A coach having a relationship with an athlete impacts more than just the two of them. Even if/when it is totally consensual, it can disrupt the dynamics with other athletes and lead to doubts about fair treatment of all athletes. A coach needs to be 100% focused and supportive of all the wrestlers, and having a relationship with one makes that a very difficult path to follow
....so theres some ugly stuff floating around about Mark Perry
- Thread starter The Vak
- Start date
Similar to a workplace. Which is why they have these rules.
gentlemen, we are witnessing a posting masterclass
I'm the boss and sleeping with a subordinate. She gets obvious special treatment like not getting written up for an unexcused absence or recommended for a promotion over others and yes there will be problems and repercussions.
Again, what EXACTLY am I taking the loss for? Texas Twister clearly detailed my stance. What exactly is wrong with it?????
We are also CLEARLY witnessing a mass lack in reading comprehension...
It’s not a lynch mob mentality to say a guy should lose his job (I.e. livelihood) if he is found guilty of having a relationship with his wrestler. I think we disagree on the potential outcome if he is found guilty. If not, my apologies.
If you read all my posts, once I had read the rules and definitions I did say he may very well need to be fired. However, I also said I believe the circumstances should weigh in if the sanctions are not already clearly laid out somewhere.
The code lists a considerable amount of violations. I am sure not all of them are considered fireable. I am simply saying I would like to know all the factors before unilaterally making that decision.
I see three potential outcomes. 1) Allegations of an inappropriate relationship are false and nothing happens.
2) Allegations of a consensual relationship between Mark and an athlete(s) are established and his position as coach is terminated.
3) Allegations of a non-consensual relationship are established and criminal charges are filed and his position as coach is terminated.
I can’t see how he remains a coach if he is found to have been in a relationship with one of his athletes. An organization is opening the door for future litigation otherwise.
How about this? I would be 100% for a "Zero Tolerance" list. Hell, I would even be a proponent of putting this on that list. Therefor this debate wouldn't even have started. In that case, "consent" truly wouldn't matter in any shape or form.
I am actually surprised there is not a Zero Tolerance" list. It wouldn't be hard, nor argued against, to have a list of immediately terminable offenses.
But, without that list, nor a guideline or precedent for punishment, I personally like to have all the factors before deciding anything....
I am actually surprised there is not a Zero Tolerance" list. It wouldn't be hard, nor argued against, to have a list of immediately terminable offenses.
But, without that list, nor a guideline or precedent for punishment, I personally like to have all the factors before deciding anything....
We are actually very close. I am just not 100% on 2. But, that doesn't mean I don't lean that way. I just think there are factors that could very much help him out.
Again, I have seen many assumptions on here. Just because they had a relationship does not guarantee it made a hostile work environment. There is no guarantee she received any special treatment. There is no guarantee that anyone else was affected by it. Hell, there is no guarantee it caused any issue at all. They could have happily enjoyed it while it happened and ended it without issue. Odds are that isn't the case, but I would like to know that for sure before formally passing judgment and THAT is all I have meant throughout this debate...
With that said, I do think public pressure always wins and if there is enough of it he will be let go regardless of any discovery...
There just needs to be an understanding of what is illegal and what is innapropriate. Having a consensual relationship with a subordinate is not automatically illegal. It is almost always innapropriate. If the state in which the "offense" took place is At Will, then a person may be fired for any legal reason. IF the employee handbook clearly stated that at no point can there be a relationship between a coach and an athlete, then there is clearly a legal reason/event to terminate employement. That in no way indicates there was anything illegal with the relationship. Other factors would need to be presented for that and how other athletes felt about it is irrelevant.
We all GET what you're saying. But today, 2023. The answer is, unequivocally, 0% tolerance. None of any of the caveats you listed matter. Consensual or not - zap.
The only judgement to be given is if this is true or not. If it is - the only thing that could happen is it get WORSE. The punishment gets worse. Not mitigated. ever. Maybe start thinking about it like that. Its sounds like you're saying, if a, if b, if c - he should be given some latitude. He shouldn't. Any.
Based on what rule though? To me, it sounds a lot like you are listing your opinion as an undebateable fact.
Mind you, I agree with you that it is in fact zero tolerance for the violation. I just have yet to see a guideline or precedent for the zero tolerance part of the punishment.
Again, I would even be open to a zero tolerance punishment. I can see it warranting it just because of the negative effects that could arise from the transgression. However, without that actually being clearly set in stone somewhere, I think you are just as opinionated as I am on the punishment part...
Note the bolded part above. Almost always still leaves the caveat I have been advocating for. Again, I do lean towards his being fired. However, without there being clearly defined punishments, the actual circumstances SHOULD matter.
when you get on these rants........just because you can type, does not mean at all that you should type .........or in the context of this thread, just because you can bang the person you are working with, does not mean at all that you should.
That is correct, it's now how things work. the one poster explained one instance on how a consensual relationship caused problems at work. companies and organization's don't want to be liable for harassment lawsuits.
Thank you for this fully thought out contribution. It warms my heart knowing you are out there to rein me in!
Nope, I definitely lean towards termination. I just like to have all the info before being 100% certain.
This. I'd be shocked if Perry and all coaches didn't have annual training/education that covers all aspects of these situations and they have to sign a code of conduct acknowledging their responsibility.
My company does this, and I have to complete the training and sign off.
So, you admit to being guilty of premature exclamation.
If there are, I am actually clearly for them being in place. In fact, they should and better be. Because, without them, you have this type of an argument. It brings "what ifs" into play.
Those on here have every right to disagree with my "what ifs", but without clearly defined punishments, those "what ifs" should hold some level of relevance...
I am all for this as well and it is all I have been saying. Without it, there absolutely is ambiguity.
I have forced you into using enough drugs to talk to yourself? My work here is done!
What is wrong is that people think the law as it currently stands is perfect and beyond reproach. Years ago, when this type of behavior was attributed somewhat to the actions of the woman, the laws were different. Now it is all the man's fault and woman can do no wrong. We are predators and filled with toxic masculinity.
Never mind that woman can use sex to gain favors or promotions or whatever, it is the man's responsibility to resist and do the right thing. The woman has no responsibility, because men are basically scum.
If a man uses his position of power to have sex with a woman - that is wrong. 100% wrong in my book and disgusting! However if a woman uses her sexuality to gain favors from a boss/coach - the boss/coach is wrong. The woman is just a poor victim.
I am with you on this one MSU. I am not saying I condone his actions nor am I saying that I even like Mark Perry, but before I call him a sexual predator - I need to have more info.
Would anyone say it is fair that if the woman initiated the encounters she be dismissed from the club and never be allowed to come near a coach again?
From the USA Wrestling document on RTCs dated September 25, 2020.
http://content.themat.com/CoachesCorner/RTC-criteria.pdf
.....and no, I do not know what rules were in place during Perry's stint as a RTC coach. Feel free to look them up.
Although I get what you are saying, I am NOT making this a man vs woman thing. If it were a female coach and a male athlete, I would expect it to be treated the exact same way. In fact, the sex of all parties involved should have ZERO bearing on how the situation is treated...
lol Apparently…. Evi-dense is pointing in that di-reaction.
do you ever take a day or two after going on these typing marathons and reread what you type? Do you have a professional you can call to discuss it with? Would you want a referral?
I agreed with many of your previous points - you're wrong here. Especially in today's world. There are plenty of predators and women are not exempt from the category.
1.) I re-read what I type all the time. I like to read!
2.) Most professionals are overpaid and under skilled....
3.) Having prerused your contributions to this site, I do not feel you would be able to provide high end referalls in my area. Thanks for the offer though!
Again, I am happy to have you on this board to follow me. It truly warms my heart. Thanks again!
It should've zero bearing on the way it is treated, but it doesn't. The stereotype is men are evil and predators and woman are weak and taken advantage of. Somewhere in their subconscious many people have already decided who is guilty and what they are and how they should be punished the case because it is a male coach and a female wrestler. You are the only one (beside me) saying that we need more facts before calling someone a sexual predator and he is totally guilty.
I agree that the nuances do matter. Who initiated. What the past history of the people involved is. What the effects of the relationship were on the environment in the room. Those are all things that should go into the punishment decision and whether he is a moron or a sexual predator and whether she is a victim or a manipulative @#$^%$.
No, you've been saying much more. Much more, over and over again.
Similar threads
