% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.


  • uhistory uhistory Jun 30, 2013 11:13 PM Flag


    What were his accomplishments at his previous employer? What was his track record with the subsidiaries he managed or were a part of?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • He "retired" after he knew he had position. I was told he had to agree to terms with UPS before he could take the job.

    • I worked for Rocky at UPS. Layers beneath. The word is, he left because he wanted to be a CEO, and at UPS it was not going to happen. The current CEO is not going anywhere soon, based on rumor, and his replacement has already been tapped. Rocky was always successful in whatever he did, and I know the company was not happy to see him go. Great motivator and innovator. If he can get past this load of garbage that got dumped on him he will make things happen.

    • Just asking, not "intimating" anything.

    • Uhistory,

      I must say that the fact that you create your account on June 30th just in time to post this rather inflammatory question tends to undermine your credibility. However, as I suspect that you know this very well, we will let that issue rest for now.

      With respect to the new CEO (I assume that you are referring to the current CEO,) your question is, however, on point as we know very little about Mr. Romanella's performance at UPS. In fact, the information that we have available is the information that is released by the company and Mr. Romanella, supplemented by sporadic press clippings over the years related to Mr. Romanella employment at UPS.

      To what extent Mr. Romanella actually is qualified to run a publicly traded company is not know, whether or not he is suited to run a business like Unitek is not know, and whether or not he did well for UPS is not known.

      However, as usual, if Mr. Romanella is not the right guy for the job and/or did not have a performance at UPS that would justify his hiring as CEO for Unitek (which I assume is what you are intimating,) is really not an issue between the shareholders and Mr. Romanella, but, rather, an issue between the shareholders and the Board of Directors, who hired Mr. Romanella. If, indeed, Mr. Romanella is not competent (for whatever reasons,) then he should be terminated and, more importantly, the Board of Directors should be replaced for bringing in an incompetent CEO.

      If your message is indeed meant to imply that there is a problem and this implication is based on factual knowledge about Mr. Romanella, you should direct your concerns to the Board of Directors and -- possibly -- to the shareholders (assuming, of course, that you are a shareholder, yourself -- and if you are not, I ask, why are you here?)



      • 1 Reply to pajacobsen
      • Intimating aside, let's think about this.

        It was stated that they went through over 200 applicants during the search for the new/present CEO. Is that not enough to put the question of his qualifications at rest? Would it be safe to say that the board felt Mr. Romanella was the best man for the job? After all, it's not like they intervewied one person and hired that person immediately. On the surface it appears there was a very thorough interview/review process. How "thorough" that process is, one has to wonder....but that is a question that could be/should have been directed to the board when the announcement of the new CEO first occured.....not 6 months later.