Let’s say that your Lodge has an excellent Mason. He’s been a member for decades, never misses meetings or other activities, knows the Work, and is always willing to help out.
Let’s say that the Temple Board has a long term project that it needs assistance with.
The Brother thinks that he is doing a great job with the project. But everyone else is extremely concerned about the quality of his work. They recognize that they have to fire the Brother.
Hindsight is of course 20/20, so the Lodge members realize that their fundamental mistake was in hiring someone to do the work that they couldn’t easily fire. But, the mistake was made, and now they are in this horrible position.
So, how do they best fire him?
What is the best way that they can do this, with the hope of retaining the Brother as an active and involved member of the Lodge?
Can it be done?
Is there a way that horribly hurt feelings can be avoided?
Based on my own experience with Lodge building projects, I think that your points are well taken.
Generally I don't think that we give specific enough direction, and far too often, I think we are way too tight with the budget. Both of those things lead to problems. They are in the first instance the result of wanting to treat a Brother gently, and in the second instance a result of having insufficient Lodge dues over the course of 100 years.
As does a lack of proper experience. We are men, so we think we can build. But, often I think, most of us end up building with brute strength and ignorance. As my grandfather used to like to say.
It's better to be direct that making it weird for everyone. I agree with Wilson above. As a supervisor on past projects, I can tell you work quality is everyone's responsibility, from the apprentice to the journeyman to the project superintendent. These issues are great to have in a lodge, and much can be learned. Heck, it brings up back to operative masons roots.
A lot of it goes back to the masons in the past doing things themselves. The lodge in Port Orchard, for example, has a ledger outlining the costs and savings from the brothers doing the majority of the work themselves when building that temple. The story goes that a lot of the heavy equipment (and steel) were "donated" by the local navy shipyard. Next time you go there, take a look at the fire escape stairs on the east side of the building.
But the work wasn't without it's flaws that they are struggling with today. Yes, they saved a lot of money doing the work themselves, but those savings are going away as attempted repairs especially around the foyer area area haven't solved the issues.
On the flip side, hiring a contractor is supposed to be the safe bet, as they are usually bonded and insured. Well, except when they go out of business. Then, whatever shoddy work they did is no longer warrantied.
Today, it's a crap shoot on getting quality work, even from reputable contractors.
Indeed you are right, a lot of our current problems are inherited from questionable work in the past. I've been tinkering around in one Lodge building at least on a weekly basis for a dozen years now. It's really easy to see the difference in the wiring that was done 'by the Brothers' and the wiring that was done by a professional.
But, your second point is also well made. When we do hire a professional, we've got to make sure that he is a good one. There are plenty of bad ones out there.
Time was when Freemasonry didn't own buildings. And I often think we were probably better off then. Out of the 4 Lodges in my Jurisdiction that I feel to be the most successful of all, three of them don't own a building.
But, hindsight is 20/20, and we do own all of these buildings. Given that, I agree with you. We should not manage the buildings we own. In most cases we would be much better off with professional management.
That particular Lodge has a company that sets the rents for the two commercial and one residential space, collects the rents, and handles any problems that the tenants have. They then make a report to the Temple Board each month. For that they have a standard monthly fee.
Ultimately, it ensures that everything is kept good for those who rent part of the building, and ensures that the TB is getting proper market rent, deposits, and all the rest. I think that in the long run the Lodge makes more money than it would if the Brothers were handling it, and I think it is probably better for those who rent space.
Yeah, certainly not needed for a small rural building, but our Larger ones, like the one you visited in Ballard, or even the one in my small town that is four stories with the first two filled with attorneys and accountants can do better with professional management I think.
In my humble opinion the “boss” should take him completely aside and have a quiet discussion about his work performance, and get him to understand that it just isn’t what we want and we’re going to have to get someone else. Not easy but emphasize that we at the lodge really like him and hope he will want to continue as a member.
Can it be done? Yes.
Is there a way to avoid hurt feelings? No.
Now. As a Quality Inspector myself I have some questions:
Did the instructions were specific?
Did a set of specifications for the job was layout?
The budget was enough?
The person had the experience for that specific job?
80% of the time the blame is not on the person doing the job, but in the corporation that did the hire.
Based on my own experience with Lodge building projects, I think that your points are well taken.
Generally I don't think that we give specific enough direction, and far too often, I think we are way too tight with the budget. Both of those things lead to problems. They are in the first instance the result of wanting to treat a Brother gently, and in the second instance a result of having insufficient Lodge dues over the course of 100 years.
As does a lack of proper experience. We are men, so we think we can build. But, often I think, most of us end up building with brute strength and ignorance. As my grandfather used to like to say.
It's better to be direct that making it weird for everyone. I agree with Wilson above. As a supervisor on past projects, I can tell you work quality is everyone's responsibility, from the apprentice to the journeyman to the project superintendent. These issues are great to have in a lodge, and much can be learned. Heck, it brings up back to operative masons roots.
Indeed, we do learn from the hard lessons, and hopefully don't repeat them again in the future!
A lot of it goes back to the masons in the past doing things themselves. The lodge in Port Orchard, for example, has a ledger outlining the costs and savings from the brothers doing the majority of the work themselves when building that temple. The story goes that a lot of the heavy equipment (and steel) were "donated" by the local navy shipyard. Next time you go there, take a look at the fire escape stairs on the east side of the building.
But the work wasn't without it's flaws that they are struggling with today. Yes, they saved a lot of money doing the work themselves, but those savings are going away as attempted repairs especially around the foyer area area haven't solved the issues.
On the flip side, hiring a contractor is supposed to be the safe bet, as they are usually bonded and insured. Well, except when they go out of business. Then, whatever shoddy work they did is no longer warrantied.
Today, it's a crap shoot on getting quality work, even from reputable contractors.
Indeed you are right, a lot of our current problems are inherited from questionable work in the past. I've been tinkering around in one Lodge building at least on a weekly basis for a dozen years now. It's really easy to see the difference in the wiring that was done 'by the Brothers' and the wiring that was done by a professional.
But, your second point is also well made. When we do hire a professional, we've got to make sure that he is a good one. There are plenty of bad ones out there.
Experiencing something like that right now. It's why we should never directly own our own buildings and ideally should be managed by non-Masons.
Time was when Freemasonry didn't own buildings. And I often think we were probably better off then. Out of the 4 Lodges in my Jurisdiction that I feel to be the most successful of all, three of them don't own a building.
But, hindsight is 20/20, and we do own all of these buildings. Given that, I agree with you. We should not manage the buildings we own. In most cases we would be much better off with professional management.
And I forgot to mention that 4th Lodge that does own its building has a professional management company take care of it.
What does “management” mean in this context?
That particular Lodge has a company that sets the rents for the two commercial and one residential space, collects the rents, and handles any problems that the tenants have. They then make a report to the Temple Board each month. For that they have a standard monthly fee.
Ultimately, it ensures that everything is kept good for those who rent part of the building, and ensures that the TB is getting proper market rent, deposits, and all the rest. I think that in the long run the Lodge makes more money than it would if the Brothers were handling it, and I think it is probably better for those who rent space.
Very interesting! I could see that working very well in urban areas with lodges that have large building with renters tenants etc.
Yeah, certainly not needed for a small rural building, but our Larger ones, like the one you visited in Ballard, or even the one in my small town that is four stories with the first two filled with attorneys and accountants can do better with professional management I think.
In my humble opinion the “boss” should take him completely aside and have a quiet discussion about his work performance, and get him to understand that it just isn’t what we want and we’re going to have to get someone else. Not easy but emphasize that we at the lodge really like him and hope he will want to continue as a member.
I think that this is good advice. Simple and direct. Thank you!