AOC’s $125,000 bonus for bully claim executive Mike Tancred

AOC boss John Coates was told of Mike Tancred’s poor treatment of staff before he offered him a $125,000 bonus.

Four months after AOC boss John Coates was told of Mike Tancred’s alleged unprofessional and disrespectful treatment of a female staff member, he promised his long-serving media director a six-figure bonus to stay in his job until the Tokyo Games.

The previously undisclosed golden handcuffs arrangement, detailed in a December 2015 agreement signed by Mr Coates and Mr Tancred, commits the Australian Olympic Committee to providing Mr Tancred with a $125,000 “retention incentive payment’’ in addition to any ­increase to his $330,610 salary.

The one-off payment, due on November 30, 2020, would inflate Mr Tancred’s total remuneration package above the most recently published salary figure for the AOC’s chief executive. ­According to the AOC staff list, he has four direct staff members.

Mr Tancred has been stood down since April 26 from AOC duties while a series of specially convened hearings determine multiple complaints against him by former staff for alleged bullying and threatening behaviour. In the first case to be heard, he was found guilty of disreputable conduct ­towards former chief executive Fiona de Jong.

AOC sources confirmed that the little known agreement, recommended personally by Mr Coates and supported by the AOC’s remuneration committee, was ostensibly entered into to prevent Mr Tancred joining the National Rugby League in a ­senior communications role. Although former NRL chief executive Dave Smith entertained the idea of Mr Tancred working at league headquarters, it is unclear whether a formal job offer was ever made. Any prospect of Mr Tancred joining the NRL appears to have ended in October 2015 when Mr Smith ­announced he was quitting the organisation.

The details of the retention ­incentive payment were formalised in a letter from Mr Coates to Mr Tancred dated December 15, 2015. It is understood the agreement was not divulged to the AOC board. Neither Mr Coates nor Mr Tancred responded to questions from The Australian about the ­retention incentive payment.

On August 14, 2015, Ms de Jong wrote to Mr Coates raising her concerns about Mr Tancred’s behaviour towards an AOC staff member. In the email exchange ­obtained by The Australian, Ms de Jong alleges that more than once Mr Tancred reduced the staff member to tears.

“… you must also be aware of the manner in which Mike has been speaking to (redacted) has not been professional or respectful either,’’ Ms de Jong writes. “We speak a lot about the culture of our Olympic Teams and I’m working hard to ensure the culture of our organisation is aligned with the Olympic values. But that requires everyone to play and I’m all for calling people on it when they don’t. That includes Mike.’’

In response, Mr Coates offered to manage Mr Tancred himself rather than have Ms de Jong call out his behaviour. He said it would be a disaster if Mr Tancred left the AOC. The staff member has left the AOC and now works for another sports organisation.

It is rare for not-for-profit ­organisations such as the AOC to offer financial bonuses for staff not to leave. It is understood that to realise his bonus, Mr Tancred was ­required to meet a series of key performance indicators. These included nurturing staff under his management and leading a unified team.

There are three formal complaints against Mr Tancred still being considered by an independent panel of retired judges. Of these, two were lodged by former members of Mr Tancred’s media and communications staff.