Stephanie Hightower tries to bully Law & Legislation Secretary, gets called out by Lionel Leach

Thanks Becka (do I remember that right) - you've done a lot to illuminate this ongoing situation with USATF. This is just more of the same from SH.

I have good reason to believe that the New England region will throw its weight behind a push to remove her in December.

Becca, sorry

AKMarmoset wrote:

Thanks Becka (do I remember that right) - you've done a lot to illuminate this ongoing situation with USATF. This is just more of the same from SH.

I have good reason to believe that the New England region will throw its weight behind a push to remove her in December.

Great, but is the New England region a vote or a recommendation to someone who has a vote and ignores what the members want anyway.

I love the "growth" angle. Those DMCA takedown notices are really adding to the bottom line. Good job Ms. Hightower. And when there's progressively fewer participants? Then what? MORE REVENUE! That's going to end well.

Meh. Actually, it's about average for an IOC sport.

If you look at the PDF of this email on the front page of LRC... its true, email isn't private but that is easy to forget when you're writing a quick draft of something in gmail.

When you format a letter on USATF letterhead, write cc: (via email) and all the other bells and whistles of a formal letter -- there's no way this was a quick paragraph dashed off thoughtlessly.

The formality of the presentation increases the bully-ing level to an extreme degree. Even without the formatting its is a horrible way for a leader to communicate, but with it, yikes.

If USATF board lets her retain the nomination they took from Hersch after this show of "professionalism," I will be happy to join on the picket line to decertify USATF.

Shark=jumped.

Why would they rise up if revenue really is growing? Growing revenue means higher salaries. Even if Ms. Hightower's claims of growing revenue aren't true, it's a common tactic to force cooperation.

Revenue trumps sport. It shouldn't be like that, but it is.

"Bullying" is a serious charge, especially in this day & age. And I also have some reservations about dispersing emails all over the internet. And what did Tim Baker say or do to precipitate this?? Anyone have the transcripts so that we can at least see what has gotten Steph in such a tizzy?

It is very easy to throw up one's hands and say "revenue trumps sport," but it is not clear to me that such a claim is accurate in the case of USATF. First of all, the revenue isn't all that great at USATF. It may be up, but it has a long way to go and if the leadership really wants to grow they need to look longer term. Given how much money is out there in athletics, they have not even begun to grab the low hanging fruit. Secondly, taking the long term view, revenue will be hampered by having a person in senior leadership who is so divisive and who has shown a willingness to privilege one sponsor over other potential corporate partners. So, to simply say "leadership won't (or shouldn't) act on Ms. Hightower's behavior because of a small increase in revenue would be to take a very weak approach to their mandate, which is to represent constituent members and grow the organization long term.

As someone who's lived their professional life as an executive in the private sector, I think sending a letter like this is ridiculous.

In fact, I think it's got to be a troll. I'll give it a 7/10 because it got a lot of you believing it.

No one in their right mind would deliver this message via a letter or email. It should be delivered in person. If that's not possible, then via phone.

If she really did this, off with her head. Immediately.

Of course she could just quietly not reappoint this guy as retribution for whatever it is he said. That would be the normal approach. But the fact that she bothered to send this threatening email indicates that she needs him in some way. I sense weakness.

At the very least because of e-mails like this, the growing negativity of public opinion about her, and the overwhelming vote against her nomination as representative to the IAAF, the USATF Board needs to seriously rethink their appointment of her to that position. It is becoming increasingly less likely that she would garner the respect among members of the IAAF that we need the U.S. delegate to have.

The tactics she has displayed will likely do nothing but produce ill-will for the U.S. at the IAAF level. We need a firm, polished, diplomatic and respected delegate who knows how the organizations works and can get things done (like Mr. Hersh), not a egomaniac who tries to bully others to get what she wants.

this deal has made me a little queasy - any of us who has worked in organizations can understand that the boss needs to know if someone is actively working against her. it sounds like this guy Baker has been, in fact, working against the boss. Not because she is breaking any rules - just because he doesn't like some of hightowers' decisions.

So she called him on the carpet. Which is appropriate.

I don't know enough of the inner workings of usatf to know if Baker was out of line or not.

but I don't think Hightower has any requirement to keep on staff people who are actively fighting her. As long as she is playing within the rules, which I believe she is. it's not bullying - it's management.

...but yeah, as a different poster said, it was dumb to write that letter. She should have called Baker.

it has to be documented, but internally, not sent out into the world.

agip wrote:

this deal has made me a little queasy - any of us who has worked in organizations can understand that the boss needs to know if someone is actively working against her. it sounds like this guy Baker has been, in fact, working against the boss. Not because she is breaking any rules - just because he doesn't like some of hightowers' decisions.

So she called him on the carpet. Which is appropriate.

I don't know enough of the inner workings of usatf to know if Baker was out of line or not.

but I don't think Hightower has any requirement to keep on staff people who are actively fighting her. As long as she is playing within the rules, which I believe she is. it's not bullying - it's management.

They aren't staff, she doesn't pay them.

Running a largely or entirely volunteer organization is entirely different from running a business with paid staff people.

I've done both.

what difference does it make if she pays him or not? Serious question.

the flaw in my argument is that I don;t know the function of Baker's committee - maybe it is supposed to be an independent check on the Board/Hightower.

But if that is how it is...is it appropriate for Baker to be publicaly talking down SH? Shouldn't he use his committee, not the mob?

is it as if a US supreme court justice went around saying nasty things about the president or speaker of the house instead of doing his job in the court?

DPL wrote:

I really don't see anything wrong with her email. I do, however, have an issue with someone posting her email.

--- "If you would like to continue as my appointee, please call me so we can discuss."

This was what was wrong with her email.

There should have been no email. If she wants to discuss something, she should call him.

The emails are part of communications that are considered to be public information.

A few points.This letter from Stephanie to Tim Baker was sent via email but was on USATF stationery.I found it odd that the stationery has both Max Siegel and Stephanie Hightower's name on it. They are different people and this isn't some official proclamation by USATF. The email chain I have seen also has Norman Wain, the USATF Counsel, forwarding the letter from Stephanie to Tim. I have written Jill Geer, the USATF Communications guru, to confirm these don't represent Max's views, but to also ask about the joint stationery and why Norman was involved.You can view the letters here with the stationery: http://www.letsrun.com/news/2015/03/more-usatf-controversy-stephanie-hightower-accused-of-bullying-law-and-legislation-chairman-tim-baker-gets-angry-reaction-from-youth-chairman-lionel-leach/

AKMarmoset wrote:

Thanks Becka (do I remember that right) - you've done a lot to illuminate this ongoing situation with USATF. This is just more of the same from SH.

I have good reason to believe that the New England region will throw its weight behind a push to remove her in December.

I was going to correct you sand say Stephanie's term was up this year but it does go through 2016. I had to laugh however when I noticed her Wikipedia page says "Stephanie Hightower (born July 19, 1958) is the former president of USA Track & Field (USATF). "

wejo wrote:

I found it odd that the stationery has both Max Siegel and Stephanie Hightower's name on it.

I don't find that odd at all. There is presumably only one official letterhead and it is proper and appropriate to have both of those people's names on it.

agip wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

They aren't staff, she doesn't pay them.

Running a largely or entirely volunteer organization is entirely different from running a business with paid staff people.

I've done both.

what difference does it make if she pays him or not? Serious question.

Very briefly, because I don't have much time on lunch break:

The primary reason people work for you in a business is because you pay them. That means you have both a carrot and stick in motivation because you control the purse strings. It also means that each employee's relationship with you as a leader is largely independent from other people's relationship. People don't generally quit because their friend gets fired or disciplined--as long as they still need the paycheck.

In an all volunteer organization the dynamics and motivation of somebody "working" for you are quite different. They have a variety of reasons which presumably including continuing to volunteer for the organization because they believe in its mission. If they get on the outs with the leadership it is much easier to leave. Also if you have an incident like this with one or a few key leaders then you can also lose a great deal of other volunteers as well.

That doesn't mean there isn't considerable overlap--for instance believe in a mission and personal loyalty can also be powerful motivators in private business and there are costs (just less economic ones) to stopping volunteering in an organization where you have been for a long time. It does mean that the dynamics of managing in the two different types of organization are significantly different and quick easy analogies are likely to be flawed.