I learned not too long ago, one of the sanctuary employees was let go. This particular person was the first employee to break ranks and contact me regarding past issues at the sanctuary, while it was still under control by the pseudo-sanctuary directors.
While I was under no illusion as to why the former employee contacted me, I have to admit I am profoundly disappointed she did not embrace the opportunity to help the animals after everything they had been through much, much sooner.
I have always known this person was the weakest link at the pseudo-sanctuary. Her past actions at another Texas sanctuary demonstrated she was only willing to speak out on behalf of the animals when her job was on the line. I knew once the former pseudo-directors saw my blog postings as well as the local on-line newspaper reports, the former pseudo-sanctuary directors would wonder if this employee was the source of leaked information. I also knew that if they confronted her, she would deny the allegations, but in defense, start keeping notes on what the former directors were doing, so the information could be used against them in the future if they tried to fire her.
Sure enough, the pseudo-sanctuary directors suspected her of releasing “confidential” information; the employee immediately started collecting information; and then on that fateful day, I received my phone call from her, asking for help right before the pseudo-directors fired her.
While I understand the need for self preservation, I do not understand why these employees allowed themselves to be used by the former pseudo-sanctuary directors—and for what? Money? Two animal caretakers held their tongues during the course of the investigation, even though they could have been the key in resolving the situation years ago. So many animal lives could have been saved if they only spoke up sooner. Instead, they kept their silence for fear of losing their jobs and their home. Apparently in their eyes, the animals’ deaths were “acceptable losses.”
It is my understanding the employee that was let go will be allowed to visit the animals and staff—that this was strictly a business decision, not a personal one. I know the workers get attached to certain animals, so I’m sure the former employee must be relieved she can visit the animals again in the future once things settle down.
I just pray the remaining animal care staff have the animals’ health and welfare at heart and decide to speak up for the animals.
Sigh.
While I was under no illusion as to why the former employee contacted me, I have to admit I am profoundly disappointed she did not embrace the opportunity to help the animals after everything they had been through much, much sooner.
I have always known this person was the weakest link at the pseudo-sanctuary. Her past actions at another Texas sanctuary demonstrated she was only willing to speak out on behalf of the animals when her job was on the line. I knew once the former pseudo-directors saw my blog postings as well as the local on-line newspaper reports, the former pseudo-sanctuary directors would wonder if this employee was the source of leaked information. I also knew that if they confronted her, she would deny the allegations, but in defense, start keeping notes on what the former directors were doing, so the information could be used against them in the future if they tried to fire her.
Sure enough, the pseudo-sanctuary directors suspected her of releasing “confidential” information; the employee immediately started collecting information; and then on that fateful day, I received my phone call from her, asking for help right before the pseudo-directors fired her.
While I understand the need for self preservation, I do not understand why these employees allowed themselves to be used by the former pseudo-sanctuary directors—and for what? Money? Two animal caretakers held their tongues during the course of the investigation, even though they could have been the key in resolving the situation years ago. So many animal lives could have been saved if they only spoke up sooner. Instead, they kept their silence for fear of losing their jobs and their home. Apparently in their eyes, the animals’ deaths were “acceptable losses.”
It is my understanding the employee that was let go will be allowed to visit the animals and staff—that this was strictly a business decision, not a personal one. I know the workers get attached to certain animals, so I’m sure the former employee must be relieved she can visit the animals again in the future once things settle down.
I just pray the remaining animal care staff have the animals’ health and welfare at heart and decide to speak up for the animals.
Sigh.
No comments:
Post a Comment