Submerged treasure; ‘Longmire’ and the strong, silent type
headline »
Tue, 12/06/12 – 4:01 | No Comment

June 02, 2012 12:00 AM
Sending robots into the past sounds like science fiction. It’s the basis of “Terminator” and other movie plots. But now, something called a stereo-photogrammetry robot is helping a 3,000-year-old city come …

Read the full story »

Q & A

Home » Headline

International Cricket Council (ICC) Boots Barbados Craft Vendors …

Submitted by on Sunday, 9 May 2010No Comment

1273392017 International Cricket Council (ICC) Boots Barbados Craft Vendors ...

One vendor told me that she went home and laid on her floor trying to overcome the thought of the work she put in, the money she spent and the fact that cricket was playing and she was not there. of course, the floor had no carpet, the rug being pulled.

It is time that small business people get some encouragement rather than all these disappointments. After 2007, the same thing is still happening. we have learned no lessons? maybe it is that our voices are of no significance.

To say that ICC did not know the vendors were selling craft, is to say that the craft vendors did not fill out a form and applied to sell craft. Also it would be to say that there were not several meetings where vendors expressed their interests. After the applications were processed, those chosen were summoned to a meeting to be told that they were chosen; these included craft vendors. Having selected the vendors and encouraging them by saying words to the effect that craft is needed during the games, they accepted the sum of $1200.00 for each kiosk space from the craft vendors, even prior to giving them the written contract.

Another piece of damning evidence is that the craft vendors were charged far less than the food vendors and ICC took their amount for a Kiosk and not a food stall which is outfitted with running water and other facilities. One of the craft vendors who applied to sell drinks was told that she was selling craft and could not sell drinks. there is, therefore, a clear distinction.

This would suggest that there was a meeting of minds between the vendors and Kensington and the ICC, since the application forms apparently went through Kensington up to ICC and the vendors paid by going to the bank to make a deposit on an ICC account and received a receipt to that effect. ICC cannot even at this time claim that they did not know, because de facto they should have known, since they received a different payment for craft on the one hand and having received it proceeded to forward the contract to Barbados. A mis-communication between ICC and its representatives at Kensington Oval cannot be the fault of the vendors but the organisers individually and severally.

The act of throwing out the vendors is simply unfair. If a mistake was made, to correct it at that time by throwing out the vendors seems to be a serious breach of contract.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Related Posts

No related posts.

Leave your response!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.