Trust us and blindly follow...
I received the following information regarding a recent UCG Council meeting.
It seems that Vic Kubik, along with two others, unilaterally decided that UCG was hiring three new men to be trained as pastor's and one trainee to receive a stipend, without getting the entire Council's approval. They apparently bypassed the Council of Elders in this decision without consulting them for any input and to where the money was coming from to pay them.
Excerpts from Council letter:
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Chairman Robin Webber
called the meeting to order at 4:08 p.m. Eastern, and the meeting was
opened with prayer. All 12 Council of Elders (Council) members were
present....
New Hired Ministerial Trainees—Robin Webber
Mr. Webber mentioned a
Council member had brought forward a concern regarding the hiring
process. He asked the Council’s permission to place it on today’s
agenda. The topic would be hiring of trainees mentioned in Mr. Kubik’s
member letter sent out this week. The question was raised about what
part the Council has in helping with these decisions. Also the budget
called for four new hires. Where will the money come for the fifth hire?
The discussion surrounding the interpretation of 8.7.2 (1) that deals with a stated Council responsibility of “to
approve the selection of all officers, agents and employees; also to
remove, if necessary, any officer, agent or employee; to prescribe
duties for them; to approve their compensation; and to require from them
their faithful services.”
The Council is within
its bounds to interpret the bylaws on its own, and this bylaw has been
subject to various interpretations over the years.
The chairman reminded
the Council that the administration had brought their plans forward
twice regarding the ministerial training program via a videoconference
meeting before the General Conference of Elders (GCE) conference and the
recent May meetings that followed.
Additionally, legal
counsel Larry Darden mentioned current human resources (HR) policy for
hiring states the Council can delegate to the president. For new
positions the president is to get approval.
Chris Rowland mentioned that this isn’t a new position.
Mr. Webber said that
the administration has put the names forward and feels there is a sense
of urgency to train these individuals at this time. Three of those six
trainees will be moved to train under another pastor. Those names can’t
be currently shared at this time due to processes of notification and
notifying current employers.
Don Ward asked how
these men were selected from all the names put forward by pastors. And
who decides where they will be moved to?
Roy Holladay explained
that these individuals had their names put forward and were highly
recommended by church pastors. Others in the current listing will be
looked at for the future.
Dr. Ward reiterated his question about who decided on these six.
Roy Holladay said they
are available and qualified. There will be four to five recommended
each year from pastoral input. It was then clarified that there were
three who made the ultimate selection of these six trainees with input
from their pastors: Victor Kubik, Roy Holladay and Chris Rowland.
Mr. Holladay,
answering the second question, said that these new trainees will be
placed with men who have specific mentoring skills. In the ministry
different individuals have varying skills, and it’s a unique skill to be
able to mentor others towards this calling.
Mr. Rowland, in
further clarifying the first question, said that the selection was made
from pastoral input. A letter was sent to all those individuals who were
recommended to get further details on those men.
Mark Mickelson
mentioned that he believes the Council and administration are operating
outside of our bylaws. There are issues in terms of doctrine, issues in
terms of employment and issues in terms of media that should receive
Council approval that are not receiving Council approval at this time.
And those are all separate discussions that he would give more detail on
if wanted. What is being discussed now brings up the point that the
Council does have responsibility for new hires and not just new
positions. We need to either change our bylaws or change the way we
operate. He doesn’t think this is the way we agreed to operate. He also
asked for the Council to consider face-to-face meetings in August to
address these things.
Robin Webber is then "surprised" that anyone dared to question what had happened.
Mr. Webber inserted a
measure of surprise and desired explanation of Mr. Mickelson’s stated
position that this might impact doctrine.
Bill Bradford said
that with the new trainee hires there was no approval by the Council. He
reiterated the inquiries already raised about the hiring process and
making sure the new trainees are doctrinally sound. He also asked Mr.
Rowland where the money is coming from when this many new trainees were
not in the budget.
Mr. Rowland replied
that this was discussed with treasurer Rick Shabi. Ministerial and
Member Services (MMS) feels that with the environment in the Church
right now we have to be able to act quickly at times. He then mentioned that the extra funds came from what is in the bank already.
In reference to Mr.
Mickelson’s previous statement, Mr. Webber asked the administration to
share an overview of their selection process in regards to
qualifications and doctrinal soundness.
Mr. Holladay said that
locally he talked to Steve Myers about them. There are always unknown
quantities with all of us that we deal with. MMS is very comfortable
with all of the selected individuals.
Mr. Bradford asked if
the others who had their names put forward by pastors were interviewed
as well. Mr. Holladay replied that they were not. Mr. Bradford asked why
not.
Mr. Holladay replied
that letters were sent out to get their input. Several wrote back that
they would like to serve, but for various reasons could not do so at
this time. They weren’t interviewed, but there was communication with
them. The Council has the authority to review all hires but has not
always exercised that authority.
Mr. Rowland commented
that Roc Corbett specifically brought this bylaw to the Council’s
attention on his behalf during the recent review of the bylaws, to ask
for direction on the handling of new hires. The Council said nothing
about doing anything differently.
Mr. Webber went back
to the fundamental issue: that the Council reviews the credentials of
the president and operation managers. All elections and selections have
consequences regarding our choices. Once made, we place confidence in
such individuals while maintaining oversight. The Council strives to
offer the administration as much leeway as possible. It’s a process that
we work through.
John Elliott mentioned
bylaw 8.7.2 and that it appears to need further clarification. Mr.
Webber asked what kind of clarification it needs. Mr. Elliott said it
needs clarification in regards to hiring, as was stated by MMS. He
suggested that this topic be brought up for a future meeting.
Mr. Webber agreed. He had talked with secretary Gerald Seelig that morning about this topic and asked for his input.
Mr. Seelig said that since 1997 this has been an issue with questions that arise and can be contentious at times.
Mr. Webber restated that the Council should always have oversight, but should not micromanage.
Peter Eddington
mentioned that at the home office the precedent has been that the
Council has delegated it to the president. This is what is being
followed. If there is a need to change that precedent then it needs to
be made clear.
Scott Ashley said that
four years ago we went through a time when 15 to 20 new hires had to be
done, and they weren’t brought before the Council. He doesn’t see any
breaking with precedent, but that also doesn’t mean the Council can’t
address it again.
Mr. Kubik stated that
what we have been doing with the hiring of the six new trainees is still
a very new thing. Mr. Kubik reminded the Council that at the home
office they meet regularly and prayerfully. They are careful to not
mention names too quickly, and they are learning from what they have
done. They appreciate the input from the pastors at the regional
conferences.
Mr. Webber mentioned
this is not an end, both in the ministerial training selection process
and in the lives of those not currently selected. He mentioned his own
experience at Ambassador College of not being immediately selected to
“go out” after graduation and the course it took. Much is yet to occur
in the lives of all these individuals.
Mr. Webber asked the Council about their desire to take a straw poll to get the feeling of the Council in this matter.
Don Ward feels that certain UCG leaders are bypassing the Council in several actions. One was the epic failure of UCG's new web site that shoved official church teaching to the secondary pages on the web site instead of boldly proclaiming their doctrines and intent on its main page. After being widely mocked by countless web sites and its own members, the Council is trying to bandage that "ouchie" up.
Dr. Ward didn’t think
it was necessary for a straw poll. His understanding was that people
proposed would be narrowed down so the Council could then discuss the
final hires. He was surprised to hear of the new hires in Mr. Kubik’s
letter with no discussion from the Council. He asked, “Regarding the new
hires, is the Council to give input, or is the administration just
wanting it rubber stamped?” Dr. Ward stated that he understood the
desire to put confidence in the administration to perform their roles,
but major issues come up at times in which more immediate Council review
and oversight is needed. Such an issue was the recent rollout of the
new website that needed more initial Council direction and careful
review to ensure that the Church’s positions are accurately stated. Here
was a case in point of the need for more immediate and necessary
Council oversight on a major item, which did occur.
Mr. Holladay commented
a number of the new traineees are already in the process of changing
careers. It would be difficult for them to wait until there is the
Council approval at this point. The issue of them being doctrinally
sound is very valid. This is one of the reasons for having them trained
under a pastor who is balanced. For the round of hiring we take the
Council’s input and improve the process, but at this time we have
already committed to hiring these men.
Mr. Mickelson stated that he would prefer not to take a straw poll since the decision has already been made.
Mr. Elliott suggested
that the Roles and Rules Committee (RRC) can have the issue of the bylaw
remanded to it. Then the RRC can have a proposal for this process for
the August meeting.
Mr. Rowland said he
would be glad to send out policy 2.1, “Recruitment and Hiring” from the
human resources (HR) policy manual to anyone who wants to review it,
because it is pretty clear about what the process is. This policy was
approved by the Council in 2001. The process needs the approval of the
Council and/or the president to hire someone. If something is needed to
be updated it would be this HR policy.
Mr. Mickelson asked if
the precedent referred to by Mr. Eddington and Mr. Rowland also
included spending money outside the approved budget. Any spending that
is not within the planned budget needs be addressed by the Council at a
later date, which would include salaries and moving expenses.
You would think that close to twenty years after UCG's formation that they would have things all figured out. Since they were the "new and much improved" Church of God at that time, they set out thinking they would be a better church and be run more efficiently. The problem is, and always has been, is that the very foundation of the UCG was envisioned in clandestine backstabbing plan's in Kubik's on-campus apartment on how to take as much money and members as they could while they were all still employees of the Worldwide Church of God. Every single person in power in UCG was a minister in power in WCG where they did what they wanted and spent as they wanted. That power carried right over into UCG along with the abuse and wastefulness they participated in when in the WCG. Nothing truly has changed in UCG. Ethics has never been the banner of the UCG since its inception.
