I disagree about your comments on the title of PBP.
...
the benefits of its existence far outweigh the negatives (including the name).

Don't you see a contradiction here? So far you have defended the book, and I agree. You did not, though, explain why you disagree with me saying the title is bad - you just say it doesn't matter.

Well, for me, it matters.

But really, given the choice between PBP and an in-house standard cobbled together by said incompetent management which would you prefer!?

I would see this most excellent book from Damian Comway as a style guide or vade mecum to gain perl insight and develop a good inhouse coding standard, rather than having the book as a whole imposed as such, without reading it, and merely because of its title.

Which means: if anybody, including the PHB, after reading it gets enlightened and shouts "hey, these are really jolly well best perl practices!" and goes to introduce a subset or all as standard, that's perfectly fine.
It is not ok if someone comes and says "here, have Perl Best Practices. It's standard now." - "Why?" - "Because they are. Can't read the title?"

_($_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo.  G°\        /
                              /\_¯/(q    /
----------------------------  \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."·
");sub _{s./.($e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;$e.e && print}