dirac

Drug scandal at the RDB?

81 posts in this topic

My concern is not just for love of the company as you suggest, my concern is for the institution it once was and that might one day, be recaptured.

As to my wishing "the allegations to be ignored", what allegations are we talking about. Supposed statements by supposed unnamed persons by definition can have no status, so there can be no sunbstantive allegations that alone a substantive statement of evidence.

What we have seen so far are,"Empty statements," that is to say statements that are purported to provide information, but in reality, provide no genuine or "admissable" information at all. Someone allegedly said something to someone about someone.

Surely the pot has to have something tangible in it before it can be stirred.

Share this post


Link to post

Leonid, I'd be interested in your response to the following from canbelto in response to Simon earlier in the thread:

If this study was an academic study, all findings would have to be from anonymous sources, as all subjects are anonymous in such studies. So the four dancers you're so angry at might not have had a choice but to speak on the condition of anonymity. Besides, if privacy is valued, why do they have to endanger their jobs and reputations? Making anonymous whistleblowing complaints is fine, there's nothing inherently immoral about that.
my concern is for the institution it once was and that might one day, be recaptured.

I understand that, but your position here doesn't flow inevitably from concern, and the opposing position isn't in conflict with it.

Share this post


Link to post

Nikolaj Hubbe is a big boy, and very capable, I'm sure, of handling allegations, whether they're true or not. If they're not, then he should have nothing to hide. If they are, then it needs to be brought to light, because it would not be a healthy work environment for anyone, Hubbe included. Respect/veneration for any institution shouldn't make people blind to the potential dark side of anyone.

Leonid and SimonG seem to think that there shouldn't even be an investigation about this matter. That's a point of view I don't really get. If dancers in any company, anonymous or not, are complaining about work conditions, don't you think that whether it's the Queen of England or a teacher in a public school, that these complaints should be investigated to see whether there's validity or not? There are no sacred cows in life. Just to point out a parallel in real life, a couple years ago a student accused me of stalking her through social media. It was completely false, I didn't even know the student in question, but turns out the student had created a ghost account under my name. If it weren't for an investigation, people would have continued to believe her. As a result of the investigation that was made into the matter, this deeply troubled young lady was able to get the help she needed and my name was cleared.

Share this post


Link to post

Why is this anyone's business? Because my tax kroner (we pay a 60% income tax rate, plus 25% sales tax on everything we buy - the world's highest tax rate!) finance the Royal Danish Ballet. This is not a story about Hubbe doing lines while on vacation in the Bahamas. This is a story about him taking drugs as a public employee, with other public employees, on public property. On my time, basically. And - which I think is worse - allegedly creating a hostile work environment for other employees, so hostile that 20 out of 92 are considering leaving a top-tier company to look for other jobs in a very difficult business.

According to one of the Danish papers (Jyllands-Posten, a 'national provincial' paper comparable to the Washington Post or Chicago Tribune), Hubbe would scream at dancers from a distance of one or two feet. "We're used to harsh criciticism - we're brought up with it from a very young age. But this was not normal," dancers were quoted as saying.

Today's news is that Hubbe is supposedly getting a coach to help him deal with personnel better. "Seen from outside, it could seem like this man is totally out of balance," says the ballet's administrative head, Henrik Sten Pedersen, to the Berlingske Tidende, a New York Times type of newspaper. "But that's because he has great artistic sense and great artistic temperament. His behaviour doesn't reflect any kind of management theorey." Pedersen also says he doesn't think Hubbe has a drug problem, but acknowledges that dancers may have assumed he was under the influence because of his mercurial temperament and behaviour. If he's drug-free and his employees are still experiencing him as abusive, there remains a serious problem to address.

I have followed Hubbe's career since the NYCB and met him on a couple of occasions. I have absolutely zero knowledge about the fairness or unfairness of these allegations. I think he's done good things from the Royal Danish Ballet. The company looks better and sharper since he took over, and I'm sure that in order to create an omlette, he's had to break some eggs. Some of the truly terrible dancers from Frank Andersen's reign are gone and not missed. As an audience member, I like his work.

But that doesn't mean that these allegations aren't worth taking seriously. They are.

This is not the first report Hein has produced for the Royal Danish Ballet: it is the third, and she has been associated with the company since 2006. Apparently they were pleased with all her previous studies, or they would not have hired her again.

She interviewed 55 members of the company, as well as several "external business partners" of the company and the consensus was that the cocaine problem was pervasive and growing: Jyllands-Posten, a legitimate newspaper, also interviewed many members of the company and reached the same conclusion. In other words, this is not a case of four sour dancers. According to the report, numerous attempts had been made to approach the board about the situation before the report was released, but those doing so were either not taken seriously or told they would have to approach Hubbe himself.

The real villain here seems to be the Royal Ballet's board, which should have looked into these charges as soon as they surfaced, and should have taken Hein's report seriously when it was presented to them. I'm quite sure they are doing so now. The Danish Royal Family, which as a previous poster suggested are quite involved with the ballet, does not appreciate any link with narcotics - one of the Crown Prince's friends convicted of cocaine dealing has been very publicly exiled from all contact with the royals. The intelligent, activist Queen will be leaning on the board quite heavily to sort this out.

Share this post


Link to post

Nikolaj Hubbe is a big boy, and very capable, I'm sure, of handling allegations, whether they're true or not. If they're not, then he should have nothing to hide. If they are, then it needs to be brought to light, because it would not be a healthy work environment for anyone, Hubbe included. Respect/veneration for any institution shouldn't make people blind to the potential dark side of anyone.

Leonid and SimonG seem to think that there shouldn't even be an investigation about this matter. That's a point of view I don't really get. If dancers in any company, anonymous or not, are complaining about work conditions, don't you think that whether it's the Queen of England or a teacher in a public school, that these complaints should be investigated to see whether there's validity or not? There are no sacred cows in life. Just to point out a parallel in real life, a couple years ago a student accused me of stalking her through social media. It was completely false, I didn't even know the student in question, but turns out the student had created a ghost account under my name. If it weren't for an investigation, people would have continued to believe her. As a result of the investigation that was made into the matter, this deeply troubled young lady was able to get the help she needed and my name was cleared.

Actually that's not what I think at all. I don't think there should be an investigation because I don't think that doing drugs is that big of a deal and I have absolutely no problem with dancers or anyone else doing drugs - unlike the cabal here who think a full lynch mob/roasting/witch hunt is in order. Especially not in dance companies where believe me it's rife. I actually object to the moral umbrage expressed here which equates coke with a Gelsey Kirkland style horror fest.

My point is that those poor little darlings who snorted coke (allegedly) with Hubbe did so of their own free will. No one made them do it and it's a bit rich to cry shenanigans after the fact, anonymously and claim any kind of credibility. Dancers aren't idiots, spineless, nor utterly weak willed puppets - it takes a bit of effort to snort a line or two, there is personal responsibility AND choice.

Let's be clear about a number of things, I described the RDB as moribund, okay, maybe a bit harsh, but definitely tatty round the edges, with a strict hierarchy, few opportunities for corps & apprentices, several dancers way past their best and a repertory which while eclectic they couldn't actually dance very well. Their one calling card, Bournonville, they resented while having to acknowledge that were it not for Bournonville they wouldn't be classed as one of the world's great companies. Moreover the stranglehold Margarethe II had on the company, or rather the interest, did little to dispel the notion that ballet is a plaything of the aristocracy - it was an institution with a great many cobwebs.

Hubbe, who I have no doubt is a difficult, obstinate, obnoxious S.O.B came in saw what was wrong and decided to lead from the front, in class and tackle the problem of the dance quality head on. He promoted people, fast tracked people, gave apprentices principal roles because he felt they were ready and could do it and why should they wait. He understood that talent shouldn't be tempered and maybe he did some things a tad abruptly - but he got results.

\maybe Hubbe does need to temper his aggression and who knows maybe those anonymous dancers are right, he does like a line every now and then and maybe he likes a line with a dancer from time to time - these things happen. But they're adults, they make their choices and if an investigation is to happen then it should be behind closed doors, dealt with inside away from a rather regressive minority who who equate drugs with the end of civilisation as we know it.

Share this post


Link to post

\

Doing lines of coke on their own time is one thing. That I agree is a dancer's business and while I don't think it's the healthiest choice, whatever. The thing that's being alleged is another kettle of fish entirely. It's the Big Boss creating a hostile work environment. It's on the level with sexual harassment -- it's one thing, for instance, to have a dancer make the personal choice to have intimate relations with the ballet master, it's another for the ballet master to threaten the dancer with "put out or get out", to phrase it crudely. I can't believe you don't see the difference here -- what's being alleged is that Hubbe is pressuring dancers to snort coke as an obvious power trip.

Share this post


Link to post

Leonid, I'd be interested in your response to the following from canbelto in response to Simon earlier in the thread:

If this study was an academic study, all findings would have to be from anonymous sources, as all subjects are anonymous in such studies. So the four dancers you're so angry at might not have had a choice but to speak on the condition of anonymity. Besides, if privacy is valued, why do they have to endanger their jobs and reputations? Making anonymous whistleblowing complaints is fine, there's nothing inherently immoral about that.
my concern is for the institution it once was and that might one day, be recaptured.

I understand that, but your position here doesn't flow inevitably from concern, and the opposing position isn't in conflict with it.

Firstly I would say that the public have no right to know the content of internal reports of any investigation within an organisation whether government subsidised or not. This would be the case in the USA, the UK and no doubt in Denmark.

It would take the process of a court of law to enforce the revealing of such information.

If this matter was subject to a court of law and only adults were involved and no government security personnel were involved, anonymity would not be acceptable in the case of giving evidence.

As regards to statements made by certain parties, the test is not losing their jobs, but substantiating the accusations would be.

Privacy begins and ends when accusations are made.

I am only concerned that the subject should not be discussed in a manner where the line between information and actual judgement may be concerned as if it is an open day, to attack anyone and not be held to account for doing so.

My concern is the rights of the accused, which generally states, innocent until proven guilty. To my mind the press coverage has undermined and possibly influenced the processes of future investigation which may therefore be abandoned.

The disclosure to the press may be considered a breach of trust on the part of employees in any organisation and therefore subject to a disciplinary procedure.

To Kay Denmark, I would say being a taxpayer does not give a citizen an inherent right to know any or all of the organisational processes of the Royal Danish Ballet or any other Government subsidised organisation. If any Danish citizen is truly so concerned about their small personal contribution to the Royal Danish Ballet, why not get their MP to ask a question in parliament.

Processes exist for a reason and what will be the measure of the fall-out of this affair in terms of the Royal Danish Ballet's

status.

EDITED

Share this post


Link to post

Doing lines of coke on their own time is one thing. That I agree is a dancer's business and while I don't think it's the healthiest choice, whatever. The thing that's being alleged is another kettle of fish entirely. It's the Big Boss creating a hostile work environment. It's on the level with sexual harassment -- it's one thing, for instance, to have a dancer make the personal choice to have intimate relations with the ballet master, it's another for the ballet master to threaten the dancer with "put out or get out", to phrase it crudely. I can't believe you don't see the difference here -- what's being alleged is that Hubbe is pressuring dancers to snort coke as an obvious power trip.

Actually, no. What's being alleged is a third party anonymously saying that anonymous dancers did lines of coke with the AD. For you this is an obvious power trip, for me, personally, I don't believe that's the way it went down if it did indeed go down. I think it also muddies the waters to bring in sexual harassment, this is a completely different kettle of fish altogether.

Share this post


Link to post

Why is this anyone's business? Because my tax kroner (we pay a 60% income tax rate, plus 25% sales tax on everything we buy - the world's highest tax rate!) finance the Royal Danish Ballet. This is not a story about Hubbe doing lines while on vacation in the Bahamas. This is a story about him taking drugs as a public employee, with other public employees, on public property. On my time, basically. And - which I think is worse - allegedly creating a hostile work environment for other employees, so hostile that 20 out of 92 are considering leaving a top-tier company to look for other jobs in a very difficult business.

The real villain here seems to be the Royal Ballet's board, which should have looked into these charges as soon as they surfaced, and should have taken Hein's report seriously when it was presented to them. I'm quite sure they are doing so now. The Danish Royal Family, which as a previous poster suggested are quite involved with the ballet, does not appreciate any link with narcotics - one of the Crown Prince's friends convicted of cocaine dealing has been very publicly exiled from all contact with the royals. The intelligent, activist Queen will be leaning on the board quite heavily to sort this out.

Hubbe and the dancers pay tax too, which also funds the Ballet. How they spend their money is none of your business. And do you truly believe that the way all public service officials, civil servants, armed forces, doctors etc use their wages for wholly wholesome things? Our taxes also bailed out massive merchant banks when they screwed up with our money and those dudes are some of the biggest drug abusers out there.

And do you truly think that drugs didn't exist within the RDB before Hubbe?

Share this post


Link to post

Anonymous sources are part of academic studies. All clinical trials are anonymous, in fact, any study that features the medical statuses of subjects must be anonymous because of the issues of medical privacy. In this study it seems as if there was an investigation that would concern the medical status of several of the dancers, so therefore, the dancers in question would have to remain anonymous. That shouldn't be a reason to dismiss the claims of the dancers.

Share this post


Link to post

Quiggin writes:

When the Murdoch story first broke, the Times seemed not to know how to treat it, fell back into their personality-news bias and framed it in terms of "what will this do to James Murdoch's career?"

Not to send the thread off topic, but in the beginning it didn’t seem as if this affair would do much more than cost some people their jobs and possibly affect James Murdoch’s place in the line of succession. Even people who’ve been following Murdoch for a long time seem to have been taken aback by the way this thing has snowballed, not least Rupert himself. Amazing story.

She interviewed 55 members of the company, as well as several "external business partners" of the company and the consensus was that the cocaine problem was pervasive and growing: Jyllands-Posten, a legitimate newspaper, also interviewed many members of the company and reached the same conclusion. In other words, this is not a case of four sour dancers. According to the report, numerous attempts had been made to approach the board about the situation before the report was released, but those doing so were either not taken seriously or told they would have to approach Hubbe himself.

I think the Post story said that Jacobsen had “oriented” the board as to the report’s contents, but the board didn’t actually see the report until Heine sent it to them direct, and then after what appears to be a cursory investigation, they sat on it. Most definitely, this doesn’t look good for the board.

"Seen from outside, it could seem like this man is totally out of balance," says the ballet's administrative head, Henrik Sten Pedersen,

Thanks for posting, KayDenmark. I’m sure that makes for a pleasant working environment.

:)

Share this post


Link to post

Anonymous sources are part of academic studies. All clinical trials are anonymous, in fact, any study that features the medical statuses of subjects must be anonymous because of the issues of medical privacy. In this study it seems as if there was an investigation that would concern the medical status of several of the dancers, so therefore, the dancers in question would have to remain anonymous. That shouldn't be a reason to dismiss the claims of the dancers.

I'm not dismissing the claims. I said they may very well be true. And yes anonymous sources are used in reports, tabloid journalism, studies and areas of medical privacy. But what we're talking about here is people wanting a full proceedural report and investigation which could lead to criminal charges, sackings and the destruction of people's reputation.

So if you do want a legally legitimate investigation the "anonymous" and indeed "anonymous reporting on alleged actions by anonymous" won't do. It certainly wouldn't stand up in a court of law, unless Hubbe was to say it was all true and give names.

So, if those dancers felt like they were forced to do drugs and that it was a power trip on the part of a semi-psychotic AD, then they will have to come forward and make it official. Anything else is just gossip and very bad tabloid level journalism.

Share this post


Link to post

Not to send the thread off topic, but in the beginning it didn’t seem as if this affair would do much more than cost some people their jobs and possibly affect James Murdoch’s place in the line of succession. Even people who’ve been following Murdoch for a long time seem to have been taken aback by the way this thing has snowballed, not least Rupert himself. Amazing story.

Dirac

The real reason for this is because Murdoch was part of the central Illuminati Cabal establishing a New World Order, but he broke away from his brethren wanting total world domination of the media and looked close to achieving this. So the other Leaders of the Illuminati, sensing one of their own was about to destroy the balance of power by becoming greater than any of them, engineered his downfall along with the Masons, the Bilderberg Group, the Lucis Society, UN, Rothschilds, the Vatican and coven of Baphomet.

Share this post


Link to post
I don't think there should be an investigation because I don't think that doing drugs is that big of a deal and I have absolutely no problem with dancers or anyone else doing drugs - unlike the cabal here who think a full lynch mob/roasting/witch hunt is in order. Especially not in dance companies where believe me it's rife. I actually object to the moral umbrage expressed here which equates coke with a Gelsey Kirkland style horror fest.

Respectfully, Simon, I know of no one here who is baying for anyone’s blood. Some people here take a poorer view of cocaine use/abuse than you seem to do, specifically in the workplace, and some also think that a more thorough investigation of the allegations in the report seems desirable, given what we currently know.

Regarding rules of evidence and "innocent until proven guilty" - leonid, this is a discussion board, not a court. We can express opinions and speculate within bounds. In any case, no one here has rushed to judgment against Hubbe.

Edited by dirac
Original post amended - bolded text added

Share this post


Link to post

Not to send the thread off topic, but in the beginning it didn’t seem as if this affair would do much more than cost some people their jobs and possibly affect James Murdoch’s place in the line of succession. Even people who’ve been following Murdoch for a long time seem to have been taken aback by the way this thing has snowballed, not least Rupert himself. Amazing story.

Dirac

The real reason for this is because Murdoch was part of the central Illuminati Cabal establishing a New World Order, but he broke away from his brethren wanting total world domination of the media and looked close to achieving this. So the other Leaders of the Illuminati, sensing one of their own was about to destroy the balance of power by becoming greater than any of them, engineered his downfall along with the Masons, the Bilderberg Group, the Lucis Society, UN, Rothschilds, the Vatican and coven of Baphomet.

You left out the Trilateral Commission!

Share this post


Link to post

Hubbe and the dancers pay tax too, which also funds the Ballet. How they spend their money is none of your business. And do you truly believe that the way all public service officials, civil servants, armed forces, doctors etc use their wages for wholly wholesome things? Our taxes also bailed out massive merchant banks when they screwed up with our money and those dudes are some of the biggest drug abusers out there.

And do you truly think that drugs didn't exist within the RDB before Hubbe?

As some of the other posters mention, this is less about drugs specifically and more about a hostile work environment. But yes, how public servants act on public property is the public's business. Particularly if they are breaking the law.

Share this post


Link to post
"Seen from outside, it could seem like this man is totally out of balance," says the ballet's administrative head, Henrik Sten Pedersen, to the Berlingske Tidende, a New York Times type of newspaper. "But that's because he has great artistic sense and great artistic temperament. His behaviour doesn't reflect any kind of management theorey."

Sheesh. The old, "because he's an artist he can behave badly" defense.

My point is that those poor little darlings who snorted coke (allegedly) with Hubbe did so of their own free will. No one made them do it and it's a bit rich to cry shenanigans after the fact, anonymously and claim any kind of credibility.

Were the dancers in Hubbe's office that night the ones who complained? And if they were, they may have felt pressured to partake - not partaking could have been read as disapproval, which for obvious reasons they wouldn't want to show. Or perhaps you're right and some are hypocrites. My point is that we can't know that, and it's unfair to presume the worst about them.

To my mind the press coverage has undermined and possibly influenced the processes of future investigation which may therefore be abandoned.

Where is the evidence for that? If anything, it's the press coverage that will finally force the investigation Jacobsen and the board didn't want.

So, if those dancers felt like they were forced to do drugs and that it was a power trip on the part of a semi-psychotic AD, then they will have to come forward and make it official. Anything else is just gossip and very bad tabloid level journalism.

As has been pointed out, those dancers are dependent on Hubbe for their jobs. Answering questions in an internal investigation isn't gossiping, and reporting the results of investigations is reporting news.

Share this post


Link to post

As has been pointed out, those dancers are dependent on Hubbe for their jobs. Answering questions in an internal investigation isn't gossiping, and reporting the results of investigations is reporting news.

Well, I reckon those jobs are in jeopardy anyway, if it did indeed take place the anonymous cat is out of the bag. Since the report makes anonymous third party allegations it is gossip, not news.

If those dancers have legitimate grievances then it's highly unlikely Hubbe would keep his job - those are serious allegations, so those dancers have to decide whether or not they want to exercise that kind of power, or even if they want to complain. After all this is third party gossip, they may have had a high old time, if it happened. And what were the motives for the third parties who decided to gossip? The original parties apparently wanted to keep it to themselves.

And yes, there may be an element of fear for their jobs, but unless they do come forward and complain directly nothing can come of this. You can't sack someone or bring criminal proceedings against someone on heresay and third party gossip. So until they do it doesn't matter what anyone here may think or want to see happen.

Share this post


Link to post

What troubles me is the way that 'downstream' press sources feed off of the original stories in Jyllands-Posten and then completely ignore what few facts those stories provide. Even JP is not contending that cocaine abuse is "rampant" in the RDB. But that doesn't stop many other publications from using that word, or similar words.

The press is lazy; I've seen it time and time again, where reporters and press reports don't bother to get the facts straight. It's not just this situation. But in this case, these irresponsible third- and fourth-hand news stories are completely unfair to the many, many dancers who work their butts off to push themselves - through pain, injury, and long rehearsals - to do what they love, to better themselves, and to bring some beauty to the world.

Here's a (Google translated) quote from a recent JP article interview with a former Royal theater communications director: "In my time I have known for several employees who had a substance abuse problem. It was something we talked very openly about, and actually I think we had fewer problems with cocaine than anywhere else in the world of culture, because we were good to address it," says Kresten Schultz Jørgensen. So where are the headlines touting "Fewer Cocaine Abuse Problems at Royal Theater than Elsewhere; Care and Attention to Blame"?

For those interested, here is a link to a listing of the 16 or so articles that Jylland-Posten has published on the topic.

Share this post


Link to post

[Admin beanie on]

Our policy is that if anyone believes a post violates Ballet Alert! policy, he or she should hit the "Report" button in the bottom left corner of the post. The moderators will review it and decide whether or not to take action.

Discussing the discussion, or whether the discussion should be allowed in the first place, is against Ballet Alert! policy.

If a post has been removed or edited, it is because it didn't follow policy.

Please say what you have to say and avoid characterizing other posters. There are enough opinions to which to respond.

[Admin beanie off]

Share this post


Link to post

Since the report makes anonymous third party allegations it is gossip, not news.

A newspaper citing unnamed sources of its own could be gossip in some circumstances. A newspaper reporting on serious allegations made anonymously by necessity is news in my book.

If those dancers have legitimate grievances then it's highly unlikely Hubbe would keep his job - those are serious allegations, so those dancers have to decide whether or not they want to exercise that kind of power, or even if they want to complain.

Perhaps our Danish posters have a good feel for the politics here, but given that Hubbe is given high marks for revitalizing the company, it would surprise me if he lost his job - note, for example, the excuses made by company administrator Pederson - and surprise me if the dancers, who for all we know may be mere corps members, would think they could bring him down.

And what were the motives for the third parties who decided to gossip? The original parties apparently wanted to keep it to themselves.

Gossip is talking about people in order to make them look bad. It is malicious. But dancers who don't do drugs and think they're harmful would have a good motive - concern for the company and even the dancers doing drugs - to report drug use when asked to report problems in the company.

Share this post


Link to post
And what were the motives for the third parties who decided to gossip? The original parties apparently wanted to keep it to themselves.

We don't know what their motives were, but to say that they could have been motivated by a concern for the company is at least as legitimate as implying, by repeated use of the word “gossip” that they are up to no good.

You can't sack someone or bring criminal proceedings against someone on heresay and third party gossip.

I don't think anyone has called for sackings or the pressing of criminal charges. The goal of an investigation, I should think, would be to address any problems in the working life of the company, not necessarily to produce someone’s head on a platter. It's true that such things do happen, not always justly. But by the same token a thorough inquiry could resolve any questions in a positive way to the benefit of all, or most, concerned. The company above all.

Thanks for those links, checkwriter.

Share this post


Link to post

A lot of people are being put through the wringer on this one: Hubbe, the Company, the dancers, the "anonymous" whistleblowers, the Danish taxpayers, even the poor Queen.

I agree with Helene that, at this point, an investigation is the only way to proceed.

Let's hope it will be transparent, fair-minded, and thorough. To achieve this the investigators should be careful to collect the relevant facts and stick to those facts when it comes to drawing conclusions-- avoiding large-scale pontificating about the cultural impact of drug use/abuse; the differences between American v. Danish value systems; the decline (or not) of the mass media; and any one expert's thoughts about competing management styles..

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think anyone has called for sackings or the pressing of criminal charges. The goal of an investigation, I should think, would be to address any problems in the working life of the company, not necessarily to produce someone’s head on a platter. It's true that such things do happen, not always justly. But by the same token a thorough inquiry could resolve any questions in a positive way to the benefit of all, or most, concerned. The company above all.

I know. But if it is proven beyond all reasonable doubt that the Artistic Head of an arts organisation, a public servant of an organisation with strong links to the Danish Royal family and funded mainly by taxpayer's money has been sharing/forcing cocaine upon his employees, who in some cases may be teenagers, does anyone here think that he'll keep his job?

If the parties all come forward and it be proven, it will be news, it will be investigated by the police who may very well decide to press charges given how high profile the case is.

I mean we can debate the whole gossip vs legitimate news and internal report as opposed to public inquiry thing - but the stakes are pretty high for all concerned.

The real problem is that there's a vast gulf between cocaine use and true addiction, by demonising and making something essentially in house so stigmatised, public and scandalous it will stop dancers who may have real problems coming forward to get the help they may desperately want and need.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with Helene that, at this point, an investigation is the only way to proceed.

I think you meant to cite someone else, since I haven't weighed in yet.

I do think that Kay Denmark made most points best, and also that if the board swept internal reports under the rug when they indicated that further investigation was necessary, the focus should be on the board.

I don't have a problem with personal use of drugs; however if they do become a workplace issue, an employer should act.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.