The problem is that the statement does not say anything of substance. It did say that Shepherd hired legal counsel who suggested that Shepherd was defamed. In response to that, the Board said that they made “an effort to avoid a rancorous, public discussion on personnel matters which are normally best left private.” If so, then why issue a statement?
The statement says that the Board “ended” their employment relationship with Shepherd yet seems to be concerned that Harlan Berk’s statement said Shepherd was fired. However, a person does not have to be a rocket scientist to know that after it was announced Shepherd was put on leave during an investigation and then his employment was “ended” to put the two events together to guess he was fired. In fact, my post on that day was “ANA Fires Shepherd.”
Again, this statement does not say anything of substance. But it appears that the Board feels they have to defend themselves. If the Board did not do anything wrong, what are they defending? Then to have Cliff Mishler, past president and current governor, make a statement, it makes them appear like they are trying to hide something.
What are the ANA Board of Governors hiding?
The ANA released their statement, Harlan Berk had his say, then Shepherd responded. Everyone vented and that should be enough. Why did the Board of Directors have to respond? What are they hiding?
The Board’s statement concludes:
It is most unfortunate that Mr. Shepherd has resorted to a public discussion that the ANA cannot comment upon, instead of moving forward in a dignified manner. We are deeply saddened by his decision. Rather than dwell on past mistakes, the ANA will move forward and fulfill its educational mission to serve the best interests of the entire numismatic community.
If you do not want to “dwell on past mistakes,” then just SHUT UP!
16 comments:
What the Board is "hiding", Scott, is the lurid details which could further damage Larry Shepherd's reputation, IF he decides he wants to keep playing this game this way.
Your further attempts to paint the Board as the bad guy here is now eroding YOUR personal reputation and desirability as a future candidate to be quite frank about it.
As Ted Williams once put it, "If you don't think too good, don't think too much."
V. Kurt Bellman
2012 ANA Worlds's Fair of Money Volunteer Chairman
My comments are not trying to paint the Board as the "bad guy." My comments are saying that by coming out and making this statement, they are leaving themselves open to criticism. I am saying that the Board should take their own advice, be above the fray, and deal with it in a quiet, professional manner.
If I was a member of the Board, I would disagree with releasing this statement. There is nothing to be gained by arguing in public.
Well, we want to know the details . Aren't we , the members , entitled to know ? i don't think Scott is painting the board as bad guys, he is just telling it like it is . It makes me wonder what is being hidden . Why did the staff also have a revolt ?
Maybe it has something to do with how much money the ANA spent on decorating in Chicago . The breakdown shows over $200,000 for decorating . At our show it costs aprx $40 per booth . Also, the security charges appeared to be very high . No wonder the table fees have skyrocketed !! We charge as low as $300 for a 10' booth for 3 days.
Sid Nusbaum
ANA LM 1712
MNS 2012 Show Chairman
No Sid, we the members, (and yes, I am one too), are NOT entitled to know the details, as a matter of statute and case LAW, not ANA policy, per se. It is a personnel management issue (the way Larry managed ANA personnel) and even in government, that is protected and confidential AS A MATTER OF LAW!
And Scott, if I were a member of the board, DEPENDING on my judgment on the factual veracity of the charge being levelled by staff at Larry, I'd vote to remove him also, if it were true, and I'd vote to keep it private, too. Because to do otherwise would open both me personally and the board to litigation. We don't have to LIKE the need to maintain secrecy, and I don't like it personally, but it is the law.
This is the crucial paragraph in the ANA's most recent release and it explains ALL the need for secrecy:
“The ANA declines to disclose those matters because ***they involve other personnel*** or third-parties outside the ANA. The decisions to first suspend then terminate Mr. Shepherd were not ‘political,’ nor made in haste. They were made
after a review of the facts and with careful deliberation."
Nothing to do with shows, or decorations, or security, or anything else. Personnel management inside the ANA and involving outside people as well. Don't read into this more than is there.
VKURTB: IF WE'RE NOT ENTITLED TO KNOW & IT IS A MATTER OF LAW, THEN HOW DID ALL THE CHARGES AGAINST THE PREVIOUS DIRECTOR COME OUT IN THE WASH ? IF IT ISN'T SLANDER THEN YOU CAN'T SUE BECAUSE IT IS THE TRUTH .
That's simply not true, Sid. Not true at all. These are internal personnel issues - not so much because it involves Larry Shepherd per se, but because discussing it involves innocent OTHER parties as well, current and former other ANA personnel.
The difference between this and the Cippoletti matter is because HE took it public by initiating litigation, which opens up the whole business unless the court issues a gag order.
This isnvolves BOTH Larry AND other ANA current and former personnel, and even if Larry wants to go public, the other innocent parties are entitled to absolute secrecy if that is their wish.
It has NOTHING to do with slander. Don't even try that angle. It has to do with employment law and the secrecy that surrounds it. My best friend is a HR professional, as is my niece. The average Joe has NO IDEA how pervasive secrecy has become in employment/personnel issues.
Sid,
I see you are a small businessman. I come from a long line of small entrepreneurs myself. I have witnessed far too many small businessmen who became ex-businessmen because they didn't heed the massive recent trend toward strict HR secrecy requirements, got sued, and lost their businesses in a lawsuit. You can even lose in court now giving an ex-employee a negative recommendation, even if every word you said was true.
This is fairly new stuff. Most of it in the last 5 or so years. HP pros advise employers to say nothing other than dates of employment and salary. If you embellish even a little, you open yourself up to a lawsuit. Careful, Sid. Don't go all macho on a slacker that might have once worked for you. it can be the wirst decision you ever made in this new modern era.
Courts are WAAAAY serious about affecting people's ability to find later work.
Gentlemen:
Let's agree to disagree so we can keep this civil.
Shepherd was fired--or his employment was terminated--everyone responded and the ANA Board decided to say one more thing. That's it.
I welcome comments from others.
Scott
Well, I'm just glad they are moving forward . We'll find out all the facts in the near future because somebody will blab - it's human nature ! Maybe they will find someone suited for the job . They do need to place less attention on shows & more attention on numismatic education .
It seems to me that Larry first went public to Coin World and then the ANA Board responded without really saying anything of substance to avoid the very legal problems Kurt discussed. So I don't get why Scott keeps taking issue with the ANA even though he does not want to admit it. Since most of the specific facts are not known to any of us, why even get into all this right now?
I think the ANA board needs to resign in masse over the disgraceful way they treated Larry Shepherd. Don Willis of PCGS is supporting Larry to lead an entirely new slate of directors. The ANA is hiding behind coy press releases, but the fact is that Larry never even had his day in court, no trial, no fair hearing.
As a casual collector and one who reads a variety of coin-related articles, there does not seem to be a good opinion of the ANA. They seem to have left themselves open to scandal over the past few years, and I would not give them a cent for membership until it is all resolved and they get their house back in order.
I wouldn't even be commenting now, but I tried last week to contact them about one of their member-dealers that is (even now) ripping people off on eBay. Their response to my email was "get back to us in 90 days if there is still a problem."
So as a casual collector and based on my experience, what is the purpose of ANA? To collect fees from members to line the pockets of those they unwisely chose to put in positions of authority?
Mind you...this is just my experience.
Joe makes a good point about the ANA generally. The Board has too many dealers, and not enough consumer/collector influence. The field of numismatics does have some nagging ethical problems - coin doctoring, abusive buy/sell spreads, bullion hawking idiots trying to commit economics in public, etc.
And when the whole Board has to kiss certain anatomy of their fellow dealers, you have an ethical breach.
And Gary is spot on correct on this:
"Larry never even had his day in court, no trial, no fair hearing."
He's right. He didn't have that. Problem is - no one in that position is entitled to one.
The Board is essentially "God". It's why elections matter and letting a Board get elected without opposition is a scandal - OUR scandal.
Post a Comment