TAB

More climb aboard the NZRB gravy train

/ Mezzasez / 2 Comments

In my job in the real world I joke with one of my academics about a certain media topic being “the gift which keeps on giving.”

“The gift” is one of those stories which is continually evolving and of which the media is never going to tire.  Pretty much how I felt when, just days after writing my last post about the salary excesses of the Racing Board, an email was circulated announcing some new appointments.

Obviously those 488 permanent employees mentioned in my previous post weren’t cutting it when it came to government and industry stakeholder engagement.  The email in question stated that NZRB had reviewed that area of its communication earlier this year and after an extensive recruitment process claimed they now had the right team to work more closely with stakeholders.

Faced with that task is a team of five. Yes, you read that right – five people to focus on that area of communication.

It was another of those jaw-dropping moments which made me ponder how many people at the Racing Board it might take to change a lightbulb.

Of course, they would probably need to undertake a review before any bulb was changed and quite possibly advertise externally to ensure they found the right people!

The cohort of five is headed by an Irishman Ian Long, who previously held a similar position at NZ Rugby and, like NZRB CE John Allen, also worked at NZ Post.

Given the onerous task in front of him, he is going to be “supported by” parliamentary refugee Bill de la Mare, who comes to NZRB from positions with various ministers, including former racing minister Nathan Guy.  Propping the other side of this front row will be James Wigley, who boasts a marketing background according to the NZRB email, though Green Grass Marketing Services where he was a Marketing Consultant for a number of years, does not appear to have any visible digital footprint.  Wigley also has two years’ experience as a senior marketing manager with the NZRB’s Event Marketing and Logistics team.

The final two making up the team both have interesting titles, with Pete Lane tagged as Operations Specialist and Dan Smith carrying the poisoned chalice as Strategy Manager – Calendar Optimisation.  Presumably the former will provide protection when the latter advises clubs of changes to their dates!

You’d think that just reading this email would be enough to confirm that NZRB is not even paying lip service when it comes to looking at ways to cut its costs.  But it gets better, or worse depending upon your level of tolerance for black humour.

While the email is signed by one Stephen Henry, General Manager Services, it is actually sent by an executive assistant.  I am always suspicious of people who need others to send their emails, they engender memories of black and white movies where women were in the typing pool while blokes did the “real work.”

It may well be that Henry is indeed too busy to deal with emails to industry stakeholders or maybe it is something which was common practice during his time at MFAT.  The last time I received an email from someone, but actually generated by someone else, it came from Henry’s CE, John Allen, who also came to the Racing Board via MFAT.

Given Allen proposed job losses of close to 300 when at MFAT (that was later reduced to a mere 79) one would be forgiven thinking he would be capable of bringing NZRB staffing levels back to a manageable level.

However, based on this latest announcement expect the following – come the annual report there will be savings of between $3-$5million in salary expenses and we will be expected to be grateful for a job well done.

Try and shake off the Stockholm syndrome, instead we now need to channel the crazy newsman from Network, meet outside those offices in Petone and yell:  “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!”

 

 

 

Will Winston slay the NZRB’s excesses?

/ Mezzasez / 1 Comment

The race has been run, all parties have weighed in, correct weight has been signalled and the country has a new government. It is one which those in racing are now expecting to deliver on the ten point promise outlined in NZ First’s racing policy.

Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters has also claimed the Racing portfolio, to the surprise of those who were unaware such a thing even existed, and expectations among those who were aware are high.

Prior to the election, there were two aspects of the policy which I did try and gain clarification around – without any joy. They weren’t major issues. I just asked some questions around timing and planning. Like everyone else, I will now sit back and wait for the policies to implemented and see just how my concerns are addressed.

One point which I hope the Minister will address straight out of the gates though is the following:

Urgently review the operations and costs of the New Zealand Racing Board.

About damned time really.

Earlier this year, with time on my hands, I delved into the NZRB annual reports online and charted the terrifying increase in staff numbers over the years, accompanied by an escalating cost to the industry in salaries.  By 2016’s annual report staff expenses totalled $66million – a fairly healthy chunk of the operating costs.

Those earning in excess of $100,000 – a mere 130-odd at the time of the 2016 Annual Report – were listed in $10,000 bands. For example, just 30 NZRB worker bees struggle along on salaries of $100,000-$110,000; 23 were finding it a little easier to afford their avocado-toast in the $110,000-$120,000 band – and so it went on right up the $350,000-$360,000 slot where there was just one lone body and then a leap to – presumably – the top man, all alone in the $650,000-660,000 bracket.

It was galling to discover there are apparently that many people employed at the NZRB who are considered to be doing enough to progress our industry to warrant that level of remuneration. Would it be more palatable if we were travelling better? Personally, I don’t think so.

So, because I had time on my hands I crafted an OIA request to determine how much they pay the other poor sods who are employed there. Possibly the ones who actually do the work!

The breakdown, when it came, was pretty depressing. Given the letter was dated February 2017 the “categorisation of NZRB employees” was dated “as at 31/7/2017” – quite possibly they meant 2016, or maybe they were gazing into the future. Anyway, at whatever date we are looking at, the permanent full-time employees totalled 488; permanent part-time was 270; fixed term 37; and casual 78, giving a grand total of 873.

The majority of those fulltime employees fell into the $40,000-$59,999 band (116); 65 were in the $60,000-$69,999; 53, $70,000-$79,999; 53, $80,000-$89,999; and 32, $90,000-$99,999.

The response to my request also broke the staffing down into business units, listing job titles (but no numbers under each title) total staff and total salary.

Each business unit reports to the GM of that unit and seven GMs, along with the CEO, comprise the “Leadership Team.” One GM, according to the information I was provided, manages both the Customer and On Course business units, the others control just one area.

The breakdown just to pay the people the Racing Board deems it necessary to run our industry is as follows (and please note, this includes permanent, fixed term and casual staff of NZRB as at February 2017):

Betting – total staff 69; total salary $4,667,624.75

Customer – total staff 341, $15,117,582.02

Finance – total staff 42, $4,500,671.94

Media & Content – total staff 181, $10,767,257.49

On Course – total staff 43, $1,940,530.06

People – total staff 10, $926,298.72

Services – total staff 99, $6,962,574.40

Technology – total staff 61, $5,743,734.00

In addition to the positions listed there were an additional 20 jobs listed under “current active recruitment” – some of these were seeking multiple appointments.

If you haven’t read these numbers and had to pick your jaw up off the floor then I would respectfully suggest you are suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

For too long we have tolerated a bloated, blinkered organisation which has ignored the needs of the industry it was set up to serve. Even as it blundered along, all the time telling us things were fine, we were on the cusp of something great, it assured us we needed to trust it. If you still believe this then you are a textbook case of Stockholm syndrome!

I may have become more than a little obsessed with the salary levels it takes to run racing because, as the Board was cranking up its staff numbers and the dollars WE forked out to pay them, out in the real world companies were streamlining.

The industry I moved back into when I left employment in racing had faced huge disruption and, accordingly, was cutting its cloth to embrace those changes. Over a period of eight years restructures and jobs being “disestablished” became the new normal and fewer people were left to do more work. And forget about wage increases and incentive payments!

Interestingly, I wouldn’t have been anywhere else. There is something inspiring about learning new skills; adapting to overcome problems as safety layers were removed; and taking your staff with you on a journey to a new frontier.  That happens when you have a passion for what you are doing!

In the meantime accountable, seemingly to no one, the Racing Board was morphing into a cumbersome, lumbering beast suckling 800+ employees, many who seemed to be there purely for the money.

Will Winston be the knight in shining armour to slay the dragon of the Board’s excesses? There are more than a few with actual skin in the game hoping that will be the case.

Stay tuned!

Race Fields legislation – what odds?

/ Mezzasez

After languishing for months it appears the eagerly awaited Race Fields Legislation may see the light of day next month.

When Nathan Guy moved on to focus on bigger and brighter things back in April he declared new Racing Minister David Bennett would be likely to introduce the Race legislation into the House “in the next few weeks.”

At the time Labour’s racing spokesman Kris Faafoi said there had to be doubt around the legislation getting through the House prior to the election.

“The government is being extremely tardy in introducing this legislation and it would be extremely optimistic to think a bill that hasn’t yet been introduced will be able to be passed before the election, which was the promise National made,” Faafoi told Stuff at the time.

“Personally, I don’t like the odds,” he said.

It seemed that Labour’s man was going to be spot on with his assessment but today came an email from the Racing Minister declaring the intention “to introduce the Racing Amendment Bill to the House of Representatives before the General Election.”

The Bill, to explain to those who have been living under a rock, came about after the industry raised concerns with the government about overseas Internet sites taking bets on the New Zealand “product” without making any contribution to the local industry.

Changes to the Act, based on recommendations from the Offshore Racing and Sports Betting Working Group, will see two charges introduced.

The information charge, which has led to the legislation being referred to within racing circles as Race Fields, is similar to that already successfully in place in Australia. Here offshore bookmakers will be required to pay a charge for the New Zealand racing information they use in their betting products. (It also covers sport but this is purely a racing blog!).

The consumption charge will apply to bets that offshore operators take from people in New Zealand.

David Bennett said it is an exciting progression for the racing industry to see this legislation come to fruition.

“We are working hard to achieve the goal,” he said.  

But the Minister also had a word of warning.

“Designing legislation which has extra-territorial effect is not simple, but the drafting is well underway,” he said.

“The Bill is expected to get its first reading in August, putting it on track to becoming part of New Zealand legislation next year at some time.”

On track, yes, but as we all know – there are no certainties in racing and, until we salute the judge with this one I won’t be putting any money on it!

Time to find racing’s disruptor

/ Mezzasez

How long can you keep doing the same-old, same-old and expect a different outcome?

Racing is a pretty simple sport.  Sure it has evolved over the years – in the days when my grandfather was plying his trade as a jockey, skullcaps were flimsy and offered no protection (probably because they were part of a jockey’s weighing-out gear), while body protectors were a long way off – but fundamentally little has changed.

Areas affected by technology have seen improvements – we no longer have to queue behind the tote to collect and bet types are many and varied.  Administration – at least when it comes to those choosing to be involved, rather than token government appointees – is still predominantly the domain of blokes.  That might explain why we are so stuck in the mire!

The TAB founded and initially funded by men with a passion for racing has, since the Racing Act 2003 was implemented, now become merely the betting arm of the excessively bloated Racing Board.  Despite repeated questioning from many quarters, no one has yet come up with a valid explanation as to why a cast of hundreds and a wage bill which surpasses $60million per annum is needed to run an industry which, at the grassroots, exists on the merest whiff an oily rag.  

We still, at least in this country, race on grass tracks. That is possibly due to the fact that no one can agree on a) what type of artificial track we should be building, b) where it should be and c) administrators have an attack of the vapours when the cost is revealed.

The jockey ranks now include a large proportion of females and, something which should raise a red flag when it comes to future-proofing the industry, an ever-increasing number of riders from other jurisdictions.  That is an indication that fewer Kiwi kids are being drawn to a career where, unless you’re a natural lightweight, starving yourself is part of the job description. Likewise, our stable staff are something of an endangered species – to the extent that capable trackwork riders are included on the government’s skilled shortage list. The ability to handle a high-strung thoroughbred combined with early morning starts is not a combination found in the average job seeker.

In New Zealand, in particular, it is possible to not attend a race meeting for a decade and find, upon your return to the fold, the same people in the same places – albeit a little more weathered.  Despite the glossy photos depicting youthful racegoers enjoying the thrill of thoroughbred racing, crowds of that type are generally only found at the well-promoted summer carnival meetings.

There has been tinkering around the edges, rating systems and how we rate our tracks for example, but I don’t remember a ground-shifting change in the past 20-odd years, other than the introduction of Trackside.

Interestingly, during the same time frame, we have been experiencing a downward spiral – dwindling numbers of horses bred, ever-diminishing race day attendance (why go when you can watch on TV) and fewer people following their passion to work within the racing industry.

What racing needs is a disruptor.  It could be argued that Trackside was a disruptor, but it only impacted on the way we view our racing – at home, bars or TAB agencies, rather than on-course.

There is talk that galloping (forgive me but when I speak of racing this is the only code to which I refer!) should break away and carve its own brave future.  While this would require more than a few tweaks to the current legislation it shouldn’t be disregarded, and it definitely falls into the realm of disruptor.

For those who might be a little hazy on just what a disruptor is, consider the impact when Sky entered our TV market – of course, things have moved along considerably since then with the likes of Netflix continuing the disruptor trend.  Uber came along to disrupt the taxi industry; Apple and iTunes impacted on the music industry; Airbnb ensures we look further afield than traditional hotel bookings, and so it goes.

In most cases, these new (most now pretty ingrained) ways of looking at things came about due to a certain level of dissatisfaction with the status quo.

So tell me those involved in racing are not dissatisfied?

I know that I have a serious level of dissatisfaction that, instead of being able to write about fabulous galloping achievements instead I am revisiting issues I regularly wrote about 20-plus years ago.

Let’s let go of the same-old, same-old and look out what we need to do to great the best results for the galloping industry, not anyone else, just thoroughbreds. And if we have to be disruptive to find our disruptor, let’s do it!