[DECISION] Staff protection in relation to the audit

HI Thorsten,

it would be great if every so often you would check your email archive so that you avoid posting misleading messages that then need to be corrected to avoid presenting to the community a misleading narrative.

The appraisal for the work done by the member of staff in 2021 was very good and I never seen any issues with that.

The issues was with the false accusations and specific firm goals written by those that should have not written those suggestions especially after having received legal statements related to applying the arm’s length principle in 2021.

I was surprised then that you didn’t get my comments about it and I find it unbelievable that you still don’t see the issue with that after years of legal troubles.

So as it’s not optional why did you refuse to remove that “firm goal” despite telling you clearly what was the big issue with that statement?

Maybe you want to check again, in the text of the appraisal, the recommendation about payments and why you have been asked to remove also that part.

What is worrying is that even today you still don’t seem to see the correlation between what you did and, reason why tendering was stopped and the ongoing legal issues that those behaviours caused.

You can’t imagine it because it doesn’t happen. Matters related to individuals are handled by a group that doesn’t include members of staff.

I didn’t blame him of anything.

You pointed to “repeated initiatives”, just one, where clarifications have been asked but not received.

We have been acting as if the motion he proposed a year ago was accepted but as it has never been completed it hasn’t been voted on.

I don’t remember if I’ve already told you but it would be great if you validated your statements with the evidence you have available and maybe also by reading the result of the audits showing that you are probably not in the best position to lecture others about good governance.

Please do also find a few minutes to forward to the board the information you know you should shared since 2022 so that we can finally move forward and fix the issues that the previous board dropped on our laps.

Ciao

Paolo

I was on purpose not mentioning any names, I did not point to individuals. I explained why a protection of staff is needed in particular for the audit. Seeing now direct comments on individuals and making it a personal thing is an unfortunate turn of events.

I am NOT agreeing to publish anything concerning HR matters. The question is ridiculous in general and shows an interesting attitude towards members of staff, but even more, this thread is not about me. This thread is about protection of staff involved in the audit, and you turn it into a discussion about individual’s performances. Even more, you continue to push your idea of a staff policy, which is one of the topics that brought another crisis just in the past months the board and me now have to deal with.

While after all those years I am sort of used to get severely attacked in private, in public and behind my back, I think also of my fellow teammates. Several reported cases of harrassment (I am not saying who claimed was harrassed by whom) were not followed up in the past years, and now my teammates probably must fear they will be exposed in the same way if they speak out.

This e-mail clearly indicates what various members of the team had to endure in the past years.

This has nothing to do with language barriers, even if I repeatedly heard such excuse. There are various reports from various team members raising complaints, including health problems.

I remember other interactions. Stop it. Just stop it, I will not tolerate something like that for my team and me. I did not expect any apologies or even thank you to the staff who pointed out severe issues way before they came to life. Listening to those people would have avoided putting TDF in the situation it is today. I would at least have expected to not get further punched. Obviously I was wrong.

Me and others are still here and work hard to solve the situation and are committed to turn things into a positive outcome again. This is of interest for everyone - for TDF, the involved directors personally, as well as the ecosystem companies affected. The situation is already quite complex. If we attack each other in such a way, it will be more and more complicated, and at some point impossible, to solve the issues.

How could any discussion or negotation work after such attacks? It needs to stop. The more heated the situation becomes, the less likely a good outcome will be, which is to the disadvantage to everyone. Attacking those who are working to solve the situation will not help.

It is clear there are demands with some for tenders, trademarks, a business entity, a staff policy and other things. However, TDF is a nonprofit foundation, driven by its statutes, there for the common good. It is not a single decider’s company. Me and others will defend the independence, stability and nonprofit status of TDF, to ensure it will be here also in ten years to come.

2 Likes