CFI Budget Cuts Lead to a Number of Firings

All people act stupidly at one time or another. It is part of being human.

All layoffs are callous, and when they happen no matter what management says “it’s not about you” you don’t believe it (after all why didn’t they lay off this other guy). And you are angry and want to rant against something but don’t know what to rant against.

If you are more credulous you will believe it’s some sort of conspiracy. Just like people who suffer from circumstance, you ask “why?” But there doesn’t need to be a why, well in this case because it is humans acting there IS a why, but it may be impossible to determine, an organization doing bad financially because of years of decisions that weren’t necessarily right or wrong.

It sucks but people being upset when they are laid off doesn’t mean there really was anything else going on. That’s how you feel when it happens to you.

OK, to call being laid off “fired” is a touch dramatic, but budget cuts wouldn’t excuse lack of courtesy and gratitude (assuming the part about not being thanked is true). I don’t know they other people, but I do recognize Norm Allen’s name, and I’m surprised he would get the axe. It’s hardly like he’s deadweight – he’s had some recent and awesome accomplishments. I don’t follow the CFI dramatics terribly closely, but it seems both factions have their members behaving in an unbecoming manner. More’s the pity.

What was that last humanist manifesto put out by Paul Kurtz really about? I think if you put out a poll and asked people which they would rather do, sit in a dentist’s chair or read that manifesto, the dentist’s chair would likely win out. I met and heard Ron Lindsay at recent conference. It sounds like he is wanting to make CFI and other secular organizations more relevant at local and national levels.

Hemant, I hope that you know that we have done everything in our power to get this donation and prevent any layoffs. No humanist organization could have withstood this enormous financial loss. And surely you don’t think Kurtz is impartial in any way. The fact sheet will provide information to put this in perspective.

Of course, everyone was explained the situation and given their heartfelt thanks and apologies. Everyone else handled it very well. There were lots of tears and heartache involved both yesterday and today. Some people I would expect not to handle this well and that is the case. We are all sorry for the loss of our colleagues and our “homes.”

Management handled things appropriately. As I said, everyone else understood and handled it very well. I would expect this sort of manipulation of the facts from the sources given.

Just for the record, I have no pretense of being impartial. Just factual. If the truth be told, I suspect this is now about saving (a few) jobs and face rather than programs. The very fact that only Paul Kurtz could deliver the “goods” when it came to the “single anonymous donor” tells me that trust and confidence has evaporated. CFI has faced deficits before, but when it did it had the intellectual and personnel resources to offset them, which translated into donor loyalty. Is that still the case?

@Hemant: Thanks for posting the pdf link.

I highly doubt that CFI would give anything short of a glowing recommendation in writing to Norm Allen (or anyone else) given his many years of service and the unfortunate financial circumstances. Had the donor kept giving all staff would still be with the organization-does that not say enough in itself?

Even if it is not your intent, I find it in pour taste for someone like yourself who is a leader in a competing organization to use an unfortunate situation to make what come off as petty jabs (“callous”, unbefitting”, etc.) when you simply do NOT have the facts.

@ JD/Hemant: Only the three people in the room could by definition know what was said and how it was said. Paul Kurtz was not in the room (indeed why was he even at the offices given that he resigned 2 weeks ago?), R Joseph Hoffmann was not in the room, you were not in the room. None of these people can know what went on-end of story.

@Melody: ditto.

I’m not taking sides here because I respect everyone involved, including R. Joseph Hoffmann. But it should be mentioned that he was in charge of The Jesus Project, and the funding for it got cut under Ron Lindsay if I’m not mistaken.

Looks like we’ll have to move on. It’s a sad state of affairs. If that anonymous donor does not support CFI at this point in time I hope he or she will do so in the future, or donate to other worthy skeptical causes.

Cheers.

We do work together. Often we use terms like “friendly competitors.”

The loss of donors when there’s a leadership transition is 100% normal in the not-for-profit universe. In our sector, it’s not uncommon for donation levels to take up to 5 years to bounce back after an ED or Chair is replaced. That some donors pulled out after someone like Kurtz, who has been so integral to CFI for so many years, leaves is not at all surprising and does not in any way translate into lacking “intellectual and personnel resources.”

People were laid off. Guess what! The economy is in the tank and has been for a while, and CFI is dealing with the added burden of losing a long-time board member! I would be suspicious if there WEREN’T any lay-offs! Maybe The Powers That Be should have been more gracious in their procedure. Who knows? Either way, this is an internal issue that should have been deal with internally. There is no reason for this sort of airing of dirty laundry. The public forum is not the place to resolve these kinds of issues.

Combined with Kurtz recent article accusing Atheist groups of not providing alternatives to religion (http://www.buffalonews.com/2010/04/18/1023513/redirecting-a-long-life-of-godlessness.html) – which, if not a lie, is at least woefully uninformed for someone who’s been in the secular movement for so many years – I’m frankly quite disappointed in him. I would have expected better.

This is a real shame. For years CFI’s operations were bloated, and there were numerous programs that generated no apparent support or revenue. The anonymous donor apparently kept things running, though, and kept people’s pet projects alive, obviating any need to justify their value. If indeed Kurtz has had anything to do with the withholding of the yearly donation, and if as the fact sheet describes, Lindsay even offered to resign to ensure the donor’s yearly support, then what appears to be being orchestrated here can only be described as both Machiavellian and Messianic. It’s a terrible shame that Hoffmann and others who appear to harbor bitter feelings are using this unfortunate chain of events to try to secure for themselves some sort of future in whatever new organization Kurtz cooks up, or perhaps CFI if Kurtz orchestrates a reversal of what he claims was a “palace coup.” It would be more productive for humanism in general to focus on supporting the various organizations that do good work in the field, and that includes CFI, rather than this pernicious infighting, backstabbing, subterfuge, and puffery. The recession has hit all non-profits, so the fact that these cutbacks are happening is and should be no surprise. To make more of it for personal gain, however, is ugly.

I have to say, as a younger person just getting involved in the atheist/skeptical/etc movement, this is all pretty discouraging.

I know there’s a fair bit of politicking whenever you get people in groups, but the sheer amount of infighting here is dismaying. We are supposed to be the rational ones here.

I’ve only met Kurtz once and didn’t agree with him much, but I can’t really comment on the people involved (I met Lindsay too, and he seemed pretty American, but that’s it).

A lot of the stuff CFI and similar organizations are involved with are good and positive, but I think there’s a lot of us down here who don’t like the old guard sort of ideas – it’s one of the reasons New Atheism is gaining ground despite the age of some of its proponents.

And yeah – that ‘competing’ organization thing sticks in my throat. I know there’s limited funding out there, much like in science, and so people are competing for donors etc. But I’d like to think we weren’t undermining each other, that we feel bad when similar organizations have problems, and feel glad when the do well.

Here’s hoping we can avoid (as much as possible) lapsing into sectarian infighting.

I’m just blown away that the CFI, for so long, depended on a single donor for such a huge chunk of it’s funding. That in itself was hugely irresponsible of Paul Kurtz, and was setting the organization up for what eventually happened..funding failure. After all, rather than being asked to leave, Kurtz could have dropped dead. It has happened before. The funding would have most likely dried up upon his death. That is not responsible leadership from someone who wants an organization to continue to grow.

I see the fired the one black guy employed by the Center. Speaks volumes about Mr. Lindsay from the great state of Virginia.

It would be wrong to assume that the layoff of Norm is racially motivated. He himself did not claim this when he fired off his angry missive, and there’s no point in hitting below the belt in the process of questioning the wisdom of this downsizing. The question of priorities remains a live one, even when the smoke-and-mirrors aspect of this public dispute is dissipated. It seems highly unlikely that these layoffs would have occurred except for dire necessity. As for whether the correct choices were made, and as for the ethics of the current CFI leadership (in Amherst,that is, what power the DC office has in decision making is unknown to me), more information is needed to which people receiving second-hand information are not privy. For example, one former employee has charged that employees are subject to draconian restrictions including a gag order, and that this reflects a questionable corporate mentality. So is the dispute then going to become one of a probable fiscal and managerial irresponsibility on the part of Kurtz, vs more competent, efficient and allegedly more corporate leadership? Much of the discussion so far has been highly unsatisfactory, Barry Seidman makes a plausible case for his point of view, but since this is all hearsay from my position, I can only treat it as another conjecture. My own inclination is to discount the self-justification of Kurtz, but to be wary of an unqualified defense of the current regime. It would be foolish to question what is happening now without questioning the entire history of the organization: the programs it has sponsored, its deployment of resources, handling of finances, etc. These are all internal matters, but as the general public is being drawn into this drama, combined with urgent appeals for donations, the potential airing of dirty laundry becomes a delicate subject.

Dr. Lindsay was left with an over-extended organisation that needed paring down, and every attempt to pare it down was met with protests about the emasculation of CFI. Moreover, the base of support actually has grown, such that there were more donations received from a broader base of supporters in 2009 than ever. Amazing, actually, given the recession. Read the FAQ.

@ R. Dumain: one can only hope. I wouldn’t pay 10 dollars for that thing. Have you seen it?

Note above: “It’s a terrible shame that Hoffmann and others who appear to harbor bitter feelings are using this unfortunate chain of events to try to secure for themselves some sort of future in whatever new organization Kurtz cooks up”

and then Hoffmann’s weasel words: “I have had no ambition to be associated with CFI since my resignation in 2008.”

and now see: http://www.instituteforscienceandhumanvalues.net/about%20us.htm

looks like it worked and was likely in the works at the time.

Ralph: yes, it would seem to be a pattern.

I finally got a look at that “sculpture” that adorns CFI headquarters. I was told $35,000 was awarded for that piece of shit. Looks like mismanagement to me.