[Cardinal96]

I was focusing on the absolute absurdity of you comparing the working environment of NFL players with your own working environment.

I never claimed that a corporate working environment is the same working environment as an NFL team.  However, I absolutely claim that repeated bullying and harrassing behavior has no place on an NFL team just like it has no place in a corporate working environment.  The NFL is not an island.  US laws still apply to the workplace.  NFL policies towards creating a harassment-free workplace still apply. 

Well, you should because legally (both civilly and criminally) it's going to have a big effect on any case.  If the response had been "Incognito is going to keep this up until you beat his ass on the field.  The next time you are out there, destroy him and he will stop."

Assuming there were no prior complaints, the above would not be surprising in a competitive, physical sport environment.  Would it be bad advice?  Yeah.  But this would not be remotely defensible in a WalMart scenario.  If the GM had one or two people who could testify that pushing back or punching Incognito forced him to back down.

A lot of assumptions there.  We don't have all the facts right now so conjecture about a legal case is silly. 

There is almost always an onus on the victim to fix the situation.  The onus if for the victim to show that it is unwanted.  The onus in certain situations might well be for the victim to complain or protest or ask the harasser to stop.  These were fellow players and the standard on harassment is different if it would have been harassment by a coach or manager.  (This ignores whatever union contract provisions might apply. 

Actually, no.  There is not always an onus on the victim to fix the situation.  The onus is on the victim to report alleged bullying and demand the right to a workplace free of harassment.  The more we learn about this case, the more we understand why Jonathan Martin left the situation.  Bullying was condoned by his teammates and appeared to have support from coaches and the GM.

I'm not remotely rationalizing the behavior.  I am saying that all behavior has to be viewed in its context.

In what context, is repeated harassment and bullying acceptable?  When it is ok to use racial epithets, threaten violence against someone's family and threaten to kill someone, particularly when the recipient didn't welcome this behavior?  I am all ears.

[Cardinal96]

I was focusing on the absolute absurdity of you comparing the working environment of NFL players with your own working environment.

I never claimed that a corporate working environment is the same working environment as an NFL team.  However, I absolutely claim that repeated bullying and harrassing behavior has no place on an NFL team just like it has no place in a corporate working environment.  The NFL is not an island.  US laws still apply to the workplace.  NFL policies towards creating a harassment-free workplace still apply. 

Well, you should because legally (both civilly and criminally) it's going to have a big effect on any case.  If the response had been "Incognito is going to keep this up until you beat his ass on the field.  The next time you are out there, destroy him and he will stop."

Assuming there were no prior complaints, the above would not be surprising in a competitive, physical sport environment.  Would it be bad advice?  Yeah.  But this would not be remotely defensible in a WalMart scenario.  If the GM had one or two people who could testify that pushing back or punching Incognito forced him to back down.

A lot of assumptions there.  We don't have all the facts right now so conjecture about a legal case is silly. 

There is almost always an onus on the victim to fix the situation.  The onus if for the victim to show that it is unwanted.  The onus in certain situations might well be for the victim to complain or protest or ask the harasser to stop.  These were fellow players and the standard on harassment is different if it would have been harassment by a coach or manager.  (This ignores whatever union contract provisions might apply. 

Actually, no.  There is not always an onus on the victim to fix the situation.  The onus is on the victim to report alleged bullying and demand the right to a workplace free of harassment.  The more we learn about this case, the more we understand why Jonathan Martin left the situation.  Bullying was condoned by his teammates and appeared to have support from coaches and the GM.

I'm not remotely rationalizing the behavior.  I am saying that all behavior has to be viewed in its context.

In what context, is repeated harassment and bullying acceptable?  When it is ok to use racial epithets, threaten violence against someone's family and threaten to kill someone, particularly when the recipient didn't welcome this behavior?  I am all ears.