Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Danzig188
must have missed the crist article...so my applause to him as well. they danced around the issue a bit the other day on t.v., but seemed as tho no one really wanted to be critical--at least i felt that was the case. and yeah, it does help that we agree (well, me and you to this point, i must read on...). i just feel, after all the attention and a congressional hearing, that it would be in the guilds best interest to find the absolute BEST person they could. i feel they failed, and failed the jockeys as a result. maybe i will read a point of view different from mine, with reasons why i'm wrong....i really wouldn't mind being wrong about this!
|
I don't think you're wrong. Your spot on. They should have done what anyone else making a major hire does... engage a search firm to find the best candidates, interview several of them and make a hire with incentives a big part of the package. It seems ludicrous that the only two candidates came from inside sources and that there is not an hour of collective bargaining experience between them. Damn shame.