Having the IWK’s Chief Financial Officer take a paid leave of absence sends a mixed message. Does it suggest he failed in his job or was bullied into submission by the previous CEO or that the individual is an impediment to investigations by outside auditors?
Part of a memo from the IWK’s board chair, Karen Hutt, printed by The Chronicle Herald says the CFO, “fully understands the importance of an external review and we appreciate that he wants to ensure that the integrity of this process is not compromised.”
I suppose this goes to the concept that “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion.”
Being asked not to come to work while still being paid $760 a day/$3,800 a week is not a hardship. So, the question for the IWK Board, the Health Minister and the Government is this: if an employee on paid leave is found to have failed in his/her duties is that paid leave considered part of the severance package or are taxpayers left to flush out a package which is built up by money paid for not working?
Is executive severance a bottomless pot of gold?
A postscript: An Ontario judge who, on a lark, wore a Make America Great Again hat to work was suspended, without pay, for 30 days.