THE Board of Communication rejects the complaints by its staff and urges the General Assembly to dismiss the petition. It also denies that there is a crisis.
''Every effort has been made by the acting convener, board and director to keep channels of communication open and to pursue a harmonious outcome based on mutual benefit,'' it says.
''There is no concrete evidence of a de facto breakdown in these relationships. Board business has continued as normal and there have been many improvements.''
In its response to the petition, it rejects suggestions that no pastoral care was offered and disputes claims of stress: ''...For the entire period since the review proposals were announced there has been no medical evidence presented to the board, or to the personnel department, of staff being treated for 'stress-related illnesses and other problems'.''
Although it makes no mention of the resignation en masse of four of its members earlier this year, the board does acknowledge a ''compensatory payment'' authorised by its finance group of #1900 plus VAT to the employers of a member of the review group who had used company time and facilities on review business.
The board disputes other charges made against it and adds: ''The board's willingness to go to mediation without precondition remains on the table.''
However, the tone and substance of the board's response stand in stark contrast to the distinctly upbeat message in its general report to the assembly, compiled earlier, which ''commends staff for their hard work and commitment against the backdrop of uncertainty''.
It has glowing praise for Pathway Productions, the Kirk's broadcasting unit which is roundly lambasted in the petition response.
The general report also outlines a new strategy for improving communications within the church and with the outside world.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article