Carol Altmann – The Terrier

I have learned that one of the options for sacking former Warrnambool City Council chief Peter Schneider would have cost ratepayers around $30,000, instead of more than 10 times that amount – $365,709.

If getting rid of the CEO just 18 months into his contract was such a matter of urgency, why did the councillors involved have to rely on the most expensive option?

It turns out Mr Schneider’s contract contained a number of clauses for termination, including two for instant dismissal.

The first of these two – let’s call it the “CEO Stuffs Up Big Time” clause – sets out a number of specific grounds for instant dismissal that, if proven, result in a much smaller payout.

The thrust of these grounds is as follows:

is negligent in carrying out his duties (ie. the responsibilities, duties and functions set out in his contract);

commits an act of serious misconduct;

seriously or persistently breaches a term of the contract;

breaches the council’s policies that apply to the CEO including occupational health and safety, privacy, anti-discrimination, and use of council IT’s systems;

engages in conduct that may cause imminent and serious risk to the health and safety of another person;

is declared bankrupt;

fails to immediately notify the council that he has been charged with or found guilty of any criminal offence;

is charged with a crime, or found guilty of a crime, that brings the council into disrepute;

is unable to work in Australia.

Under this clause, the CEO would only be entitled to his salary, holiday pay, sick leave and long service leave up to the time he was sacked.

As of 13 July 2020, when Mr Schneider was dumped, this total came to around $30k.

As we know, the four councillors who voted to sack Mr Schneider didn’t – or couldn’t – use this clause and I can only speculate as to why, given it contains the sorts of grounds that most of us would expect behind a CEO getting the boot.

The councillors instead used another clause in the contract, which I will call the “Not Telling” option.

Under this option – as we now know –  the council could sack the CEO for “any reason or no reason”, which pretty much covers everything from leaving the hot tap running in the tearoom through to serious misconduct.

Not surprisingly, the payout for pulling the lever on this trapdoor is much higher: 12 months remuneration OR the remaining value of the contract, whichever is less.

With 30 months to go on Mr Schneider’s contract, the 12 month payout is what came to pass – $365,709.

The “Not Telling” option is the most expensive of all the options and, I can only assume, is used when the other “instant dismissal” option can’t be justified, or doesn’t apply.

All of this, I am afraid, only raises more questions and takes us further away from the answer that everyone is seeking about Mr Schneider’s rapid demise: why?

The full story will be slow in coming, if at all, as the dismissal heads to the Supreme Court in February.

Speaking of questions, one of I have left with the council today is whether it has acted on the recommendation of the Victorian Ombudsman to refer the misuse of a council credit card by former tourism manager, David McMahon, to police.

It is now 10 days since the Ombudsman’s eye-popping report on the ratepayer funded booze fest was made public, so I am sure an answer is imminent.

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

Terrier Tip Jar

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

For those who missed my post stream during the final meeting of the Warrnambool City Council, here is the string of revelations regarding the dumping of the CEO:

Good god – this is getting interesting! Cr Kylie Gaston has asked a number of punchy questions to the Mayor about the whole sacking of the CEO saga.

We are now learning:

1. Nine applications during the recruitment of the previous CEO went missing. The recruitment agency had an IT problem. (I hope we got a refund from that recruitment agency).

2. The council and CEO Schneider met on 21 February to discuss issues with the CEO’s performance.

3. Crs Cassidy and Herbert went to Peter Schneider’s private house on a Sunday morning on February 23 to discuss issues that Cr Cassidy had with the CEO. Cr Herbert set up this meeting. Cr Cassidy says she now considers it was unprofessional to have this meeting at Mr Schneider’s house.

4. Cr Gaston says councillors didn’t realise what they signed up for with the CEO’s contract that would allow such a big payout of around $364,000.

5. Another big allegation – that the former CEO signed up long-term contracts of several senior managers knowing that he was leaving. I wonder who these people were? (Ms King – the new acting CEO – was not among them.)

6. Cr Sycopoulis is raising whether the CEO payout is the end of the matter or if extra legal fees may be coming, if there is legal action by Peter Schneider.

7. Cr Gaston says a performance review of the former CEO in May was not favourable and that, in effect, his sacking was not “out of the blue”.

8. It sounds like the WCC didn’t know what it signed up for with the former CEO’s contract. (Good grief). The size of the payout came as a surprise. Not good enough councillors.

9. Bring on the election – there are no winners here.

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

Tonight I want to pause and reflect on this simple fact: the Warrnambool City Council is now the subject of not one, not two, but three investigations.

One of those investigations is the Ombudsman’s inquiry into the misuse of corporate credit cards.

The second is the council’s own internal inquiry into these credit cards.

The third is a Worksafe investigation into alleged bullying.

And the fourth – revealed here on Friday afternoon – is an investigation by the Local Government Inspectorate into the sacking of the former CEO Peter Schneider by Crs Sue Cassidy, Mike Neoh, Kylie Gaston and David Owen.

What a freaking mess.

And all of it – ALL of it – will come at a cost to ratepayers, which is the bottom line of this latest disgraceful manoeuvring, backroom dealing and secrecy.

We are footing the bill.

We will pay for Mr Schneider’s payout, whatever that is, because we still don’t know.

The Four Horsemen involved in lopping off the CEO’s head were happy to swing the sword, but haven’t had the spine to reveal how much it will cost ratepayers, because that information will undoubtedly upset voters as they head toward the October election.

The councillors don’t want that bitter truth spoiling their campaigns.

Best to distract ratepayers with other shiny things, like bike paths and taverns and new grass at Reid Oval.

And the four councillors involved in the coup brought in all the lawyers they needed to get rid of Mr Schneider, and guess who pays for that?

We do.

How much was spent on these lawyers? We don’t know.

And who decided to get that legal advice?

It sure as heck wasn’t supported by all seven councillors, because three of them – Crs Tony Herbert, Peter Sycopoulis and Robert Anderson – were dead set against the whole idea.

This begs another key question: can four councillors rack up a legal bill without the approval of the other councillors?

I am no expert on the finer details of the Local Government Act but the Inspectorate is, and I hope it will pull this question apart during its investigation, because, as a ratepayer, I have a vested interest.

We all have a vested interest, because the four councillors involved have been spending my money – and yours – and we deserve to know the full story.

Rates notices are going out as we speak and blowing people away: I am getting messages every day from people shocked by how much we pay in Warrnambool compared to other cities.

I am also talking to people worried about what lies ahead as the full economic impact of the C19 virus kicks in.

And yet here are four of our councillors, blowing hundreds of thousands of dollars on lawyers and payouts for reasons which are all secret.

The inspectorate’s investigation will probably take some time, but my hope is that the four councillors who are now part of this investigation will step up themselves and tell the public the full story about this coup and the cost.

They know the truth.

As we inch closer toward the October election, there will be many shiny distractions and photo ops and promises, but the two things that I am hearing voters want the most right now are transparency and integrity.

Transparency and integrity.

Over to you, councillors.

If you would like to support the work of The Terrier, please make a contribution to the tip jar.

Terrier Tip Jar

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

Questions: Are we about to throw $1 million of ratepayers’ money down the drain because the four horsemen of the apocalypse decided to sack the WCC chief without warning?

This is the figure being floated about and because Crs Owen, Neoh, Gaston and Cassidy refuse to tell us the full cost of their night of the long knives last Monday, I am going to say it must be close to the truth.

The math makes sense: 2.5 years left on a $340,000 contract, plus paying the acting CEO another $340,000, plus legal fees, leave entitlements etc.

Analysis – Carol Altmann

When is a termination a resignation or vice versa?

The Warrnambool City Council’s forthcoming financial report for 2015-16 contains an intriguing line, saying the substantial sum of between $390,000 and $399,000 was paid out to a senior officer as a result of a “termination” of their employment.

As far as the public record is concerned, nobody has been terminated from the Warrnambool City Council in the past 12 months, but there has been a number of resignations, including director of city growth Bill Millard, who left last November, and that of former head of infrastructure Peter Robertson.

Mr Robertson left the council in January this year after losing the confidence of several councillors.

According to the council documents, the total payout of between $390,000 and $399,000 was a result of a “contractual payment” that was made in addition to the unnamed senior officer’s normal entitlements.

Given the highest salary for a senior officer (not including the CEO) is between $200,000 and $210,000, this is one heck of a payout and begs the question of where that extra $100,000 has come from? Parking fees and fines? And what has been cut in the budget to accommodate it?

We will probably never know due to confidentiality clauses and a general reluctance by the Warrnambool City Council to reveal the salary arrangements of its public officers. After all, we still don’t know, officially, exactly how much CEO Bruce Anson is paid each year.

In the US, for example, it is widely accepted that if you are paid from the public purse – from the US President down – then you can expect full public scrutiny of your entitlements.

Given ratepayers are the ones footing the bill for the Warrnambool City Council, it should be exactly the same here.