From Billfred's link:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Betty Lauer
Last week I recieved a telephone call from Steve Chism, Senior Director of Programs, at FIRST, and I was surprised and saddened to learn that FIRST had changed their mind and decided that they would not recognize our event as an "official" FTC tournament this year. Steve Chism explained that this decision had nothing to do with our very successful FTC (then FVC) Championship event last year, and acknowledged our event is a well organized, well run, high quality event for all the teams. Steve informed Quinsigamond Community College, via telephone, that the reason FIRST would not "allow" QCC, or myself, to be a Massachusetts FTC Affiliate Partner was that my son Brad now works for Innovation First. Needless to say, I was (and still am) troubled, perplexed, and stunned that FIRST would make a decision that negatively impacts teams, schools, and students based on that reasoning.
|
I'm a little concerned by what I'm seeing here. While I realize that this is only one side of the story, it seems to me that (short of an outright refutation of the contents of this correspondence) FIRST is exercising their power as the FTC Affiliate Partner licensor in a very questionable manner.
I have to wonder why FIRST, in dealing with QCC and Ms. Lauer, would choose to deny them the FTC partnership based upon her son's employer. While it's apparent that there has been some sort of recent change in the nature of the relationship between FIRST and IFI, to discriminate against an IFI employee's mother's employer (i.e. QCC), on no basis other than the identity of his employer—it's startling. I'm frankly having trouble concieving of a situation whereby that decision represents fair dealing. Is Brad Lauer personally involved in the Worcester FTC competition in such a way that his participation would threaten some interest of FIRST's? And if so, why can't he simply step aside? Has this possibility been addressed?
FIRST styles itself as a responsible organization with responsible values. So why are they making life difficult for the Worcester FTC planning group? Does it do the students any good to make this decision? Does it advance FIRST's standing and prestige within the community? I don't think so, but would love to hear FIRST's side of the story to understand their motivation.
If I had more faith, I might be happy to forget about this, supposing that FIRST's internal politics would work themselves out promptly. I don't think that will happen. But what I do still hope to see is an explanation of why FIRST is seemingly making decisions that appear at face value to be biased against IFI and IFI's interests.