What was all that Rogers family drama about?
We have you covered with a breakdown of the "Succession-style feud gripping Canada," with twists and turns like any good, rich family TV drama.
Welcome to the 57th issue of The Supplement, a newsletter that fills in the gaps of your other news intake. This is Sierra, one-third of The Supplement team!
Each week, we pick a question submitted by you, our readers. If you’d like to submit a question for a future week, then email us at thesupplementnewsletter@gmail.com or reach out to us on Twitter or Instagram.
If you like what you read each week, consider buying us a coffee ☕
This week, we’re tackling this question: What was all that Rogers family drama about?
TL;DR: Rogers, the telecom giant, has been in the news a lot recently for a dramatic family feud and power struggle at the company’s top levels. The PR nightmare started and ended with Edward Rogers, son of the late Ted Rogers, pulling strings to select who would be CEO. After public arguments and even a court case, he emerged the winner of the battle against his mother and sisters, who say he has disrespected the wishes of his father who started the company.
This is a long and complicated story, with twists and turns like any good, rich family TV drama you’d expect. It’s why The Guardian’s headline called it the “Succession-style feud gripping Canada.” It’s also why the journalist who broke the story — The Globe and Mail’s telecoms reporter, Alexandra Posadzki — will be writing a book on the whole saga.
The heat of when this story broke might have dampened, but the ripples of it are far from settled. Let’s talk about the 2021 saga you should know about.
Main characters: Who’s who?
Joe Natale, former CEO
Tony Staffieri, now interim CEO
Edward Rogers, company board chair and trust chair, son of late company founder Ted Rogers.
Melinda Rogers-Hixon, deputy chair, sister of Edward.
Martha Rogers, director, sister of Melinda and Edward.
Loretta Rogers, wife of the late Ted Rogers, family matriarch.
Follow the Rogers family feud with this Globe and Mail explainer.
It started with a butt-dial
An accidental phone call launched this whole narrative. Rogers Communications Inc.’s (RCI) CEO Joe Natale received a butt-dial call from chief financial officer Tony Staffieri, in which Natale overheard plans to oust him and nine other members from leadership at the telecom giant. It later came to light that Edward Rogers, son of the company’s late founder Ted Rogers, supported the move. Edward is chair of the family trust, which holds the majority of the voting power. He is also chair of the company board.
What happened next over the following weeks is a mess of power moves within the company.
Then what?
We’re trying to simplify the story, but you can see more of the timeline of events here.
Tensions between Natale and Staffieri have been on the rise for years. At an emergency board meeting on Sept. 26, Melinda Rogers-Hixon — Edward’s sister — and the majority of the family backed Natale and his management team. Staffieri’s departure was announced on Sept. 29. But Edward’s failed attempt to oust the CEO was not the end, placing the family on opposite sides of a burgeoning battle.
Complications
Edward has two positions, which makes this complicated. As chair of the Rogers Control Trust, he is responsible for working with his family to make decisions. An advisory committee overlooks the trust. Six of the 10 are family members. He is also chair of the company’s board, but the composition of the board is controlled by the trust, him and his family. This unusual structure was created by Ted Rogers to give his family control of the company he built.
On Oct. 21, there was a meeting where Edward informed the Rogers Control Trust’s advisory committee of his idea to replace independent company directors. At a following meeting that day, the board voted to replace Edward as board chair.
So, still as chair of the Rogers Control Trust, Edward moved to replace the five independent directors who opposed him with his own hand-picked candidates. The company called the move “invalid,” but Edward took the decision to court to confirm its legitimacy.
At the courts
A BC court confirmed that Edward did have the power to remove and replace board members using a written resolution and without calling a shareholder meeting. This means he is once again chair of the new board. The company won’t appeal the ruling, meaning the decision is final.
That also means, yes, after the court battle Staffieri will come back to the company to replace Natale and become (interim) CEO after all.
What would Ted Rogers say?
In court hearings, Loretta Rogers, wife of the late Ted Rogers, said her son was exploiting his position as trust chair by ignoring the family’s interests.
Ted Rogers, the founder of Rogers Communications, died in 2008, leaving behind the business to his family. In excerpts from his “memorandum of wishes,” it’s clear that the entrepreneur wouldn't be pleased to see what has gone down. The private internal documents were revealed during the court battle.
“The three of us voted against this misguided decision, which creates great uncertainty for RCI and its employees, customers, sports fans and shareholders, not to mention the Shaw transaction,” said Edward’s mother and sisters.
A company marriage on the side: Rogers and Shaw
In the midst of ~ all this ~ (read: a PR disaster), there is also a massive deal underway between Rogers and Shaw Communications Inc. Last March, news was announced of the $26-billion Shaw takeover, expected to further transform Canada’s telecom world.
The deal will still need approval from three different regulators before it’s official, which is now Staffieri’s problem to deal with. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is the first to hear from the company, and they are focused on the broadcast implications of the deal.
Here’s someone to follow:
If you’ve made it this far, I think you’d enjoy reading The Other Wave as much as I do. This newsletter is put together by Anita Li, who works in the space of innovating journalism and has some interesting thoughts to share about the changing industry. This edition from November caught my eye: When journalists talk about ‘serving the public interest,’ who are they really talking about?
Here’s a story to check out:
ICYMI: Read this story from The Walrus about how virtual trials are a better option for sexual assault survivors. “Minimizing harm should start inside the courtroom, but to create safer spaces for survivors, we must look beyond it,” it reads.
