12-06-2010, 02:54 PM
|
|
Worthy Raver
|
|
Join Date: 29 Sep 2009
Posts: 31
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
Infoman forced to resign
Stumbled across this on Facebook - obviously there's at least two different sides to everything but here's Infoman's account:
|
Originally Posted by Infoman
|
Some of you may have heard reports of the death of 'Infoman'. As of 1st June the service that 'Infoman' provided for the public representing the Festival, was ceased. The link from the official website was removed on instruction from Michael and Emily Eavis. Of course I am fully aware that it is their Festival and their prerogative to make this kind of decision.
'Infoman' was me, as you possibly know. I was given 3 weeks notice of this decision, with no direct contact from either Michael or Emily, nor even a word of appreciation after 14 years in this role. I have been engaged with Festival Information since 1981, co-ordinating the service since 1990. It is regrettable that the link between the Festival and the Festival-going public has been cut, having spent so many years cultivating it, with initiatives like the Fine Guide and the free Property Lock-ups (and many others) being of our invention. It follows from the axing of the link with the vibrant Message Boards a couple of years ago, further severing our connection with the public, completely without discussion or notice.
I have been told that there was nothing at fault with my work, sometimes dealing with up to 800 emails a week from the public, but that this personal service is something that "...has been superseded by the success of the new website", further that "... the view is that all questions from the public and Festival goers can be addressed from the website and stored for reference."
Admittedly, the numbers of emails I receive has reduced in the last couple of years, but I know I have provided a (low cost) personal service of the kind that the Festival believes in. It is something I have believed in, as likely you do, for the ethical stance that the Festival makes is what makes it stand head and shoulders above all others. That stance also needs to apply to the people who make the Festival tick. I requested that the improvements to the website should at least be up and running before my redundancy took effect, or at least await a review that was planned after the Festival. This, it seems was not possible, such was the urgency to remove the service.
I am told that Area Organisers will have enquiries from the public directed straight at them to answer. I hope they are prepared for this at such a busy time.
If you wonder what kind of questions are received, they range from the basic to the complicated and everything between, with all kinds of people asking. Some of the answers are to be found on the website, and many not. Some people need to have the reassurance of a personal email, others want to have a definitive line from the Festival. Above all it is indisputable that there is a demand from the public that is not met by a website. Also this works the other way around, so the Festival is able to discern the mood of the public (for example on flags, or the showing of international sports).
It has come to my attention that the Festival Office has been putting out the following statement:
'Part of Stephens job had changed and as a result he resigned from festival information services. Stephen was valued in his role of running the on site public information and will be missed.'
The answer given is rather ungenerous and short of the truth. The part of my job that had 'changed' amounted to about 90% of my work, and it did not just change - it vanished! The on-site part left amounted to such a small amount it could not justify payment year round. Hence the forced redundancy. The statement says by omission that I was not valued for the before and after (around the year) information that I provided. I believe the public thinks otherwise!
I have had to think carefully about the question about being reinstated. I think if I received an apology from Michael with a willingness to acknowledge that the public still wants the service I offered and that it was valued, with a reinstatement of the online presence I had, it would be churlish to turn it down. Somehow I do not feel that is likely to happen.
If you feel inclined to contact Michael and Emily about their decision - please feel very welcome, for we were told that we needed to raise our profile with them, being a little too much like the good pupil who is virtually invisible to the teacher in the rowdy classroom.
In peace, with much sadness and disappointment,
Stephen Abrahall
|
|
COME JOIN US 
