News The Do Better Report - 12 Month Review

Remove this Banner Ad

May 27, 2008
25,776
31,855
Wherever I May Roam
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Socceroos, Melbourne Victory
The 12 month review of the Do Better Report has been completed and indicated that significant and genuine progress has been made.

The review acknowledged the impact of Covid and board level changes had affected the pace of implementation.

There is an article by Michael Gleeson from The Age for those interested

 
Last edited:
The report quoted one of the interviewees saying: “The club has shut up for a minute, rolled up its sleeves and actually done some work, which isn’t normally the case at Collingwood.″⁣

I like this quote from the article. I for one won't complain if the club doesn't constantly bang the public relations drum on this issue. An annual review of meaningful progress suits me fine.

I considered joining the online meeting about this (yesterday?), but had to wash my hair. Did anyone else here tune in?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The report stated we should have a 5% indigenous workforce?

I guess other races and minorities just aren't as important ?

I'm lefthanded, and would like to know that my people are properly represented by the club.

I hear that the club is also preferencing Collingwood supporters among its staff. What manner of madness is this?

I guess it's true, we just need to keep doing better.
 
The report stated we should have a 5% indigenous workforce?

I guess other races and minorities just aren't as important ?
How many of those other cultural groups have lived in this country for 50,000 years?
 
The report stated we should have a 5% indigenous workforce?
What was the direct quote from the report? I know your posts well enough to understand this may be a loose interpretation of the facts. IMO, 100% of the workforce should be the best people for the job.
 
What was the direct quote from the report? I know your posts well enough to understand this may be a loose interpretation of the facts. IMO, 100% of the workforce should be the best people for the job.
Given the club committed to introducing all of the report’s recommendations, it would be an odd move not to introduce an Aboriginal employment model. Especially given it is common practice in many companies and government departments.
 
I'm lefthanded, and would like to know that my people are properly represented by the club.

I hear that the club is also preferencing Collingwood supporters among its staff. What manner of madness is this?

I guess it's true, we just need to keep doing better.

The Age article mentioned the report recommended a 5% minimum but I can’t recall that recommendation being made at the time? Reckon we would remember if a quota system was recommended?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Last edited:
Given the club committed to introducing all of the report’s recommendations, it would be an odd move not to introduce an Aboriginal employment model. Especially given it is common practice in many companies and government departments.
I work with one such company and it is startlingly easy to adhere to this sort of mandate. I’m just of the belief a targeted response is more effective.

For instance my employer has a department that, for lack of a better explanation, is devoted to all things indigenous. IMO, that department is 100% offering better outcomes for indigenous peoples than having the same number of staff spread throughout the organisation. If we’ve established a similar department with 4-5 employees we would be hitting a “quota” and we will reap the rewards, but in a professional sport setting you employ the best people for the job and that can’t come into it.

FWIW Johnson, Kreuger and Jetta would be included in the numbers hence why that department wouldn’t need to be all that big in terms of numbers.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I think the club as a whole, especially with all the new staff, are starting to do better. We seem to be on a more positive trajectory than we have been in the past. 5% seems quite small in the scheme of things and we have that covered already. It should always be the right person for the job but as is the case with many organisations these days, it doesn't hurt to bring in less qualified people and train them up. I would love to see more Indigenous players in our team also.
 
I think the club as a whole, especially with all the new staff, are starting to do better. We seem to be on a more positive trajectory than we have been in the past. 5% seems quite small in the scheme of things and we have that covered already. It should always be the right person for the job but as is the case with many organisations these days, it doesn't hurt to bring in less qualified people and train them up. I would love to see more Indigenous players in our team also.
5% does not seem small given indigenous people comprise 3.3% of the population.
 
The Age article mentioned the report recommended a 5% minimum but I can’t recall that recommendation being made at the time? Reckon we would remember if we had a quota system was recommended?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

I don't recall a quota from last year, but there are a lot of things about the CFC from last year that I've chosen to forget, and maybe this got swept up in it all.

Maybe it's something which came out of the review, rather than the original report? I have no issue with such a quota, but I'm curious to know what it would mean in actual numbers.
 
I don't recall a quota from last year, but there are a lot of things about the CFC from last year that I've chosen to forget, and maybe this got swept up in it all.

Maybe it's something which came out of the review, rather than the original report? I have no issue with such a quota, but I'm curious to know what it would mean in actual numbers.
Seems like an error from the reporter - which is odd. Had a quick skim of the report again - nothing in there. Indeed this article written by Jake Niall would support the idea that there wasn't a recommendation made regarding a quota.

 
I don't recall a quota from last year, but there are a lot of things about the CFC from last year that I've chosen to forget, and maybe this got swept up in it all.

Maybe it's something which came out of the review, rather than the original report? I have no issue with such a quota, but I'm curious to know what it would mean in actual numbers.

The internet tells me Collingwood employs 272 people. Which means we're aiming for 13.6 people if the article has interpreted the report/review correctly. I'd like to read that myself to confirm. I know of 5 indigenous people employed across our football programs.

Edit: As sideswipe clarifies below mention of a quota was a suggestion by one stakeholder interviewed in the review process. Not a commitment to a quota system by the club.
 
Last edited:
What was the direct quote from the report? I know your posts well enough to understand this may be a loose interpretation of the facts. IMO, 100% of the workforce should be the best people for the job.

Read the last part of the report, it wants us to have a minimum 5% of our workforce be indigenous… despite indigenous people, particularly in Melbourne, making up a much much smaller percentage than that and no other minorities seem to matter according to the indigenous writer of the report. Do African Australians not also face racism issues? Why not have another 5% be African employees?
 
The internet tells me Collingwood employs 272 people. Which means we're aiming for 13.6 people if the article has interpreted the report/review correctly. I'd like to read that myself to confirm. I know of 5 indigenous people employed across our football programs.
Looked into it a bit further - it was the 12 month review report which mentioned a minimum of 5% indigenous workforce. However, on my reading, it wasn't a recommendation of the "review report". The exact language was "...Collingwood stakeholders suggested the following measures.... A minimum 5% indigenous workforce across the organisation".

To me, that is a long way short of it being a recommendation made by the report itself. The review was conducted by way of interviews with 9 people at Collingwood. That one or more of them suggested a quota is a long way short of it being a recommendation.

Racial quotas can be a slippery slope.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top