that sacking him risked “potentially serious implications for the charity’s work and reputation."
he broke local haitian laws and sex tourism laws in the uk and europe for which he should have been reported to authorities
every subsequent ceo and executive remained silentStocking isn't ceo and that blokes gone, so why burn the whole thing down?
Information yes, but that is separate from reporting. How you place emphasis on the information is where I lose trust with the telegraphall the information is coming from an internal oxfam report and employees who blew the whistle
i only quoted the employee not the editiorialising, the times who originally broke the story also had the similar reporting, as do many left leaning outlets like the guardian, who reported on the pattern of behaviourInformation yes, but that is separate from reporting. How you place emphasis on the information is where I lose trust with the telegraph
Did they know and to whom were they meant to report? What disclosure process is there?every subsequent ceo and executive remained silent
they also continued to cover up sexual abuse by management in other places, according to a former safeguarding officer at the charity
it needs to be burned to the ground because charities should not be run like this, let another better charity take its place and its funds
haitian police, uk police, swedish police etc. etc., a lot of police forces would have had interest in their bahviourDid they know and to whom were they meant to report? What disclosure process is there?
Since they have been firing people for these actions the question is why didn't they in some cases, that means reform is needed, not burning to the ground
The hatian police when? After an earthquake which had devastated their country? You think they would give a feck about prostitution at that time?haitian police, uk police, swedish police etc. etc., a lot of police forces would have had interest in their bahviour
reform is not enough, reform is consequence free
i don't know, but it's better than covering it upThe hatian police when? After an earthquake which had devastated their country? You think they would give a feck about prostitution at that time?
Swedish police, UK police would hae jurisdiction in Haiti?
The Times broke it and a lot of fuss has been made of it since by Government, I don't accept that Oxfam have been so awful that it needs burning to the groundi only quoted the employee not the editiorialising, the times who originally broke the story also had the similar reporting, as do many left leaning outlets like the guardian, who reported on the pattern of behaviour
their entire corporate structure is set up to protect it's high level employees, it can not be trusted any longerThe Times broke it and a lot of fuss has been made of it since by Government, I don't accept that Oxfam have been so awful that it needs burning to the ground
But there wasn't a cover up, as people have been fired for this. There may have been some cases dealt worse than others, but that needs reform, your solution is stupidi don't know, but it's better than covering it up
sex tourism laws, like what got garry glitter
If people are being fired or resigning as consequence of investigation how is it protecting the top brass?their entire corporate structure is set up to protect it's high level employees, it can not be trusted any longer
their own internal report said they covered it upBut there wasn't a cover up, as people have been fired for this. There may have been some cases dealt worse than others, but that needs reform, your solution is stupid
that's their jobThey might end up reporting everything in the future, good luck to the copper that has to wade through that lot
top brass were not fired, they were allowed to go get high level positions at other NGOs, von rapestick becoming running the bangladesh arm of a charity where he again ran brothels using charity moneyIf people are being fired or resigning as consequence of investigation how is it protecting the top brass?
Everything? Then why were people fired?their own internal report said they covered it up
Let's hope nothings missedthat's their job
low level employees were fired, with their actions not being reported to any relevant authoritiesEverything? Then why were people fired?
Again how do you stop someone resigning? He may have been eased out but either way he could have resigned which would stop all investigations against himtop brass were not fired, they were allowed to go get high level positions at other NGOs, von rapestick becoming running the bangladesh arm of a charity where he again ran brothels using charity money
oxfam chose not to fire him, it is in their internal report, they gave a nice reference and got him a high level job elsewhereAgain how do you stop someone resigning? He may have been eased out but either way he could have resigned which would stop all investigations against him
So the simple reform would be to make sure a channel is created for reporting this. Hardly a need to burn it to the groundlow level employees were fired, with their actions not being reported to any relevant authorities
that is consequence freeSo the simple reform would be to make sure a channel is created for reporting this. Hardly a need to burn it to the ground
Before you can fire you need an investigation, otherwise you'll break employment law. A resignation before a formal disciplinary process is how people have escaped many times. So where they ever in a position to fire him?oxfam chose not to fire him, it is in their internal report
Before you can fire you need an investigation, otherwise you'll break employment law. A resignation before a formal disciplinary process is how people have escaped many times. So where they ever in a position to fire him?
when they did that instead of firing himStocking, Oxfam's CEO at the time, offered Hauwermeiren “a phased and dignified exit” invoking her concern that sacking him risked “potentially serious implications for the charity’s work and reputation."
Person responsible has been fired, that is a consequencethat is consequence free
"ugh, should we run a brothel"
"careful now, there might be another reform"
that's not enough
they all got golden handshakesPerson responsible has been fired, that is a consequence
Was that as a result of a disciplinary process? That to me seems more a result of a ceo wanting to avoid going through a formal disciplinary processwhen they did that instead of firing him
Who got golden handsakes?they all got golden handshakes
the current oxfam employee who was chosen as a sacrifice resigned
it's not enough
i don't know if you read the quote but the words "instead of sacking him" are in there, that was a legitimate, legal option the charity hadWas that as a result of a disciplinary process? That to me seems more a result of a ceo wanting to avoid going through a formal disciplinary process
von rapestick, going to bangladesh to head a charityWho got golden handsakes?
The new charity that hired him, so not Oxfam?von rapestick, going to bangladesh to head a charity
that was part of his "dignified exit"The new charity that hired him, so not Oxfam?
It doesn't say instead of sacking him. Again it's also the previous ceoi don't know if you read the quote but the words "instead of sacking him" are in there, that was a legitimate, legal option the charity had
A golden handshake is generally a hello. And again this happend under the tenure of the previous ceothat was part of his "dignified exit"
It doesn't say instead of sacking him. Again it's also the previous ceo
subsequent ceos and other executives chose to remain silent, their only regret is being caughtA golden handshake is generally a hello. And again this happend under the tenure of the previous ceo
'Remaining silent', who was asking?subsequent ceos and other executives chose to remain silent, their only regret is being caught
helen evans'Remaining silent', who was asking?
