How To Terminate a BGCT Employee

   So, word comes yesterday, a BGCT employee has had their position terminated. This is not the same as firing. The position is eliminated. No reason is given. This is an internal matter.

   Someone questions the decision on the internet. In this case it was the Spiritual Samurai. He did not say it was wrong or a conspiracy. He did draw attention to the termination.

   Still no word from the Building. This is the usual approach when dealing with a personnel matter.

   Soon, some surrogate jumps up to affirm the BGCT decision, citing possible moral or ethical issues with the terminated employee. That happened yesterday, as well, on an attack blog-site I will not guide you to because the man who writes on that site does so for attention. I will not give him any help building his hits.

   There is no way the attack blooger has any information on the ethics or morality of the terminated employee unless it comes from within the Building itself. Therefore, he is either creating a cloud of suspicion over the terminated employee on his own, which is irresponsible, or he is acting on information from unnamed sources within the Building itself, which is despicable.

   The sources will not come forth for attribution. No one will ever come clean about it. The terminated employee, if he/she raises a ruckus, will at most get a letter of regret and an assurance no legal rights have been violated.

   This is pretty much what happened to me under the last two administrations. I outsourced myself when it became clear evangelism was not at the core of the previous administration's reorganization. I was repeatedly attacked underhandedly by various employees and surrogates. When I confronted them with evidence, I was told how much the BGCT regretted their actions but that none of my legal rights had been violated. With tort reform in Texas, there is no money in a lawsuit, so there is no lawyer who will defend you. 

   In short, they do it because they have the position and the power to do this kind of thing. They do it because they can.

   The blogger in question has been featured on the BGCT blogsite as one of the real forces for Texas Hope 2010 in his area. He is obviously a surrogate mouthpiece for the Baptist Building hierarchy. Now, the terminated employee, whose job was eliminated and who must  seek other employment, gets to leave under a darker cloud. The BGCT can deny any involvement. The blogger can say he was just hypothesizing.

   I will not give you his address or name. I will say he is a rat, his work is that of a rat and he keeps company with rats.

   There is no new breeze blowing. It is the same old hot air. Lives are destroyed through corporate channels in the name of God. When you, rank and file baptist, get sick of this nonsense, or when someone near you gets hurt, perhaps it will stop. Until then, you deserve what you get.

Comments

[Gary]

I know that this will not be news to you, but Texas is not the only place that this happens. It is a sad commentary. Years of service, retirement eligibility, etc., wiped out by contracting-out employees for a fraction of what they made as a part-time employee. High-profile, beloved, fruitful, and edifying staff members marginalized, and eventually 'allowed' to retire because they were more popular that the muck-a-mucks.

Our witness speaks far louder than our words.

Gary

[Tim Dahl]

Instead of it being Christmas, they did it at the beginning of the Fall. As the schools start, flu hits, and other things jack up the cost of living.

Sad.

Tim

[Ken Coffee]

I had intended to blog on this, but decided to wait until I had more facts. I hate to see anyone lose his/her job at any time of the year. I hope there was no immorality or ethical issues and until I know for certain I will not speculate.

[aintsobad]

The leadership has the right to change directions and positions at any
point. The stupidity of some bloggers to cry "moral reasons" is at least
irresponsible and at worst despicable. That is what I am saying.

Plainly and simply, the method stinks.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:13 AM, wrote:

[Tim Dahl]

I think there will be more of a brew-ha-ha over the perceived distancing from women in ministry, than anything else. Yes, most of our churches wouldn't consider having a woman pastor/leader. But, just because the majority is wrong doesn't mean we have to castigate those that choose to support women in ministry. Some feel this is a backwards step for the convention that desires to be welcoming to all churches in regards to "non-essential" issues.

sic: http://www.thebigdaddyweave.com/2009/09/bgct-discontinues-support-of-women-in-ministry.html

Tim