When clubs are intimidated by employees

[Mike_Young]

I just happened to see a case of this today but it is not uncommon at all.  Often is the case at private clubs where an employee such as a superintendent my have been there for years and has become accustomed to his way with each new board and since the boards overlap in membership an intimidation factor takes place and it can become expensive for a club.  Much more expensive than one would think.

[James Brown]

Certainly happens all the time.  Doesn’t take long to find a “always trust the super” type comment here either.  A really good club finds the right balance between come and go committee men and experienced hands.  Or they just have a tyrant as club chair like many of the great clubs had in their infancy. 

[Tim Martin]

I was told recently that an area golf professional had negotiated a “lifetime contract”. The source was another PGA professional that had information regarding the situation. For those in the know is this something that is common with tenure or fairly rare? I have heard of all sorts of compensation models but don’t recall hearing “lifetime contract”. Thanks.

[Dan Herrmann]

Another reason I really like non-equity clubs.  Let the pros run things.

[Duncan Cheslett]

Nothing worse than a Club Manager who develops a Mussolini complex.

I have experienced this - and moved clubs! 

[Thomas Dai]

Replacing an employee costs hard cash and can take a while. Replacing a committee member costs nothing and can usually be achieved quite quickly. Sometimes though, the hard cash bullet has to be bitten.
atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,


While none of us has a broad enough sample size to draw broad conclusions, in general, I would think superintendents have more to worry about than the clubs, who IMHO, often have no problem firing them after a bad winter, renovation project, etc.  It does seem to go by market.   For instance, for years, the same supers were in place in Omaha at the better clubs.  In other areas, they get changed out more often than NHL coaches (who have historically short life spans at any one job) 


And, in the good times, many job changes were the supers being offered better jobs.  With construction down, they seemingly are more interested in staying where they are.  (again, in general, there's a million stories out there)


A club employee with tenure is (again IMHO) a sign that they are respected in an above average way by their employers, although, I don't doubt, given the variability in human nature that some let that go to their head, whether pro, super, or GM.  Golly, some clubs have kept wait staff around for decades because the members like them.


Do you have any firm idea what % of clubs are afraid of their staff?  My guess would be 2%, a number which applies to a lot of odd ball behaviors in the human race......