Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
VIC
Your post confuses me even more.
If most of the board were in favour of ROGER why is he no longer there?
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Guys (Keef and Vic re posts 59 and 60) for clarity purposes the President of the Chamber is Cameron Macsween...no y in it at all. Any confusion with our very own Howard must be avoided at all costs
Keef ...I think Vic is referring to the Mayors meeting yesterday..so it was NOT the board of the chamber who he was giving an opinion on but the general assembly. I would guess this is what he meant anyway.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
PAULB
No confusion over our loved HOWARD
The confusion lies with this decision by the chamber
was barryw aware?
is it just about not being able to afford rogers wage?
if the board as vic says were all in favour of Roger why is he not there now?
Does, as Roger says, the board all have there heads in the sand?
Will we ever get the true story
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Keef we posted at the same time as I added an extra bit to the post above (62) Vic wasnt ( I dont thinkso anyway) referring to the Board of the CoC but the general meeting held by the Mayor yesterday..the board of the CoC wasnt there, so Vic would not have been able to ascertain that info. Confusing I know... Cameron McSween was there though I understand.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Sorry about that I have now done a edit of post 60.And you are right it was the meeting of the Business,s in Dover and in the chair was the mayor.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
VIC
Me old china, nothing like making a confusing story, even more confusing lol
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Paul The Chamber of Commerce was there and as I said,their President and Director Business Develoment got up and told us all the statement from the C/C and the press was there to.It is not confusing Keith.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
OK
BUT questions remain unanswered,already people are forming there own opinions
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Yes I said that Vic, the President was there but not the full board...the confusion came as you suggested Roger had the support of the full board.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
thanks paulb
i'm sure Vic knew what he was on about
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
This is a line-management issue and not a strategic one dealt with by the Board, as such. The first I knew about the 'sacking' or 'non-sacking' was from this forum and that is something of a sore point I openly admit.
I repeat that I will not comment on the specific of what happened regarding Roger. In due course the Board will get a report on what happened and will make any decisions needed from that with any Board discussions remaining within the Board.
There are clear differences between strategic decisions and line-management matters, the Board does not micro-manage.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
BARRYW
That opens a new can of worms, I will await(as i'm sure many others will) with interest the boards view on what has happened.
Athough I suspect the truth will never be known
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
As I say the Board discussions will remain within the Board as is only right and proper.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
ROGER
Your shafted mate
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Paul. In post 44, I said"Roger had most of the support from the floor"I did not say the support of the C/C/ at any time. I know I get it wrong at times and you help me out, but I am right on this one.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
you can say one thing about roger, always controversial.
75 posts already on the subject.
i have to say that the statement from the chamber seemed a bit too carefully worded for me.
knowing what roger is like i would go along with his statement of events.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Thank you Howard.
When it comes down to it, I guess it's a case of who do you believe. I know what happened and what was said because I was there having it said to me (but Cameron will also say that too, as will Alan.
I can honestly say, hand on heart, hand on the Bible, hand on Jean's life, the news release Cameron has put out, is NOT TRUE.
I know I've said it more than once and it is danger of becoming boring, but I was SACKED as Dover Business Support Manager, I did not resign - I loved the job for God's sake.
Keith, your post number 63, has a piece that says I said the Chamber Board have their head in the sand; I didn't say that at all, what I did say was they don't have their head in the sand - they're all successful businessmen, but the 3 leaders have their heads in the sky, but their feet are most definitely not on the ground and they do not appreciate the needs and concerns of local (small) businesses, or of how to move Dover forward - that's why I created and developed those projects and initiatives.
Roger
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
and you thought politics was a dirty business
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
I guess I must be naive John - politics and business.
Roger
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
just like oil and water ayyy roger.
