Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 agnosto wrote:
Because we should all condone obvious nepotism.

Beat me to it by a second.

 fullheadofhair wrote:
OK you bunch of immature sexist numbnuts. It is entirely possible that a woman can be qualified for such a senior position regardless of who she is married to. As for the dumbass who said at least she gets paid --- grow up. Shame on the Mods for not stopping this, shame on the Mod for join in.

A woman can most certainly be qualified to run an IT department. But that's not what's going on here. That website cost 4 MILLION pounds- I believe it was stated that the previous one cost in the order of $450k pounds, so almost nine times the original for a program that has way less material compared to the old one (aka things other than shopping).

Kirby has done a great job finding ways to bleed GW dry, and I suspect this was just another one of those things. Even if his wife did have excellent IT background, she was being paid significantly more than a physician makes for a website for a relatively small miniatures company. I personally think putting your spouse in a high up position is questionable even if they are qualified. And to my current understanding, Mrs. Kirby has no IT background at all, which begs the question of why she was being paid so much money, or even in this role to start with.

 TheKbob wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
Because we should all condone obvious nepotism.

Beat me to it by a second.

Beat me by a whole lot of lines a number of minutes.

This is on the level of mustache twirling, how can I run this company into the ground while making sure me and mine are taken care of. Call it what you want, it's obvious. Dunno, maybe a chairman hiring his wife as head of a department is kosher business practice these days.....

I am just appalled at how you all assumed that she has no qualifications for the job. Does anyone know if she has a profession or did you all just assume she lies on her back for money? I hope none of you are bring up daughters with this very modern day attitude you are showing.

If you'll actually go back and read instead of focusing on comments that you didn't like, you'll find a discussion of her actual qualifications, or lack thereof. I know, its much easier to get bent out of shape and focus on the negative but there IS actual information in this thread. Surprisingly, most of which has nothing to do with Mrs. Kirby.

 fullheadofhair wrote:
I am just appalled at how you all assumed that she has no qualifications for the job. Does anyone know if she has a profession or did you all just assume she lies on her back for money? I hope none of you are bring up daughters with this very modern day attitude you are showing.

Before accusing others of jumping to conclusions, you may want to avoid jumping to conclusions yourself.

 fullheadofhair wrote:
I am just appalled at how you all assumed that she has no qualifications for the job. Does anyone know if she has a profession or did you all just assume she lies on her back for money? I hope none of you are bring up daughters with this very modern day attitude you are showing.

Well, let's approach this from another perspective..

On the balance of probability, how likely do you think Mrs Tom Kirby was the best qualified candidate for the position of IT manager in her husband's multi-million pound, global PLC?

If you can, with a straight face, suggest that she was the best person available for the job, despite no evidence I'm aware of to suggest she had any substantive experience, then fair enough.

Nobody, to my mind, was casting any more scorn on the appointment than they would if it was Kirby's brother, daughter or cousin. It has nothing to do with her gender, and everything to do with a relationship to the Chairman. The nature of the comments merely reflected the nature of the relationship, just as if it was his child they would likely have been along the lines of "daddy's little girl" or "trust fund brat" or similar.

 agnosto wrote:
This is on the level of mustache twirling, how can I run this company into the ground while making sure me and mine are taken care of. Call it what you want, it's obvious. Dunno, maybe a chairman hiring his wife as head of a department is kosher business practice these days.....

British MP's regularly hire their family members (on public expenses). Its more or less part of British culture.

 fullheadofhair wrote:
OK you bunch of immature sexist numbnuts. It is entirely possible that a woman can be qualified for such a senior position regardless of who she is married to. As for the dumbass who said at least she gets paid --- grow up. Shame on the Mods for not stopping this, shame on the Mod for join in.

Kirby, is that you?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 fullheadofhair wrote:
I am just appalled at how you all assumed that she has no qualifications for the job. Does anyone know if she has a profession or did you all just assume she lies on her back for money? I hope none of you are bring up daughters with this very modern day attitude you are showing.

Seriously, take your white knight bollocks somewhere else.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
This is on the level of mustache twirling, how can I run this company into the ground while making sure me and mine are taken care of. Call it what you want, it's obvious. Dunno, maybe a chairman hiring his wife as head of a department is kosher business practice these days.....

British MP's regularly hire their family members (on public expenses). Its more or less part of British culture.

Not especially British, it goes on everywhere, doesn't make it any more palatable.

Five minutes of searching on Google, free (well sans internet charges):
http://www.ssan.org.uk/junior-development/junior-development-action-group/


Making an ass of yourself on an internet board, priceless.

Her prior work appears to be as Lead Contact for the Staffordshire Athletics Network...juniors development action group. So, she appears to have experience as a coordinator of athletic activities for kiddies. I'm sorry, I take it all back, she's obviously more qualified to head the IT department of an international PLC than someone with an MIS background. I've been such a churl to suggest that she was not more qualified than numerous potential other candidates. I've been a sexist pig. The hire obviously had nothing to do with who she is married to and a gym class coordinator is well deserving of the post that pays over 100,000 pounds per annum. Stupid me.

 fullheadofhair wrote:
I am just appalled at how you all assumed that she has no qualifications for the job. Does anyone know if she has a profession or did you all just assume she lies on her back for money? I hope none of you are bring up daughters with this very modern day attitude you are showing.

Our "modern attitude" has nothing to do with assuming anything. That's your attitude.

We made no assumptions. You made lots.

 agnosto wrote:
Five minutes of searching on Google, free (well sans internet charges):
http://www.ssan.org.uk/junior-development/junior-development-action-group/


Making an ass of yourself on an internet board, priceless.

Her prior work appears to be as Lead Contact for the Staffordshire Athletics Network...juniors development action group. So, she appears to have experience as a coordinator of athletic activities for kiddies. I'm sorry, I take it all back, she's obviously more qualified to head the IT department of an international PLC than someone with an MIS background. I've been such a churl to suggest that she was not more qualified than numerous potential other candidates. I've been a sexist pig. The hire obviously had nothing to do with who she is married to and a gym class coordinator is well deserving of the post that pays over 100,000 pounds per annum. Stupid me.

Plus her only directorship on record was as company secretary for Warrior Associates Ltd, a now dissolved company which I can't readily find any description of, both as Ms K E Lathbury and subsequently Mrs K E Kirby.

I'm doubtful "Warrior Associates" is some sort of IT consultation firm, but am open to being proved wrong...

 agnosto wrote:
Five minutes of searching on Google, free (well sans internet charges):
http://www.ssan.org.uk/junior-development/junior-development-action-group/


Making an ass of yourself on an internet board, priceless.

Her prior work appears to be as Lead Contact for the Staffordshire Athletics Network...juniors development action group. So, she appears to have experience as a coordinator of athletic activities for kiddies. I'm sorry, I take it all back, she's obviously more qualified to head the IT department of an international PLC than someone with an MIS background. I've been such a churl to suggest that she was not more qualified than numerous potential other candidates. I've been a sexist pig. The hire obviously had nothing to do with who she is married to and a gym class coordinator is well deserving of the post that pays over 100,000 pounds per annum. Stupid me.

Well, at least you apologized

 agnosto wrote:
If you'll actually go back and read instead of focusing on comments that you didn't like, you'll find a discussion of her actual qualifications, or lack thereof. I know, its much easier to get bent out of shape and focus on the negative but there IS actual information in this thread. Surprisingly, most of which has nothing to do with Mrs. Kirby.

Oh I am sorry - I missed the bit where you all went through her resume and last 4 or 5 jobs and analyzed her weaknesses etc. I just saw afew snide comments people most of whom have no idea how to manage a big project or costs involved. Apologies for my misreading.

I guess the mods are on their coffee break?

 Azreal13 wrote:



Plus her only directorship on record was as company secretary for Warrior Associates Ltd, a now dissolved company which I can't readily find any description of, both as Ms K E Lathbury and subsequently Mrs K E Kirby.

I'm doubtful "Warrior Associates" is some sort of IT consultation firm, but am open to being proved wrong...

Found a "Thomas Henry Felix Kirby" listed as Director of that now defunct company...

https://opencorporates.com/companies/gb/03046706

inactive KAREN ELIZABETH KIRBY, secretary, 17 Mar 2010-
inactive KAREN ELIZABETH LATHBURY, secretary, 5 Nov 2008-
inactive THOMAS HENRY FELIX KIRBY, director, 14 Mar 1996-

Ahh....young love and the destruction of small companies.


Edit: Digging a bit deeper, I found that a Katharine Kirby worked as Secretary at that company, left and then the future Mrs. Kirby became employed there. History of marrying the secretary or just coincidence? I need to work for a tabloid.

Mrs Karen Elizabeth Kirby 17 March 2010 Secretary
Karen Elizabeth Lathbury 5 November 2008 Secretary
Thomas Henry Felix Kirby 14 March 1996 Director
Suzanne Brewer 18 April 1995 14 March 1996 Nominee Secretary
Katharine Kirby 14 March 1996 17 March 2010 Secretary
Dr Kevin Brewer 1952 18 April 1995 14 March 1996 Nominee Director

http://www.dellam.com/03046706-WARRIOR%20ASSOCIATES%20LIMITED


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 fullheadofhair wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
If you'll actually go back and read instead of focusing on comments that you didn't like, you'll find a discussion of her actual qualifications, or lack thereof. I know, its much easier to get bent out of shape and focus on the negative but there IS actual information in this thread. Surprisingly, most of which has nothing to do with Mrs. Kirby.

Oh I am sorry - I missed the bit where you all went through her resume and last 4 or 5 jobs and analyzed her weaknesses etc. I just saw afew snide comments people most of whom have no idea how to manage a big project or costs involved. Apologies for my misreading.

The snide comments came after the discussion of her previous job as a gym class coordinator. If it helps, she was a secretary before that.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
This is on the level of mustache twirling, how can I run this company into the ground while making sure me and mine are taken care of. Call it what you want, it's obvious. Dunno, maybe a chairman hiring his wife as head of a department is kosher business practice these days.....

British MP's regularly hire their family members (on public expenses). Its more or less part of British culture.

Although that does tend to be as PA/Secretary which is at least (in part) justifiable in that they are around when the MP works odd hours at home which is not uncommon, whereas you don';t need your website designer to take notes from you at midnight just because you've had an idea or need to answer a constituents email

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I guess the mods are on their coffee break?

Saturdays always seem a bit Mod lite, for what I assume are obvious reasons.

It also tends to be a day many people drink...

Company secretary dudes, company secretary. It is a very senoir position with a lot of legal responsibility. Nothing to do with an admin secretary.

 fullheadofhair wrote:
Company secretary dudes, company secretary. It is a very senoir position with a lot of legal responsibility. Nothing to do with an admin secretary.

Dude, you've lost. Give it up.

Bollocks.

I appointed my mum company secretary and she did precisely two thirds of feth all.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 fullheadofhair wrote:
Company secretary dudes, company secretary. It is a very senoir position with a lot of legal responsibility. Nothing to do with an admin secretary.

Dude, you've lost. Give it up.

This is GW, just forge the narrative until there is no winner.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Bollocks.

I appointed my mum company secretary and she did precisely two thirds of feth all.

I appointed my dog as a personal assistant. Though, his only real duty was shredding documents.

Warrior Associates was a family corporation setup to hide money from the tax man. The last real job (outside of GW) that she held that I know of was when she was a gym teacher. She did that for a few years, then mostly doing things that CEO wives do...charities and what not that interest them.

You can dig a bit deeper into the process - and someone who is experienced with UK tax law can explain things a bit more precisely than I can...but yeah, tax shelter, not a real business.

Company secretary is a position that companies legally are obliged to have on their board. It doesn't have to be a "real" position though of course it often is. I mean it can be a purely nominal appointment.

As for the lack of Mods on a Saturday, I was out at the Weybridge Head of the River for most of the day.

If someone feels people are transgressing the site rules they should click the yellow alert button.

Now I would suggest getting back on the topic.

 fullheadofhair wrote:
Company secretary dudes, company secretary. It is a very senoir position with a lot of legal responsibility. Nothing to do with an admin secretary.

Just for giggles...how about you take a look at the documents available for the company...that she was a very senior position in...

The one day appointments exist only to fulfill corporate governance requirements. And as the one with the legal responsibility of filing the paperwork...she managed to foul that up more often than not (pay close attention to the names used in the filings...).

 Azreal13 wrote:
Bollocks.

I appointed my mum company secretary and she did precisely two thirds of feth all.

^This. I'm my wife's company secretary, the first and last piece of work I did in that role was to appoint myself company secretary!

Heck, with the Kirby hate going, surprised at the shock of it spilling over onto the wife.

I would have a few choice words for a salary in IT being around $400,000 for basically a toy company.

Sucks seeing an IP we love used and abused huh?

Not accusing anyone of anything, but only mentioning it because I've seen it done in other companies, but Kirby's wife could be on the books just to reduce his tax.

If Kirby's tax on his full pay = X, but if the total pay is reduced by the amount given to his wife, therefore his tax becomes = X-1, that could be the reason.