Following heated debate, PRSA accepts CFO Bullock

LOS ANGELES: The saga of Cerrell Associates CFO and would-be PRSA member Steve Bullock seems to have come to a close, with the society’s Los Angeles chapter finally agreeing to approve Bullock’s membership application.

LOS ANGELES: The saga of Cerrell Associates CFO and would-be PRSA member Steve Bullock seems to have come to a close, with the society’s Los Angeles chapter finally agreeing to approve Bullock’s membership application.

LOS ANGELES: The saga of Cerrell Associates CFO and would-be PRSA

member Steve Bullock seems to have come to a close, with the society’s

Los Angeles chapter finally agreeing to approve Bullock’s membership

application.



It took several weeks - not to mention a heated e-mail exchange between

Bullock and board member Greg Waskul - before the application was

rubber-stamped, once again leaving the PRSA looking petty and hard to

please administratively.



Bullock’s application had initially been turned down by both the LA

chapter and the national association on the grounds that it failed to

show that he was ’engaged in the paid professional practice of public

relations.’ (PRWeek, Feb. 7). Despite having led account teams and

pitched for new business, Bullock’s title of CFO - often considered an

administrative-only post - apparently rendered him unworthy of PRSA

membership.



In one of several letters of protest to the group’s local and national

arms, Bullock maintained that his application clearly showed that his

work as well as his job description met the organization’s eligibility

requirements.



’What I tried to describe (in the application) was the working

atmosphere of a public relations agency,’ he wrote. ’We are all involved

somehow in the ’manufacturing’ of our product: public relations.’



Waskul said he was speaking as an individual rather than as a member of

the board when he chastised Bullock for failing to discuss the situation

with the chapter’s eligibility chairwoman, Karen White, and choosing

instead to go public with his protest.



’Considering what you do,’ Waskul wrote, ’you never would have been

rejected ... had you explained the scope of your job on your

application.’



The debate between the two, which was alternately polite and barbed,

centered on Bullock’s insistence that his eligibility be judged on the

basis of the application he originally submitted.



Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register
Already registered?
Sign in

Would you like to post a comment?

Please Sign in or register.