May 3

by Harpreet Singh

In an article called “Management Woes”, the author, GNFA Trustee Ajit Singh, starts by stating his purpose as to ”give true and accurate information because the other side is misleading the worldwide Sikh sangat and painting the present Guru Nanak Foundation Of America (GNFA) management in a poor light.”. But in reality he misleads the readers and provides a very biased and incomplete report on the events that have led to the state of events today at GNFA.

The biased reporting starts in the first paragraph where Ajit says the board unanimously passed a resolution to cut the payroll. He fails to point out the board consisting of himself and his friends is a virtual dictatorship regime. This is the result of some very unsavory maneuvering by the current management to end all elections at GNFA. Please see Anju Kaur’s article “In the Name of Nanak” for additional information regarding the voting situation at GNFA. Despite the current and past pleas of the sangat to retain their favored Raagis, the dictatorship has imposed its will on the people.

The second inaccuracy is in the statement that the Raagis were released for financial reasons. The dictatorship management has been trying to get rid of the current Raagis for over a year. In a show of support and to strike out against the dictatorship, a large percentage of the Sangat has been depositing a penny into the Golak while giving their actual donation to the Raagis. This has infuriated the management – which may be the reason the dictators won’t even let the Raagis perform for “free”. To add insult to injury, the fired Raagis are not even able to come to GNFA without the committee’s permission. This is based on Ajit’s statement that they were able to have the police write an order and the secretary “added a clause that they [raagis] could come to the Gurughar with the Committee's permission.”

The next few paragraphs describe some dramatic and unsubstantiated sequence of events involving the Raagis. Ajit goes on to describe 20, mostly youth, people that demonstrated against the actions of the dictatorship. The reason why he points out these were “mostly youth (more that half of usually go to another Gurughar)” is perhaps to discount the protestors. Instead, the fact that the initial protesters were youth points to the grave concerns of the Sangat. If almost 20 youth people drop their plans on a FRIDAY NIGHT to be involved with a protest, then there must be something really wrong with what is happening at GNFA.

Ajit further details a civil disobedience protest that grew to 60-70 people. Perhaps due to his inexperience at being involved in a dictatorship, Ajit is surprised enough to point out that the disenfranchised protesters were “very angry, they were shouting very loudly, ladies were pushing the secretary around…” Does he expect the sangat to bow to the will of the dictatorship and let them destroy the Gurudwara? Perhaps Ajit has been watching to many news clips of Sadam Hussain and General Pervez Musharraf and not enough of Martin Luther King to understand the anger of the disenfranchised protestors.

In an effort to silence the protests, Ajit details a few points that the dictatorship management is putting in place. He fails to point out the history of his management team in reneging on agreements. It was only last fall when there were protests by the Sangat on other actions by the dictators. It was at that time the dictators had implemented some changes that would guarantee their dictatorship. A few concerned members of the Sangat made others aware of these changes. The Sangat protested, seeking to reverse these changes. In an action similar to today, the dictators said they would meet “all demands of the sangat”. Having silenced the protests, they reneged on their words only a month later! What else can be expected this time?

Ajit goes on to describe a classical business problem in his paragraph titled “Financial Situation of GNFA”. In this paragraph, he describes how GNFA is now losing $5,000 each month as a result of some bad decisions by his dictatorship management team. He describes how they purchased a $1.8 million plot of needed land. This decision was made because there were people that “advocated purchasing the land” and “assured the board that they would prepare 200 people to pay $50 per month regularly to make up for the mortgage”. At a later time, “they backed off” the expected $50 contributions. Lets look at this situation in a parallel business example:

You run a convenience store and I suggest that you should buy a soft ice-cream cone machine. I indicate that I know 200 people that would regularly buy ice cream cones from you. You would obviously buy the ice cream machine. If however you start to treat me and my 200 friends badly every time we come to buy ice cream from you – could you expect me to continue to visit your store and buy ice cream?

Perhaps some of us would continue to visit your store because you only treat us badly when we buy the ice cream cones. These people would continue to visit because you sell some really good brand of candy. Despite this, your business is losing money because of the Ice Cream machine loan payments. What decision would you make to save and restore your business?

1) Forfeit the Ice Cream Machine to the Bank along with the down payment

2) Stop selling the good brand of candy favored by your customers

3) Start treating your customers better when dealing with them

It would be clear to any reasonable person that the best option is to start treating your customers better. The worst option would be to stop selling the good brand of candy since it is an important revenue producer. The foolish option would be to forfeit the ice cream machine and down payment since it could be an important source for future growth, especially coupled with the implementation of option 3.

Gurudwara’s are in many ways businesses. In discussions of “Financial situations”, the actions and results of management must be analyzed. The management bought the land (ice cream machine) with the expectation that the sangat (customers) would help pay for it. They started treating the sangat badly, but still expect contributions for the land. Now management has put an end to the only remaining reason the sangat came to GNFA, which is the favored Raagis (Good brand of candy) [See testimony at http://www.sikhe.com/gsdno/articles/letters/may2002/05022002_jitendersingh_raagisentitled.htm].

In addition, Ajit seems to be hinting that despite all these conditions, the Sangat should come to the Gurudwara because otherwise the management will not have enough revenue. Without enough revenue, the management will have to give back the land and $500,000 down payment. The obvious solution would be to rectify the reason why the 200 people have backed off their expected contributions. Or perhaps Ajit and his management team should get the two thousand new members they recruited to actually attend the Gurudwara and contribute to its welfare. Instead of listening to the Sangat, the dictators are proposing or implementing foolish decisions such as firing the Raagis and giving back the land to the bank.

In an obvious and futile attempt to divert attention, Ajit brings up that the Raagis make over $15,000 a month. Unless he has access to IRS computers, it is unclear how he is able to determine their supplemental income figure. The issue of how much the Raagis make is completely unrelated to the issues at hand. The Raagis may live in a large home but they are three brothers with families. The fact that the three brothers have chosen to live together in the same home is testimony to their values. These values are difficult to find in anyone that becomes accustomed to the western life style with 14 years spent here, and could be one reason for their strong support by the Sangat.

Perhaps due to his weak arguments up to this point, Ajit launches into an personal attack on one of the leaders of opposition, Mr. Surjit Singh. Ajit says that “In March 2000, the pro-Indian embassy group lost the elections. One of the leading members of this group is Mr. Surjit Singh whose father was in the Rajiv Gandhi welcome committee and garlanded Rajiv when he came to the USA. A Panthic group won the election.” [Can you count the number of red herrings in this paragraph?]. For those of you wondering, pantheism is “A doctrine identifying the Deity with the universe and its phenomena”. Is Ajit using the doctrine of God as reason for the dictatorship? Has anyone heard about a group of people called the Taliban?

Intent is no excuse for method of execution. No matter what the dictatorship intends to do with its unopposable authority, it is WRONG. Ajit and his dictatorship want to “run the GNFA according to the Rehat Maryada, support the Sikh cause, develop a very organized Punjabi and Kirtan school for the youth, build a bigger and better Gurughar Building..” These are all great intents but not anything that wasn’t already in place before the dictatorship. There has been support for the Sikh cause, Punjabi and Kirtan schools, and plans for a bigger Gurughar to meet the increases in Sangat. Of note, many of the 20 youth demonstrators mentioned earlier were taught kirtan by the fired Raagas.

The agenda of the dictatorship starts to vary from the wishes of the Sangat when Ajit says the dictatorship also wishes to “hire (on a year-to-year contract) a missionary trained bilingual Granthi who can communicate fluently with the youth and depend on visiting Jathas for the Kirtan.” What is the point of a Granthi who may only be around for a year or two (due to his year-to-year contract) when it comes to developing a meaningful relationship with the youth? The whole appeal between the Raagas and the youth is the result of a fourteen year relationship. These young people have known and have developed a bond and trust with the Raagas – a bond that can only be developed through a long term relationship, not a year-to-year contract.

I am certain Ajit Singh is a good man and means well in his intents. This is however no excuse for eliminating the democratic elections of management at GNFA. This is no excuse for ignoring the will of the Sangat that helped build GNFA into what it is today. If Ajit and the rest of his management team is reasonable and well intentioned, they will listen to the will of the sangat and restore elections and bring back the Raagas. If however there is malice in their intents, then like all other dictatorships, this one too will end. There may be a lot lost along the way but eventually the WILL of the SANGAT will prevail..

For the worldwide Sikh Sangat that Ajit is trying to address in his article, you may be able to help. Please stay tuned to what is happening at the GNFA and let Ajit and the rest of his team know how you feel about their actions. Please comment on Ajits article through www.sikhe.com . If we allow this to happen once, it will give fuel to others and happen elsewhere.