Comments on: Unitus Update

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 04:13:18 +0000

Where was the “moral obligation” to the staff when letting them go? Since this was in the works for quite some time, why would you not have let your “dedicated” team know they were going to be laid off? I can’t fathom how this team must feel. Quite frankly, there WAS no moral obligation whatsoever. I think Unitus should be ashamed of the action taken in regards to the staff layoffs.

By: Tim Ogden

Tim Ogden — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:47:19 +0000

Yes–very interesting that in the Holtzman article several of the statements in this email are contradicted, namely:

1) the consulting of donors other than those on the board
2) that this option had been considered for a long time
3) that the decision was truly unanimous

By: Sean Stannard-Stockton

Sean Stannard-Stockton — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:36:51 +0000

Good questions Tim. At least some of these issues are explored in this new article from Clay Holtzman who broke the story.

By: Tim Ogden

Tim Ogden — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:22:57 +0000

I remain curious on two important points:
1) How will Unitus “meet its existing commitments” without any staff?

2) As noted in the beginning of the email, the clearly stated goals of Unitus involved microfinance–that’s what donors were giving to, not general poverty alleviation. So are Unitus’ donors all happy that their funds will be repurposed to the broader goal? How many of them were consulted? Given the puzzled reaction of large donors like Omidyar Fund it doesn’t seem like very many of them were.