Emails sent to the medical staff by the CEO of Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center (OLOL) Scott Wester and the CEO of the Franciscan Missionaries of Our Lady Health Systems (FMOL) Dr. Richard Vath attacked what Vath described as “a troubling article” by the Baton Rouge Business Report which Wester said included “a number of negative allegations about Our Lady of the Lake, and me in particular.”
The Business Report article, by Editor Stephanie Riegel, was published on April 24 and described in detail administrative and financial problems encountered by OLOL and FMOL and hinting at a connection between the firing of former FMOL CEO Michael McBride and the embezzlement of $810,000 from the foundation involving its former chief fundraiser John Paul Funes.
McBride, brought in to shore up FMOL, lasted a year. An outsider, he attempted to oust local power Wester but was himself shown the door.
If all that isn’t confusing enough, consider this: the two emails by Vath and Wester went out on April 23, the day before the article’s online publication.
Damage control isn’t unusual but damage control in advance of a “troubling article” is less common, to put it mildly. Especially in light of a paragraph in Riegel’s story: “Attempts by Business Report to reach Wester for comment were unsuccessful and OLOL officials declined to make him available for an interview for this story.”
It just seems to me that if you’re not going to avail yourself to an opportunity to tell your side of the story, you waive any rights to attack the messenger—especially the day before the story’s publication.
Which, of course, raises the question of just how did Vath and Wester get their hands on an advance copy of the story?
Something about the timing of all this just doesn’t pass the smell test.
For those who might need a refresher or for those living out of the Baton Rouge media coverage area, FMOL and OLOL were rocked late last year by the revelation that $810,000 had been embezzled from a foundation, established by OLOL to raise funds for projects like the new OLOL Children’s Hospital.
Chief fundraiser Funes, whose salary was listed at $283,000, subsequently fired.
But Riegel’s story went further by quoting McBride as saying the Funes scandal “was a symptom,” not the cause, of bigger problems at OLOL. McBride was quoted as attributing low OLOL employee morale to the “good ol’ boys’ network,” adding, “It is no coincidence that seven-plus years of stealing went unreported until new senior leadership was in place.
She described inroads into the Baton Rouge market by Ochsner Health Systems of New Orleans, quoting sources as implying that OLOL’s fees are currently about 25 percent higher than its competition at Ochsner and Baton Rouge General.
Those were the points with which the two emails obtained by LouisianaVoice appear to disagree, although neither email addressed any specific errors in the story, both choosing instead to deliver a “feel good” message aimed at lifting morale and deflecting from points made by Riegel.
“I believe the article paints an inaccurate picture,” Wester wrote. “I could easily make the case about why the ministry is strong and how the Sisters and System’s leadership have us on the right path. Instead, I want to apologize.”
Vath took a similar approach, writing, “The article is misleading and inaccurate in several ways and attempts to use recent leadership transitions as the starting point for several lines of attack against our ministry.”
“When reading the emails, it was impossible to know what Mr. Wester and Dr. Vath were talking about unless one received the Baton Rouge Business Report in published form,” said one OLOL employee.
“Both of the emails are camouflaging and obfuscation, and don’t address any facts or specifics of the article—nor of anything going on at the hospital.
“Just from the form and tone of the two emails, I was pretty confident that I’d agree with over 50 percent of the article even before I actually read it the next day,” the employee said. “Now that I’ve read the article, I agree with almost 100 percent of it—at least the parts I know about from working at OLOL.
“I’d love to have Mr. Wester and Dr. Vath tell us which parts of the article are not factual and/or untrue.”
It would seem if they didn’t know specifically what was going to be reported, they certainly knew they had problems.
This is interesting.
Does the business report put stories online before print publication, as The Advocate often does?
See the response from J.R. Ball.
We don’t publish magazine stories online prior to subscribers receiving their print magazines. Our view has been to let those paying money see the stories first.
Happy to provide some detail: The story first appeared in our print magazine, which most subscribers receive in the Tuesday mail. The online version of the story becomes available Wednesday morning at 5 a.m.
Thanks… JR Ball
I live in West Feliciana on a rural route so I get the print edition on Wednesdays, sometimes even Thursdays. I also get the daily AM and PM newsletters. There have been a significant number of times when I read something online before the print edition came out. This may not apply to the immediate situation, but it does happen out here in the wilderness beyond the concrete and steel of urbanity.
Big money, big problems, throw in “ministry”, forget the ministry, call William J. Barr, a lawyer for all Republicans/big money and rest assured, Bill Clinton and Obama is at the bottom of all of this. ron thompson
My guess on how they knew about the article before its release is that there is a mole at the Baton Rouge Business report who leaked the article to OLOL staff.