The Mayor of Newark has an overly broad job description…
I came close to giving Newark Mayor Cory Booker the “Incompetent Elected Official of the Month ” designation for his well-publicized stunt of rescuing a freezing puppy from the cold. I decided it would be unfair. An executive who wastes his or her time doing the jobs of others is indeed incompetent, not to mention inefficient, wasteful, and dumb, but that’s really not what Booker was doing. What he was doing was shamelessly sucking up to dim-bulb voters who are impressed with silly PR maneuvers like this rather than actual job performance.
To a moderately intelligent, informed citizen of Newark, a mayor interrupting his day to do what the city pays animal control workers a fraction of what he earns to do more responsibly would be an indictment of that mayor’s priorities, time-management skills, and judgment. To an idiot, it means that the mayor is a real swell guy who loves animals and is running willy-nilly all over the city, leaping tall building in a single bound—a hero! Booker has apparently made the calculation that Newark has more idiots than moderately intelligent, informed citizens, so his conduct was an insult as well. Or maybe he’s right.
The public’s grasp of what their elected leaders actually do is tenuous enough without elected officials like Booker intentionally adding to their ignorance. To be fair, he is an activist, hands-on leader who has engaged in genuine and appropriate acts of generosity, kindness and bravery. He should not, however, be rescuing kittens from trees or dogs from the cold, rushing to answer 911 calls or cleaning the streets. The taxpayers are already paying people to do those things. His job is to be mayor, and Newark needs one, full-time. If he has so much time on his hands that he’s doing the jobs of other city employees, then he’s neglecting his own responsibilities.
BAD mayor! BAD!
_____________________________________
Ethics Alarms 
So everyone should just stick to their job description? Seems to me that you were on the other side on a certain lifeguard issue a while ago. “Can’t go rescue someone else on the non-paying side of the beach, because we aren’t paid to do that” was, indeed, NOT an ethical response there. Jack, you have forgotten the leadership role that Booker is playing. So, he’s made ALL of Newark his business, ALL of Newark a place where he sets the example of stepping outside of the rigid job description, ALL of Newark sit up and remember that EVERYONE has a role in making it a safe and compassionate community. That’s what leaders are supposed to do, and what a certain president has failed to do.
Come on. A lifeguard’s job is to rescue people who are drowning, and one was drowning in his presence…of course he has a duty to rescue. If Booker saw the shivering dog as he walked by the animal, he’d have a duty too—I see nothing wrong with him acting then, and that’s at least an appropriate analogy..That’s not what happened here…Booker personally responded to a situation he has a whole department to handle.
A leader who doesn’t delegate, let people do the jobs they are trained to do and can’t prioritize is a lousy leader. Simple as that..
I’m leaning toward Peter on this one, with one glaring exception to his last sentence, assuming he is referring to a current President. A leader provides an example to act, and in this case, flawed though it may be in terms of a clumsy attempt, one needs to interpret the intent behind the act. Granted, whether one believes this act was merely a self-serving act in a contrived media setting, or whether one believes the act was designed to inspire others to be active in improving their community and city and to “do the right thing” requires one to be somewhat of a mind-reader, in which case it is fair to assume all of us here are equally gifted. In my view, Booker’s track record in many contexts, has been to “do the right thing,” so I believe the latter than the former.
But the right thing for a leader is not to do his subordinates’ jobs.
Amen, I’ve had bosses like this and it’s hell.
This is a skill unto itself, and one that I think can be hard to master, especially for someone who came up through the ranks of the job they’re now supervising.
This is meant as a general comment. I’m not implying anything about Booker.
1) Was there a timeliness issue here? That is, in Booker’s assessment, would the response time of the designated department be too long to rescue the dog? 2) This appears to me to have been a spontaneous response driven, quite possibly from COMPASSION, rather than the cynical PR stunt that you assume. What I have seen in interviews about Booker suggests to me that this is more likely. 3) Your assumption that Booker is a “leader who doesn’t delegate” is without basis, since this is ONE example only, with your interpretation and conclusion being on the basis of insufficient data. All you know is that Booker DIDN’T delegate,not that he CANNOT delegate. Such lack of rigor in your thought process would get you an “F” in physics or chemistry, Jack.
You’ve got to be kidding. If anything, the Mayor’s intervention slowed down the rescue, since he made sure he had camera crews and photographers present by the time he got there. Unless, in your careful application of scientific reasoning, you have begun from the premise that ALL animal rescues are accompanied by such crews and photographic capability, which could be justified only by some advanced knowledeg of a frozen dog obsession in Newark that I foolishly forgot to investigate. I know that Booker didn’t delegate in a situation where it was a no-brainer TO delegate, and that he or his PR lackey made sure that there was plenty of press around to record it. Hmmm…you’re right, we may be leaping to conclusions to assume the extensive coverage was based on the mayor’s desire to ass to his “Super-Mayor” brand even if the dog had to shiver a little longer. The puppy may have been a celebrity puppy, for example, mayhap the winner of the much awaited “Puppy Bowl” already in the can and ready for broadcast on the Animal Channel. Or perhaps it wasn’t a puppy at all, but Booker’s enchanted nephew, in which case I agree, he has a special interest in not seeing the lad sent to the pound. Or, come to think of it, Animal Control was being held hostage by terrorists. Or this was an initiation into the “Legion of Super-Mayors.” There are all sorts of things I didn’t consider.
If we are going to accept your generous pass, and assume that just this once, with all the imperiled animals in Newark every day of the week, Booker spontaneously decided it was his duty and it had nothing to do with a blatant suck-up exercise. Of course, this would still suggest that the mayor is flighty and has poor impulse control. Meanwhile, I need more than “it was just a coincidence” or “it seemed like a good idea at the time” or “I had nothing better to do.” If he comes to the conclusion that the Mayor needs to do this once, and the dog isn’t a celebrity or a nephew, and Newark Animal Control wasn’t being held hostage by terrorists, then he may conclude that he needs to do this again, and I need a coherent, plausible reason. I can’t think of one. I can think of a reason why he would try this stunt, and I think it’s the best of the available options…by a mile.
Jack, I concede your point if the matter had been delayed by the necessity to call camera crews, discuss with his PR department, and so on. In which case, category 1) the matter of timeliness of the rescue, would have given great weight to your argument. The act makes sense to me ONLY if it was spontaneous, and the Mayor’s actions would have rescued the dog in a much more timely manner than Animal Control could have managed it. It was not clear to me from your description of the event, whether this was so, or not, and I am “virginal” regarding the prior reporting of this event. It’s not clear to me whether his own press crew, or those in his entourage carried video cameras or not.
Regarding this being a matter of “duty,” you did not address my point that, in my interpretation, based on interviews and articles that I have seen, it had nothing to DO with DUTY, but, in fact, may have been a spontaneous act of compassion. My belief, unrebutted by arguments or facts suggesting the contrary, is that this may have had nothing to do with poor impulse control, and was probably a conscious decision. It likely reflected his actual, true nature as a human being. If it contributed to his reputation as “Super-Mayor,” is that bad? In the case of Newark, again, he holds a special place as leader, and, in fact, may illustrate NATIONALLY a good example of Mayor-leader, by doing what he did. What time did he waste in doing this? What time was wasted relative to the perceived benefit as example to the community that I believe he sought to create? So, he got home later than usual, by completing the remaining tasks for the day later. So what? Again, from interviews, I recall his being “out and about” in his community at all hours of day and night, weekdays and weekends. That’s DEDICATION, not poor impulse control, Jack.
Loved you on O’Reilly but not on this. Booker was acting like a leader should: he saw a need and did it. I’ve seen great leaders in the military help mow common lawns and pick up trash as an example, or install a tile floor to spruce up an old building. The most important job of a leader is to show what’s important by his words AND by his actions.
And rescuing dogs is “important” for big city mayors? I don’t think that fits his words. Come on—a pure stunt.
I’ve seen great leaders in the military pick up trash and mow yards also as an example. I haven’t seen them go all the way across base and arrange full press coverage so the soldiers know how ‘good’ of a leader they are. This examples were always ‘examples of opportunity’ (for lack if a better phrase).
If a situation didn’t present itself literally in passing while the leader didn’t have something better to do, the leader didn’t manufacture situations to be a good leader. That isn’t the mark of leadership but of supreme narcissism.
And here I thought your love was constant and unequivocal!
Getting the job done is what’s important. doing what it takes. Whenever. I recall Booker also dashed into a burning home and pulled a resident o safety through intense heat. Another pure stunt? http://goo.gl/3qGQV
Saving lives trumps job descriptions by a huge margin.
Of course, clarify that by, if no one better equipped or better prepared, whose job it IS, are not around.
I referenced that in the linked post. I don’t doubt Booker’s bona fides as a stand-up guy and a mensch. And were pet dogs being left out in the cold in Newark a significant and oft-occurring problem, I’d give Booker the benefit of the doubt and say he was trying to focus public attention on a serious problem, and a leader doing such a thing is often a good way of doing that, since the press only pays attention if there’s an angle, like the mayor rescuing a dog rather than Animal Control.
But this dog was a pet that got out of the house while his master was away; it wasn’t the tip of any iceberg. Rather it was a cheap set-up for an “Awww!” story, with the mayor expropriating his subordinates’ duties for no legitimate reason. I like Booker. This is awful management, however. I’m sure you don’t teach your business school students that its a good idea for the boss to step in and do their jobs when they’ve been doing them just fine themselves. It undermines confidence, causes resentment, and distorts the chain of command.
This isn’t leadership, this is showmanship. You don’t lead by doing someone’s job you, lead by having the right person in place to do the job, giving them the proper resources to do the job and not second guessing them.
Spoken like a Marine, and exactly right. Thanks.
Funny you should mention, I was just thinking of an old Marine myth very similar to this one. One told to us to highlight the kind of ethos that the Marine Corp likes to promote. Its about a Marine LCpl (probably terminal) who was walking along a busy street when he came across some trash that he promptly picked up and threw away. The Commandant just happened to be across the road with some aides, and after seeing many other Marines of superior rank pass by the trash without stopping to pick it up, he went over to the motivator and promoted him on the spot into the first, and much coveted, rank of NCO.
Same story accept the kid is a Governor, the Commandant is the press, and the promotion is good PR.
As noted, this isn’t the same story. The governor didn’t happen by the dog and the press didn’t happen to see him. If the marine LCpl heard about the trash, called the Commandant to the spot, and went over and picked up the trash in front of him, then it would be parallel. If that occurred, I hope the Commandant would say “Why the hell’d you waste my time?” and treat the LCpl negatively for the rest of his service.
Ole Cory has come a long way…
Nope, never mind. Still a dolt.