|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Civil & Human Rights |
|
Habitat Stomps On Huth |
Current rating: 0 |
by Awake
(No verified email address) |
12 Jul 2006
|
|
|
I don't know why IMC isn't covering this, but someone has to say it. The board at Habitat clearly has a big problem with strong women leaders.
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/living/2006/07/11/habitat_for_humanitys_executive_director_fired
What does it take for Laura to get a fair shake? |
This work is in the public domain |
Comments
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by wayward
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
12 Jul 2006
|
I have no idea what happened, though I was disappointed to hear that Laura Huth was no longer Habitat's executive director. During the Homebuilder's Blitz, I'd been one of the photographers and was amazed by how much Laura and her staff had managed to do. This is from Habitat's latest email to volunteers:
A note from Steve Clarkson:
Ms. Laura Huth has served as the executive director HFHCC for more than two years and has returned the organization to sound financial status and has helped grow the organization to the present ability of building six homes annually. The Board of Directors is appreciative of her service and wish Ms. Huth the best. HFHCC will immediately begin a search for a qualified progressive individual to fill the executive director position. In the interim period, staff will continue our work in the community and will push forward as planned with the move of the HomeWorks Store and HFHCC administrative office to our new home at 119 East University Avenue, Champaign by years end. If you have any questions you can call me at 841-9913.
Sincerely,
Stephen Clarkson, Board President. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by curious
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
12 Jul 2006
|
|
Can you reveal the email address for clarkson? Actually, email addresses for the entire board would be appreciated. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by wayward
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
12 Jul 2006
|
I really don't know the email addresses for the board members. However, the Illinois Fire Chiefs Association (http://www.illinoisfirechiefs.org/ex_board.asp?id=19) shows an email address for a Stephen Clarkson in Champaign as clarkssd (at) ci.champaign.il.us
The board members are listed at
http://www.prairienet.org/habitat/about/board.html
The UIUC ph server shows these names and addresses:
Danielle Matthews - dnmatthe (at) uiuc.edu
Sandra Holloway - shollowa (at) uiuc.edu
Ibulaimu Kakoma - kakomai (at) uiuc.edu
George Kieffer - georgeki (at) uiuc.edu
Laura Mottl - mottl (at) uiuc.edu
Alejandra Seufferheld - seffrhld (at) uiuc.edu
Please note that the information is only FYI . Some of the names are pretty common, and I don't know whether they're HFH board members or just people with the same first and last names. |
|
Keeping/Losing Faith |
by historian
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
12 Jul 2006
|
|
The Habitat BoD has got to do better than a vague statement and a no comment. This is absolutely ridiculous. Ms. Huth is an exemplary individual and there isn't a hint of impropriety cited. It's really sad when a community is deprived of effective leadership. In fact, this unexplained action calls into question the leadership and direction of the Habitat board itself. Unless they do better, my support is ended. There are plenty of good causes to support. I don't support BS like this. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by not curious at all
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
12 Jul 2006
|
|
Ms. Huth was fired because of the manner in which she treated her employees. The board cannot come out and say this publicly. End of story. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
12 Jul 2006
|
An anonymous rumor, worth as much as anonymous rumors are worth.
@%< |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by not curious at all
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
12 Jul 2006
|
|
Well, okay, lets start this up. We'll begin with the fact that right after she was fired, two habitat employees who quit were asked to come back. Which is exactly what happened when she was the executive director of ISEN. There is a history here. Ask anyone who has ever worked for her about the manner in which they were treated. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by Former Huth Employee
none (nospam) none.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
13 Jul 2006
|
|
I have worked for Ms. Huth and can verify that she is, to put it kindly, difficult to work with and for. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by FOL
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
14 Jul 2006
|
|
As a friend of Laura, I can honestly state that never in this process was there any hint of financial impropriety. Yes, there were accounting errors but not one dime was unnaccounted for. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by anon
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
14 Jul 2006
|
Strong woman, weak board, means firing.
We should rally around Huth, a strong, proactive, outstanding woman who accomplished more in a short time than the whole board did before her.
A little stern with employees? Yes. Strong pwople, strong women, are stern. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by wayward
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
14 Jul 2006
|
I've talked with Laura a few times and did photography for a Habitat event. As a photographer at community/nonprofit stuff, I generally get left alone, so I have no idea what she was like as a manager.
To succeed in that position, I think a director would have to have a fairly strong, self-confident personality. It seems like a large part of that job is getting other people to do stuff, e.g., volunteering and donations. Were there personnel management problems? I really don't know. If there were, it wouldn't have been a good idea for the HFH president to hang that laundry out publicly.
Laura didn't seem dumb, and she also didn't seem to have an expensive lifestyle. So I'd be inclined to doubt that there was any embezzlement or fraud. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by not curious at all
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
14 Jul 2006
|
|
It had nothing to do with any financial issues. It was entirely about the way she dealt with her staff. There is a difference between being a strong woman who is stern (yet fair) with her employees, and what Ms. Huth actually was. The place was a revolving door for employees who had to work directly under her. There is a reason for that. |
|
Hmmmm |
by fwiw
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
14 Jul 2006
|
Yet another anonymous, cookie-cutter comment on this. It kind of makes one think that for all the smoke that is being generated, no one is willing to actually describe seeing a fire.
This is supposed to resemble some form of journalism, not a untidy, junior-high scholl Facebook bitch-fest. If you're trolling, you need to try harder.
If you're aspiring to some form of journalism, you'll have to try WAY harder. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by imcreadear
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
15 Jul 2006
|
|
here we go again, disagree and you are accused of being a troller. This is not the place, and it is not anyone's business why an employee is fired. But when it comes on so quickly and without apparent merit- of course it is just human nature to be shocked and want to know what precipitated such an extreme measure to be taken when on the surface everything is going smoothly. At least I now have an inkling of what could have contributed to the dismissal of someone who on the surface seemed very capable. I do not need the details. It is not my business or yours either, fwiw. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by FOL
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jul 2006
|
|
Further examination of the issue proves that Laura was not involved in the financial questions that remain in her wake. It is my opinion that Laura's team would not respect her leadership. The two employess that quit were out to get her as well as those who remained but cowardly petitioned the board to have her fired in disgrace. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by julie
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jul 2006
|
Having many years of experience of working for someone and having people work for me, I can say that disgruntled workers don't necessarily mean it was the boss' fault. If Habitat's board acted on accusations w/o getting both sides of the argument, then their actions are faulty. If they haven't told Huth why she was fired then nobody who works there is safe. What kind of management fires a top performer w/o notice, w/o opportunity for rebuttal, and w/o opportunity for metrics to improve if there is something to improve? There's only one answer to that--one that has other motives behind its actions. Perhaps someone on the board doesn't like Huth's politics, or her personally, or something...
The damage done to HFH with this action will be hard to measure, but I already know of several people who have decided to stop donating to Habitat as a result. Time will tell how much wider that sentiment goes. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by th0rn
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Jul 2006
|
Sounds like Ms. Huth got railroaded. Also sounds like a petty power struggle between the board and her. Hmmm, H4HCC didn't get nearly as much accomplished before her arrival, she came in like a storm and lit some fires under peoples' butts...
I'd say her accomplishments speak for themselves, and she wasn't willing to just "go along" and accept the status quo. No doubt, she irritated the slackers or political schemers within the org, that were holding it back.
The baseless accusations of financial impropriety are a really scummy smear tactic.
What a real loss for Champaign County. But CU just loves office politics, committees, endless meetings, and petty office "wars", which is what drives the Uni too. The predominant CU culture is much more about "the process" and pointless debate, than actual results. This culture, as established by the Uni (of the workers and staff and prof's, not student life), influences every business sector in the town. Even non-profits, which you'd think would have a unifying goal.
So the H4HCC board can feel self-righteous and indignant, and feel that they "won", but who actually "lost"? I'd say people that need somewhere affordable to live in CU. I'd say this was a "lose-lose", for everyone.
Any of those board members have a reputation for stonewalling or otherwise gumming up the works? Just curious. Any of 'em seem real "status quo"? What are the known political affiliations of the board members? I'd be curious to hear from someone that knows.
Lets see, "the board" apparently couldn't accomplish half of what Huth actually did. I'd say replace the board. 'Cause I'm not convinced Ms. Huth was actually the problem...
I ask you, how do measure the "success" of H4H-CC? Zero employee complaints, or... the list of concrete accomplishments mentioned in the Snooze-Gazoo article? |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by Still a Habitat supporter
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Jul 2006
|
I will begin this by saying I have nothing politically against Ms. Huth. I think she did an excellent job on the city council, and I was disheartened by the seeming witchunt that led to her resigning her position.
That being said, now we have another article in the N-G. And it seems as if no one is willing to talk about what happened, at least not in public. Do any of the supporters of Ms. Huth here notice that they are going out of the way to not answer questions? Do you think there might be a reason for this? Perhaps they are trying to take the higher road and not let out certain facts that would cause people to really question Ms. Huth and all of her "strong leadership skills". And the fact that Ms. Huth has hired an attorney makes it almost impossible for any of them to speak publicly now. It certainly would be much easier for Habitat to say exactly what happened and the reasons why she was fired, because now there is a great amount of speculation, and quite a bit of that speculation reflects negatively on Habitat and on the Habitat board, with people going so far as to say they will no longer support the great cause that Habitat is.
Really, with that many people on the board (people who have volunteered their time and effort for a good cause that they want to succeed) do you think they would UNANIMOUSLY vote to fire her without a very good reason, seeing as how she has done so much for Habitat?
Judging from the NG article, it appears now that this is indeed related somehow to her relationship with her employees, and has nothing to do with any financial improprieties. Now, people here have made comments about her employees, and how they just must not have been able to handle her strong leadership skills. Well, isn't part of being a strong leader actually LEADING people, and not handling them in a manner such that they quit? It isn't logical to conclude that it was the employees faults for not living up to her standards... she was the one who hired them in the first place. If she is such a great, strong leader, do you think that she would hire incompetent employees?
To FOL- You say that her employees let her down time and time again. Where pray tell can I find this information? I have seen nothing of the sort published anywhere, which leads me to think that you got it directly from her or someone very close to her. What an unbiased fact that is!
Now, lets think about this... if indeed Ms. Huth had such a low opinion of her employees, why were they always the ones to quit instead of being fired? Also, lets consider all of these great accomplishments that happened under her "leadership". Do you honestly think that she singlehandly made all of that happen herself? No one could possibly do that. Not with having to deal with such a supposedly lackluster staff.
You can't have it both ways. If the accomplishments are great, then so is the staff. There are several areas of Habitat that have done very well, notably the Homeworks store. I shop there quite a bit, and have been helped numerous times by their incredible staff of mostly volunteers. Whenever any of the volunteers is unable to answer a question, they go to the store manager, and not Ms. Huth. Never once have I seen Ms. Huth helping anyone there. So I think its unfair to give her all the credit for the success, when clearly she does not have that much to do with the actual workings of the store. Who makes it happen? HER EMPLOYEES. Those oh so disappointing employees... the ones who are making it possible for the Homeworks store to move to a bigger and better building.
And maybe, just maybe, if Ms. Huth felt constantly disapointed with her employees, despite all of the work they do and they results that THEY have achieved... that begins to clear things up.
Habitat is not just about building houses for those who would not be able to afford them on their own. It is about making the people part of the process instead of just a source of a donation. It seems that Ms. Huth's leadership was poisonous to that process, and to one of Habitats core missions. There is no other reason why she would be fired, given her results.
She had excellent results as a politician and along the way managed to upset quite a few people. That is not the way to run a non-profit such as Habitat. In the case of Habitat, the end does not justify the means. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by th0rn
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
23 Jul 2006
|
And it seems as if no one is willing to talk about what happened, at least not in public. Do any of the supporters of Ms. Huth here notice that they are going out of the way to not answer questions? Do you think there might be a reason for this? Perhaps they are trying to take the higher road and not let out certain facts that would cause people to really question Ms. Huth...
All I ever expect, is the absolute truth, and transparency. Given the false and scummy money rip-off accusation, and given the way this situation is being handled and presented, it's perfectly natural to be skeptical. I also automatically question any story as presented by the Snooze-Gazoo, as they're mostly an embarrassment to CU. A stodgy anachronism, in 2006; nearly irrelevant. Couldn't be more status quo.
I like to say, "put it out in the sun, and see if it lives". If Ms. Huth was more of a hindrance than a help, let hear the exact reasons why. All I'm seeing are anonymous accusations and speculation.
Well, isn't part of being a strong leader actually LEADING people, and not handling them in a manner such that they quit?
Agreed, 100%. However, 2-3 people quitting, still doesn't prove (to this reader) that Ms. Huth deserved to be fired. You ever try to "lead" a group of volunteers, to achieve concrete accomplishments? I have, and won't ever look for that opportunity again.
Habitat is not just about building houses for those who would not be able to afford them on their own.
I beg to differ. What is H4H about, then? Making sure every single employee feels valued and always enjoys the process?
http://www.habitat.org/how/factsheet.aspx
"Habitat for Humanity International is a nonprofit, ecumenical Christian housing ministry. HFHI seeks to eliminate poverty housing and homelessness from the world, and to make decent shelter a matter of conscience and action."
Perhaps Ms. Huth wasn't "christian" enough? Who knows what the real reasons for her firing were, at this point.
And as an aside, while I believe H4H should proceed as an org, and I hope it grows and flourishes, it's not a practical solution. It's tied to religion, and the ratio of homeless to new homes provided, is probably like 100,000:1. If their goal is truly to put a roof over peoples' heads, I'd propose building modern tent villages, with modern facilities, well engineered, and well planned. Public housing communes, if you will. I've always felt like H4H was really more of a "christian show", than an actual, viable solution.
That said, I swung a hammer and slung some paint on one in Urbana, for a few hours. I do believe in, and support the idea, in general. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by km
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
23 Jul 2006
|
If one reads into the latest NG story, and combines it with comments above, then they might come to the conclusion that there were a couple unhappy employees, and that the board fired Huth because of it. If this is the case, then the board should be forthcoming with that information, and the affected employees should be willing to share their story. Otherwise, I won't believe any of it.
Huth took over an organization that was in the red and performing at a much lower level 3 years ago. Since that time, HFH has flourished, both in mission and in finances. When a new leader enters an organization determined to be successful, it stands to reason that some are going to be unhappy with the changes. After all, those who were there already were the ones not performing nearly as well as they are now.
For every story one hears about a manager who was unkind to an employee, there are also stories of slacker workers that do as little as possible no matter what the goals or motivations are. Without knowing the details, I can't say which of these may have happened at HFH. However, I urge everyone to remember that an unhappy employee does not equate to a bad manager. Sometimes it is, but just as often, its the employee who is at fault.
If there were employees who complained, what were the complaints? Was Huth given a chance to respond to the complaints? It doesn't sound like she was, given the nature of her firing and her comments to the NG since.
As for unanimity of the board meaning anything (as suggested above)--I don't give that much weight. First of all, it wasn't the whole board. Second, without knowing the facts, there is no way of knowing what the board was told. If one person wanted a unanimous board to oust an employee, they can craft a story that will do the job. I don't know if that happened here, but it could have.
I join those who have said they won't contribute to HFH as a result of this--at least not until we know the facts and/or until the board turns over completely. I have donated time and money to the organization in the past, but I need to see new and logical leadership at the board level before I can help out again. |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by not curious at all
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
23 Jul 2006
|
This argument is getting old. The people who support Laura are never going to change their minds and are never going to accept the fact that she has issues dealing with people on a personal level, and the people who think there was financial impropriety are just flat out wrong. The Habitat board has its hands tied because Laura has hired a lawyer, so we are not going to get any answers, and I'm wililng to bet Laura wants it that way, so once again, she can play the victim role.
Can I bring up again that this EXACT same thing happened when she was the Executive director of ISEN? Perhaps that's just a coincedence... two people quitting (or threatening to quit) then being asked to come back as soon as Laura was asked to step down. Those employees must have been slackers, too.
Will one of you FOLs answer that please? |
|
Re: Habitat Stomps On Huth |
by th0rn
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 Jul 2006
|
I think FOL and Asleep have finally nailed it ! (pun intended).
Ms. Huth wouldn't chant to their SkyWizard, and instead, was more concerned about concrete results. Now the truth of the matter is starting to come out.
However, to be fair, she had to know she was agreeing to lead a "christian" org. She had to know it was going to present a bit of a conflict.
But maybe she also believed that actually building the org into a success, getting it into the black, and actually putting roofs over peoples' heads was still a worthwhile goal, despite all the SkyWizard b*llsh*t.
Still sounds like she was railroaded, and now it's starting to become clear why a certain faction doesn't want to be open with their reasons for dumping her. What are the religious or political leanings of the individuals that quit? Of the board members that atttended the meeting to dump her? Are they members of local churches, or... republican fascists or conservatives?
There's always been a smug and slimy conservative, ol' boy network around CU, and it's like a lingering infection that can't be cured. They've held the reigns of power for a long time, and are entrenched. In the Trad'Media, in the Uni (which today is not much more than a R&D dept for BigBiz, BigBrother, and BigPharm' - the good ol' boys sold it out, basically), in local politics, etc.
So Ms. Huth was a woman, Progressive, and not willing to fall into line on the "christian" rituals... Is this a fair assessment... anybody?
Starting to make much more sense, now. I hope she stomps 'em in court, if it comes to that.
'Cause you see, what was obviously more important to the board, was maintaining their smug little "christian club", not actually producing the results their org was supposed to be all about. Also called, selfishness, or self-interest.
Maybe I've got it all wrong. I'm not betting real money, just yet. But that rotten fish smell is startin' to get a little stronger.
When I helped out a little bit in Urbana, there was a lengthy "prayer session" at the ribbon-cutting. I think the ceremony took over an hour. I didn't know about the strong "christian" part of H4H, and wondered what was up with all the damned religion. I was thinking, "what does any of this have to do with 'god'? A bunch of kind-hearted folks built a house for someone in need, isn't that alone something to be happy about and proud of?"
So it's sounding like H4H might be mostly a "christian feel-good" program. The concept, is still valuable, but the execution is lacking. Will they build a house for you if you're not a "christian"? How do they decide who to help? Does a local church choose the "most needy"? If so, it's extortion (for Jesus!), in a way. If you don't "accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and savior", no house for you! Who Would Jesus House?
I also remember thinking, "I'll bet they (the needy family) would just like to say 'Amen', cut this feel-good ceremony short, kick everybody outta their new yard, and enjoy some family time, alone, at last."
Charity that expects public recognition, is not really charity. This is case in point. A bunch of shiny-happy white folks standing around gloating. I felt like the recipients were being short-changed on dignity, sort of. |
|
