While she is on sick leave, Olaug Bollestad must fight for her political power. Three employees have reported against the elected manager who they believe is not fit to do his job. This is primarily a sore conflict where personality, leadership style and demeanor are in focus. But it quickly becomes a debate about the way forward for a party that was already in crisis. In the near future, the party leader will have to answer for himself. The party must conclude. It should happen quickly. Therefore, KrF may face a fateful time. Right now the pressure is on Olaug Bollestad. Bollestad can take over and withdraw. She may have to go against her will, or regain trust, writes news’s political commentator Lars Nehru Sand. Photo: Wilhelm Sverdvik She has to decide on this: Will she take charge herself and announce her resignation as party leader? Then the pressure increases on first deputy leader Dag Inge Ulstein to change his mind, and take four more years as a national politician and promotion in the party. If Bollestad has the health and motivation to do so, will she deal with the whistleblowers and demand to stand in a position she has been given by the national assembly and the voters in Rogaland? Put in charge, she then forces her administratively subordinate party secretary to either advise her employees to resign their positions, or adjust their expectations of the working environment, or introduce measures in the workplace. The central board will then also be put in a demanding situation. KrF’s political and administrative team at the Storting obviously have major problems. Does the board trust Bollestad, and will they be able to reject whistleblowers? Bollestad can take over and withdraw. She may have to go against her will, or regain trust. A party paralyzed for action Now the KrF’s general secretary Ingunn Ulfstein, employed by Bollestad and her board, will process a notice from his colleagues against the top boss. KrF’s central board must conclude whether the party leader has breached the party’s ethical guidelines or not. KrF has gone from crisis to paralysis of action. The party now appears to be in complete disarray. It is startling to look at what is now happening: the party leader has been stripped of his authority and room for action. The whistleblowers seem to be acting in desperation. Olaug Bollestad disagreed with then-party leader Knut Arild Hareide about the road election in 2018. Together with Kjell Ingolf Ropstad, she worked for the party to enter the Solberg government. Photo: Tom Edvindsen Criticized for being emotional and insecure Bollestad is a warm, eager and genuinely committed party leader. No one who has met her doubts that. Whether people think she is a right or wrong leader for KrF as the situation is now, KrFerne wants the best for Bollestad on an interpersonal level. news has not read the notice. It must be three of the 14 employees in the party’s parliamentary group who have notified the party leader. More than the whistleblowers are said to have had challenges with Bollestad’s leadership style ever since she started the job, but many are said to have put a lot of effort into facilitating the best possible working day. Before the summer, it must have reached a point where some see that this cannot continue. After several other attempts to resolve the conflict, it is decided to resolve the matter through a formalized notification process. The weekend before the important Arendal week and party leader debate, the whole thing is formalized in a written notice. Bollestad’s sick leave is extended. The warning letter must be comprehensive, and contain both general statements about Bollestad’s personality and demeanor, but also refer to specific individual episodes that the whistleblowers believe are examples of a poor working environment and management style. The warning should show that her emotion-driven approach is sometimes a problem for those around her. The whistleblowers describe what they perceive to be an insecure party leader who easily mistrusts her behaviour, and without reason feels criticized, opposed, or without reason sows doubts that employees want her best. They say she can characterize people in unfavorable ways to others. The whistle-blowers believe it will be difficult to deal with which advice the party leader listens to and which he does not. It is demanding for them when she deals with critical feedback such as distrust. Notice as a means of action The notice is perhaps primarily a cry that the workplace is dysfunctional. It is difficult to see the contours of a well-organized coup, although it is understandable that Bollestad can see it that way. This is not about wings, path choices, strategy or political matters. This is almost exclusively about Bollestad as a person. It is painful, naked and brutal. Regardless of who the central government believes in, it is harmful to the party. No one appears ready to take over the party. In a party, all conflicts will have a touch of politics and power struggle at the bottom. It is in itself worth problematising that employees can influence party democracy through a notice. At the same time, it is relevant for the party’s bodies how the leader functions in everyday life. We are more used to politicians who get into trouble for breaking guidelines or rules. Or politicians who lose trust for political reasons. Or discord in political leadership. Or administrative managers who make mistakes, for example under the Working Environment Act. It is unusual for a party democracy to have to deal with a labor dispute. It happens because Bollestad has not only been chosen by the voters to sit in the Storting, and by KrF’s national meeting to lead the party. Through this, she is also the parliamentary leader of KrF’s parliamentary group, which consists of both politicians and employees. Personnel crisis from before The personnel situation is critical for KrF from before. In addition to party leader Bollestad (who is seeking re-election), the parliamentary group consists of first deputy leader Dag Inge Ulstein, who also creates the party program for the next term. He does not want re-election. The third man is Kjell Ingolf Ropstad, who had to step down as party leader after a commuter housing case and who also does not want re-election. In the opinion of many, Dag Inge Ulstein made a good figure in the party leader debate, despite a difficult starting point. Photo: William Jobling / n647304 The party’s second deputy leader, Ida Lindveit Røse, is standing for election from Akershus, an uncertain parliamentary mandate. Ulstein is mostly praised for his substitute performance in the party leader debate from Arendal. Although many note that he did not give unreserved support to Bollestad, there are many in the party who understand the demanding balancing act. As mentioned, no one sees this as a campaign to bring Ulstein to power. But that may still be the result. And there are many who believe that it will be for the better for KrF. Something is true until it is no longer. This is also the case with Ulstein’s no to re-election. It will be a completely new situation if Bollestad withdraws. Those who know the situation best are clear that this is not a power struggle. In KrF’s case, it is more accurate to call it a power struggle. Published 18.08.2024, at 19.29
ttn-69
Hurtful and harmful – Speech
