CEO victory blows open poisonous culture that silences city

Warrnambool City Council CEO Peter Schneider bore the brunt of a broken WCC culture with his sacking, which was today overturned by the Supreme Court. Image: Gameworld

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

Today’s emphatic victory in the Supreme Court by Warrnambool City Council CEO Peter Schneider did more than give him his job back – it has exposed the poisonous culture that tries to silence our city.

This victory exposes a rotten culture of power and entitlement that was allowed to take root and fester in the council for almost two decades.

Mr Schneider, wide-eyed and pink-cheeked off the plane from WA, walked into a culture that thrived on the cruel concept of  “insiders” and “outsiders” and the snivelling, sycophantic silence of those who quickly learned how the game was played, and who chose not to speak up, but to join in.

By joining in, they thought they might have a tiny slice of power too.

How did that work out?

Mr Schneider walked into a joint that had not had seen a staff review in 12 years.

The WCC had become a place of power plays, backroom deals, favours, payback, revenge, circles of influence, pet projects and political aspirations.

In this culture, one councillor who was on council for 16 years, Michael Neoh, was elected Mayor five times.

Peter Hulin, who was on council for a decade, was not allowed to be Mayor, even once.

Insiders and outsiders.

Mr Schneider was an “insider” for about 23 minutes – having been chosen for the job and relocating his family from across the other side of Australia – only to find he wasn’t an insider at all.

He didn’t fit the plan.

When those who thought they held all the power decided he had to go, they gathered, they plotted, and they ripped his voice out.

As Justice Michael McDonald’s judgment said in no uncertain terms today, Mr Schneider was denied the basic right to defend himself.

He was silenced.

Three other members of council, including the Mayor and a former Mayor, tried to ask questions.

The four councillors who believed they had all the power, stayed mute.

Is there any more brutal example of those who are allowed to speak and those who are not?

We have seen this silencing time and again in Warrnambool: where the cliques have gathered to protect their own and the powerless were ignored.

We see it in the ribbons fluttering on the Loud Fence outside St Joseph’s church in Lava St.

We saw it during the March4Justice rally on 15 March when sexual abuse survivors spoke for the first time.

We saw it in the battle to save Levy’s Beach from the might of the racing industry, where the words of the indigenous elders were lost in the tailwind of Darren Weir’s blazing comet.

We are seeing the same silencing take root in Lyndoch Living right now, in real time, where becoming a member or board member is no longer an opportunity open to everyone, but to a select few.

As a result, we have a situation where more than 1000 people have now signed a petition asking Lyndoch simple questions that it refuses to answer.

Insiders and outsiders: that’s how Warrnambool used to roll.

Mr Schneider’s victory today should send a message to all those who believe the voiceless will stay silent that those days are over.

The days of stepping on heads for personal power – those days are done.

But the cultural clean-out at the council is still not over.

There is an ongoing Local Government Inspectorate investigation that we all hope will provide answers to exactly what happened in the lead up to Mr Schneider’s illegal sacking and afterward.

This includes the “free” legal advice provided to then Cr Neoh, and the appointment of Vikki King as Acting CEO who, before the ink was dry on that deal, was also reappointed for another five years as manager of Community Services.

None of Ms King’s managerial colleagues signed off on that deal, so it was passed to a subordinate – a casual.

I have always believed that the truth rises and it will, and when it does, it comes with a roar.




Peter Schneider v W’bool City Council: judgment in full

Find the full judgment here:

Schneider v Warrnambool City Council [2021] VSC 337




Sacked WCC chief launches legal action against councillors

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

Lawyers for sacked Warrnambool City Council CEO Peter Schneider have issued defamation proceedings against four councillors.

Those four councillors are Cr Mike Neoh, Cr Kylie Gaston, Cr Sue Cassidy and Cr David Owen.

This partly explains the flurry of confidential business happening behind closed doors at the council meeting last night.

The second matter, according to sources, is believed to relate to lawyers for Mr Schneider arguing that he be reinstated as CEO: in other words, he gets his job back.

There is a precedent for such a thing, with a sacked CEO of Logan City Council, in Queensland, being given her job back after challenging the motives of the seven councillors who deposed her.

Wouldn’t that be a turn up for the books!

With the council elections just two months away and a new council to be elected, it may not be as unthinkable as it sounds.

And the third matter, twisted up in all of the above, is understood to be a heated, ding-dong, hair-pulling (except for Cr Sycopoulis, no offence to him), full-blooded barney over who should pay for the legal expenses racked up so far and those yet to come.

Should it be the individual councillors involved in the coup? Should it be ratepayers?

Discuss.

I emailed all seven councillors today to ask for comment on the legal action, whether ratepayers would be footing the bill, and how much had been spent so far on council lawyers.

Only three replied by deadline and no prizes for guessing who.

Here are their statements in full:

Mayor Tony Herbert:
“Thanks for your email.

As you are aware I am unfortunately unable to confirm most of your queries although some of the info might be able to be sought through channels of FOI. We lost the resolution on the night of the 13th July regarding confidentiality.

It is a very unfortunate situation the council has decided to thrust itself into especially in light of the further and greater impacts of the pandemic on council, staff, council budgets and our community ongoing.

I certainly would have preferred when such significant costs have been incurred, to have spent funds in a more productive and positive way…as a stimulus for our community post COVID for example.

I also implored councillors on a number of occasions to take alternative actions to manage our CEO  through discussion and negotiations rather than this drastic and expensive action as our only management tool!

As far as legal costs questions, I’m unable to comment at this time.

Hopefully things will become clearer.

One thing I will add further, is that personally,  I feel the community has a right to know what happened in the lead up to the sudden termination, reasons for  the termination and also the costs.”

Cr Robert Anderson: 

“Thank you for your email Carol, unfortunately because of the confidentiality on the above subject I am unable to make any comment.”

Cr Peter Sycopoulis:

“Thank you for your enquiry. Due to confidentiality requirements, I am not at liberty to provide an answer to your questions. What I can confirm however, is that I personally have not received correspondence from any law firm in relation to this matter.”

So the council is about to enter a legal shitestorm, to be frank, and – so far – we are officially being told nothing.

Please keep this in mind when we all vote in October.

Think about integrity, transparency, openness, honesty, accountability and the-right-to-know: these, to me, are now the key themes of election 2020.

If you would like to support the work of The Terrier, please consider throwing something in the tip jar.

Terrier Tip Jar