|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Feb 10, 2019 14:55:27 GMT -5
But like... do you see where this is skeezy? Any talk of "one of the boys" is sketchy in wrestling. The ideal would be to have a real system that works, not to have a guy who's really a middle-manager but everyone gets to pretend he's not because he's also a wrestler. If I worked for a company, and people set up these multiple layers of shadiness to keep from addressing morale and behavior problems above-board, that would make me incredibly worried about how this place works. I don't want an 'unofficial leader,' I want the policies to be clear and public, so we can point out when they're bullshit.
Everyone's focusing on trashing up lockerrooms, which I'm still skeptical is happening a lot, but fine, fix the problem if it's happening, great. But that's not all that's being thrown around, regarding 'bad locker room behavior.' We're also using as examples wrestlers folding towels and bringing more senior wrestlers water after their matches. That is absolutely stuff that wrestlers should be able to say "No, that's not my job" to. But I reallllly don't like this vague term "respect" getting thrown around, because "respect" can very easily be translated into... anything. Henry's clearly a good guy, but does anyone really find it that implausible that he'd, say, care about hand-shaking bullshit, or whatever?
Part of what rubs me the wrong way about this is Henry's asinine playacting tough guy during this: "We finna reestablish the leadership chain of command." But as people have pointed out, that's just kayfabe for his hr position, whatever. The bigger problem is the refusal to end the inmates-running-the-asylum, "one of the boys" mentality. It's just another way the WWE gets away with refusing to treat its employees like employees.
|
|
|
Post by 2coldMack is even more baffled on Feb 10, 2019 15:05:31 GMT -5
But like... do you see where this is skeezy? Any talk of "one of the boys" is sketchy in wrestling. The ideal would be to have a real system that works, not to have a guy who's really a middle-manager but everyone gets to pretend he's not because he's also a wrestler. If I worked for a company, and people set up these multiple layers of shadiness to keep from addressing morale and behavior problems above-board, that would make me incredibly worried about how this place works. I don't want an 'unofficial leader,' I want the policies to be clear and public, so we can point out when they're bullshit. Everyone's focusing on trashing up lockerrooms, which I'm still skeptical is happening a lot, but fine, fix the problem if it's happening, great. But that's not all that's being thrown around, regarding 'bad locker room behavior.' We're also using as examples wrestlers folding towels and bringing more senior wrestlers water after their matches. That is absolutely stuff that wrestlers should be able to say "No, that's not my job" to. But I reallllly don't like this vague term "respect" getting thrown around, because "respect" can very easily be translated into... anything. Henry's clearly a good guy, but does anyone really find it that implausible that he'd, say, care about hand-shaking bullshit, or whatever? Part of what rubs me the wrong way about this is Henry's asinine playacting tough guy during this: "We finna reestablish the leadership chain of command." But as people have pointed out, that's just kayfabe for his hr position, whatever. The bigger problem is the refusal to end the inmates-running-the-asylum, "one of the boys" mentality. It's just another way the WWE gets away with refusing to treat its employees like employees. Right. If you want these issues taken care of, establish an HR department, and MAKE the boys respect it by enforcing their edicts. Don't carny your way out of having to do that by appointing a "sheriff" to keep the old bubble of "Well, the boys will handle it in-house" going. This is a publicly traded company, for god's sake, and we've got Henry out here talking about "Holding people's faces to the fire" over some frankly trifling bullshit that a competent and company backed HR deparment could handle.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 10, 2019 15:10:11 GMT -5
He should also fix the BS that takes place in whatever room Vince rewrites the scripts in. Careful, I don't think we really want Becky giving birth to a hand. But it would be a beautiful hand with long flowing red hair.
|
|
|
Post by greyfmdan on Feb 10, 2019 15:14:14 GMT -5
When I first started at the company I work for now, I had a habit of leaving my project work out on my desk—not trash, but materials for the project I was currently working on. At the job I had come from, that was common. But I got talked to by a middle manager about it. I wasn’t scolded, but was calmly told, “The boss wants you to put your papers away & leave your desk clean.” It wasn’t that I was knowingly being disrespectful; it was just that I had to learn how the new company wanted things done. So I adjusted my behavior accordingly. Apparently the boss was satisfied with my adjustments & most other aspects of my work, as I was promoted to manager 3 years later. And as of earlier this month, I’m now in my 13th year with the company.
I really think that’s basically what’s going on with Mark Henry here. For as much better as the locker room environment is today than in times past, I can see where the more laid back atmosphere might have led to a lackadaisical attitude from some workers about certain things—not because they’re intentionally being disrespectful, but because they probably don’t realize how it comes off. (Granted, you’ll occasionally have the Enzo types who are blatantly disrespectful, but that seems to be the exception more than the rule.) It seems they’re simply bringing in Henry to teach the young workers how to show respect & professionalism. And Henry, having been in that position himself, carries the clout & respect to be a mentor to these guys.
While I understand the concerns about bullying & hazing, I didn’t at all gather from Henry that this was going to be his approach. As others have said, I think it will start along the lines of, “Hey guys, we don’t want Vince on us. Let’s clean this place up.” If that doesn’t fix the issue, the offender will probably get a more stern talking-to (or two). If that still doesn’t take care of the issue, then he’ll recommend the offender be fined.
To me, that’s a very fair way to handle it. It’s how it would be handled in most jobs, except instead of being fined at that final stage, the offender would probably just be fired.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,914
|
Post by Mozenrath on Feb 10, 2019 15:14:52 GMT -5
But like... do you see where this is skeezy? Any talk of "one of the boys" is sketchy in wrestling. The ideal would be to have a real system that works, not to have a guy who's really a middle-manager but everyone gets to pretend he's not because he's also a wrestler. If I worked for a company, and people set up these multiple layers of shadiness to keep from addressing morale and behavior problems above-board, that would make me incredibly worried about how this place works. I don't want an 'unofficial leader,' I want the policies to be clear and public, so we can point out when they're bullshit. Everyone's focusing on trashing up lockerrooms, which I'm still skeptical is happening a lot, but fine, fix the problem if it's happening, great. But that's not all that's being thrown around, regarding 'bad locker room behavior.' We're also using as examples wrestlers folding towels and bringing more senior wrestlers water after their matches. That is absolutely stuff that wrestlers should be able to say "No, that's not my job" to. But I reallllly don't like this vague term "respect" getting thrown around, because "respect" can very easily be translated into... anything. Henry's clearly a good guy, but does anyone really find it that implausible that he'd, say, care about hand-shaking bullshit, or whatever? Part of what rubs me the wrong way about this is Henry's asinine playacting tough guy during this: "We finna reestablish the leadership chain of command." But as people have pointed out, that's just kayfabe for his hr position, whatever. The bigger problem is the refusal to end the inmates-running-the-asylum, "one of the boys" mentality. It's just another way the WWE gets away with refusing to treat its employees like employees. Right. If you want these issues taken care of, establish an HR department, and MAKE the boys respect it by enforcing their edicts. Don't carny your way out of having to do that by appointing a "sheriff" to keep the old bubble of "Well, the boys will handle it in-house" going. This is a publicly traded company, for god's sake, and we've got Henry out here talking about "Holding people's faces to the fire" over some frankly trifling bullshit that a competent and company backed HR deparment could handle. HR route means people get fined with no recourse, shit goes on peoples' records, and people get fired or not re-signed. That seems so much harsher than "veteran told me to knock it off", because it is in fact the much more draconian route.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Pigwell on Feb 10, 2019 15:17:16 GMT -5
But like... do you see where this is skeezy? Any talk of "one of the boys" is sketchy in wrestling. The ideal would be to have a real system that works, not to have a guy who's really a middle-manager but everyone gets to pretend he's not because he's also a wrestler. If I worked for a company, and people set up these multiple layers of shadiness to keep from addressing morale and behavior problems above-board, that would make me incredibly worried about how this place works. I don't want an 'unofficial leader,' I want the policies to be clear and public, so we can point out when they're bullshit. Everyone's focusing on trashing up lockerrooms, which I'm still skeptical is happening a lot, but fine, fix the problem if it's happening, great. But that's not all that's being thrown around, regarding 'bad locker room behavior.' We're also using as examples wrestlers folding towels and bringing more senior wrestlers water after their matches. That is absolutely stuff that wrestlers should be able to say "No, that's not my job" to. But I reallllly don't like this vague term "respect" getting thrown around, because "respect" can very easily be translated into... anything. Henry's clearly a good guy, but does anyone really find it that implausible that he'd, say, care about hand-shaking bullshit, or whatever? Part of what rubs me the wrong way about this is Henry's asinine playacting tough guy during this: "We finna reestablish the leadership chain of command." But as people have pointed out, that's just kayfabe for his hr position, whatever. The bigger problem is the refusal to end the inmates-running-the-asylum, "one of the boys" mentality. It's just another way the WWE gets away with refusing to treat its employees like employees. No, I don't see where this is skeezy. I'm sorry, I just don't see any of this in that light at all.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Feb 10, 2019 15:18:32 GMT -5
Right. If you want these issues taken care of, establish an HR department, and MAKE the boys respect it by enforcing their edicts. Don't carny your way out of having to do that by appointing a "sheriff" to keep the old bubble of "Well, the boys will handle it in-house" going. This is a publicly traded company, for god's sake, and we've got Henry out here talking about "Holding people's faces to the fire" over some frankly trifling bullshit that a competent and company backed HR deparment could handle. HR route means people get fined with no recourse, shit goes on peoples' records, and people get fired or not re-signed. That seems so much harsher than "veteran told me to knock it off", because it is in fact the much more draconian route. It doesn't have to be that way; I've seen lots of HR people give warnings. This is a false dichotomy. And honestly, if it WAS a binary choice, and you put a gun to my head and MADE me choose, I'd definitely opt for the 'draconian HR' than the 'boys will take care of it themselves' thing. Because at least the former is above-board and professional.
|
|
|
Post by 2coldMack is even more baffled on Feb 10, 2019 15:18:43 GMT -5
Right. If you want these issues taken care of, establish an HR department, and MAKE the boys respect it by enforcing their edicts. Don't carny your way out of having to do that by appointing a "sheriff" to keep the old bubble of "Well, the boys will handle it in-house" going. This is a publicly traded company, for god's sake, and we've got Henry out here talking about "Holding people's faces to the fire" over some frankly trifling bullshit that a competent and company backed HR deparment could handle. HR route means people get fined with no recourse, shit goes on peoples' records, and people get fired or not re-signed. That seems so much harsher than "veteran told me to knock it off", because it is in fact the much more draconian route. If it's this big of an issue that a fine is required......then yeah, f***ing fine 'em. The general tone of the narrative is "If they won't respect X, they'll respect the money taken out of their check", and giving HR the power to do that solves the problem without playing into the old "locker room pecking order" narrative that wrestling is finally starting to get out from under.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2019 15:37:08 GMT -5
A lot of the comments against this just don't make sense to me. I've been reading this thread over and over and I just don't get it. I don't know if it's a culture shock thing, people just being overly paranoid but man, I really wonder why there's a disconnect between us here because unlike other threads related to wrestling this one extends in all areas of working a job. It's something that we're all familiar with.
Someone said that Henry's trying to play tough and another said that anytime someone says someone is "one of the boys" that's a cause for alarms and honestly that's pretty much describing exactly what Henry was talking about with this interview. He said he, Rock, 2 Cool, Kane and the other young guys had to deal with that "with the boys" mentality and did their best to try and change what it meant, the perception of wrestlers and yet you see comments saying "nah, he used that term, he's still giving off alarms." That's basically saying that regardless of the work he and the others did to change the perception of wrestlers they'll always associate Henry and everyone else with how things used to be. You're putting them in the same bucket. I've heard a lot of today's talent from New Day to The Shield to even the girls called "one of the boys" or "one of the girls" so with that logic that means these wrestlers go in that same bucket? Like, not everybody is the same. I don't get it. It sounds to me like no matter what these people do or they're automatically going to put them in the same bucket as the perpetrators (Bradshaw) including the guys like Henry who was fighting against that mindset and it's repercussions.
And the "Henry is a tough guy" stuff. Man, I'm from the South, I know people who have met him, I've hungout with people from his area plenty of times and I know people in my family who are similar. Him saying that isn't him being tough, it's just how he talks. If anything hearing the rest of what Mark said he's not saying he's a tough guy. This whole thing just doesn't make any sense to me because, well I'll break it down with my first job. My first job was Target. I worked the floor as a regular employee and in charge of my department was a team lead. The team lead did planograms on the floor as well, they were around us most of the time, they were like a squad leader. Above that we had an exec who was in charge of my side of the floor (hardlines) and above that we had the manager of the store. We also had an HR person. Now, there were times where some departments needed help doing specific things such as making sure things were kept in line, making sure the people on the team were good with what they were doing, that type of thing. The person who made sure we were good wasn't the exec in charge of hardlines, it wasn't the HR, it was the team lead. The reason is because the team lead knew us the best, knew what needed to be done and how it needed to be done, was in tune with how we did things, understood us as individuals more and finally they were there to be the middle-man between us and the execs. The team lead used to be a regular employee like us but then they were promoted and the biggest thing about that is the trust and the "teamwork" aspect of it. We trusted that person and were more in tune with that person from a team aspect than anyone else.
That's Mark Henry's position. That type of person fits way more than HR, execs and everyone else who works at the store. This is an example of the company treating their employees like actual employees, like real people, rather than disposables because rather than getting someone in HR who doesn't know them, who's just handling papers, someone to fill a spot, they're getting one of their own to help out who knows way more about the job and someone who's there to relieve the employees that they can relate to which opens up trust. It's also a great tool to let others know that hey, you don't have to be in an office one day, there's other stuff you can do. It's promoting within the company.
We gotta stop this "inmates running the asylum" stuff too because going by that mindset you can't become a team leader from a regular employee at any job. That is basically saying that you cannot promote at the workplace and be a leader of a group of those who you were apart of compared to someone arriving from out of the company coming to take that spot because the moment you do you're "an inmate running the asylum."
Nah man. Nah. I don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Feb 10, 2019 15:38:38 GMT -5
No, I don't see where this is skeezy. I'm sorry, I just don't see any of this in that light at all. It's weirdly kayfabed. Not just him acting tough, but also him explicitly saying it's an important role even though there's not 'a title' for it. He's really an HR liaison, but he's hired as a wrestler. That's unnecessary, carny, unprofessional stuff. It allows the WWE to keep rules unspoken rather than explicit, because things are getting handled in an unofficial, quiet way. It allows for unfair enforcement of rules, because those rules are unspoken and therefore ambiguous, and because things are getting handled unofficially and quietly. It keeps wrestlers from knowing legit what their jobs consist of, because they consist of a bunch of unspoken things that can't be fairly enforced no matter how hard anyone tries. This discourages people from standing up for themselves if there is bullshit. It allows for punishment of things that HR couldn't get away with punishing. You can make a rule about leaving trash in locker rooms or treating rental cars badly. But you can't fine someone for "not showing basic respect" without something more specific there. Like, I agree Henry isn't Bob Holly; he doesn't have a malicious bone in his body. But I do think it's possible he could legit believe that the proper way for a young wrestler to show respect is to bring water to John Cena after his matches. When that wrestler (correctly) replies with "That's not my job," Henry would therefore perceive it as that person lacking basic respect... he solely has benign motivations. And what do we do there? HR can't punish them... that stuff isn't in their contract. It's literally not their job. But Henry could. And I can't think of a word other than "skeezy" for a situation where you have people getting punished for stuff you can't make rules against.
|
|
Perd
Patti Mayonnaise
Leslie needs to butt out for fear of receiving The Bunghole Buster
Posts: 32,366
Member is Online
|
Post by Perd on Feb 10, 2019 15:42:43 GMT -5
Mark is always willing to give a hand. Just ask Mae Young.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Pigwell on Feb 10, 2019 15:46:22 GMT -5
No, I don't see where this is skeezy. I'm sorry, I just don't see any of this in that light at all. It's weirdly kayfabed. Not just him acting tough, but also him explicitly saying it's an important role even though there's not 'a title' for it. He's really an HR liaison, but he's hired as a wrestler. That's unnecessary, carny, unprofessional stuff. It allows the WWE to keep rules unspoken rather than explicit, because things are getting handled in an unofficial, quiet way. It allows for unfair enforcement of rules, because those rules are unspoken and therefore ambiguous, and because things are getting handled unofficially and quietly. It keeps wrestlers from knowing legit what their jobs consist of, because they consist of a bunch of unspoken things that can't be fairly enforced no matter how hard anyone tries. This discourages people from standing up for themselves if there is bullshit. It allows for punishment of things that HR couldn't get away with punishing. You can make a rule about leaving trash in locker rooms or treating rental cars badly. But you can't fine someone for "not showing basic respect" without something more specific there. Like, I agree Henry isn't Bob Holly; he doesn't have a malicious bone in his body. But I do think it's possible he could legit believe that the proper way for a young wrestler to show respect is to bring water to John Cena after his matches. When that wrestler (correctly) replies with "That's not my job," Henry would therefore perceive it as that person lacking basic respect... he solely has benign motivations. And what do we do there? HR can't punish them... that stuff isn't in their contract. It's literally not their job. But Henry could. And I can't think of a word other than "skeezy" for a situation where you have people getting punished for stuff you can't make rules against. I think my perception of the intent here is just way different than yours. The way this works in my head, Henry is here like a guidance councillor from high school. Snub out the simple things so it doesn't build up of have to get to actual administration's ears. I'm just not foreseeing bad juju here is all.
|
|
|
Post by xxshoyuweeniexx on Feb 10, 2019 15:50:07 GMT -5
I could see if this was JBL taking about brining back shower time with Uncle Jibbles and Grandpa Holly, but this is Mark Henry. From all accounts, the dude has sounded like Kane backstage, a sweet nice guy who never bothered anybody. Wouldn’t that be somebody you’d want to make sure people aren’t being messy slob assholes?
Also on another note, this seems to be a problem because Roman’s not there. And regardless of his character on tv, everyone has said he’s their lockeroom leader, but still one of the coolest guys. And guys like Dean leaving/not being that type of guy, Seth and Finn possibly being more “90s Shawn Michaels” type of leaders than Bret Hart, and Braun being late and one of said problems, there’s nobody there to be like “bro can pick that up please” but also know when to really step in, like kicking Enzo off a tour bus for being loud and rude. Maybe Mark’s there to turn stuff around and teach some guys how to be that type of leader? I dunno, but Henry’s earned the benefit of doubt from me at least.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2019 15:55:08 GMT -5
I could see if this was JBL taking about brining back shower time with Uncle Jibbles and Grandpa Holly, but this is Mark Henry. From all accounts, the dude has sounded like Kane backstage, a sweet nice guy who never bothered anybody. Wouldn’t that be somebody you’d want to make sure people aren’t being messy slob assholes? Also on another note, this seems to be a problem because Roman’s not there. And regardless of his character on tv, everyone has said he’s their lockeroom leader, but still one of the coolest guys. And guys like Dean leaving/not being that type of guy, Seth and Finn possibly being more “90s Shawn Michaels” type of leaders than Bret Hart, and Braun being late and one of said problems, there’s nobody there to be like “bro can pick that up please” but also know when to really step in, like kicking Enzo off a tour bus for being loud and rude. Maybe Mark’s there to turn stuff around and teach some guys how to be that type of leader? I dunno, but Henry’s earned the benefit of doubt from me at least. I read that Rollins has been having back problems since the Rumble so he's gonna be taken off of live events and probably not wrestle until WM time so that could be another reason. Henry made it seem like this just started recently so I'm guessing yeah. You've Roman on hiatus, Ambrose leaving soon, Rollins hurt and having so much on his plate because the others are having their things, I mean yeah it's probably way more relaxed than ever. The Shield were those guys who set the standard for the locker room and with those 3 going through something it's probably a far different time on Raw than has been since they debuted.
|
|
|
Post by darbus alan on Feb 10, 2019 16:04:37 GMT -5
I'm now picturing Finn being Locker Room Leader "Good Cop" and Anderson and Gallows being his goofy "Bad Cops." Finn: "Hey, Braun, you've been late a few times lately. That isn't cool, man. We all work our butts off and it's disrespectful to all of us who get here on time. So please, try not to do that to us or to yourself. Vince's noticing that stuff and it might hurt your career in the future." Anderson: "Yeah, don't be late! Because you know who's late?" Anderson and Gallows: "NERRRRRRRRRDS!" Finn: "So yeah, just trying to look out for ya, buddy." *Gallows and Anderson do the "Too Sweet" hand gesture*
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Feb 10, 2019 16:08:33 GMT -5
A lot of the comments against this just don't make sense to me. I've been reading this thread over and over and I just don't get it. I don't know if it's a culture shock thing, people just being overly paranoid but man, I really wonder why there's a disconnect between us here because unlike other threads related to wrestling this one extends in all areas of working a job. It's something that we're all familiar with.
I think you and I, specifically, have told each other all we can tell each other and it just keeps bouncing off. We're equally perplexed by one another's perspective. This may be a side topic that doesn't fit here, but I actually legit find it really interesting... I think you're right that it is a culture shock difference, and I'm really curious what that difference is. Looking at the same thing, seeing something different. I think part of it is that you're seeing Henry in a 'team leader' position, which might be the right way to interpret it, but the big difference for me is that "team leader" is an official position, while "sheriff of the locker room" isn't. I also don't think "paranoid" is the right word for distrusting a company like the WWE. But more interesting, one thing you keep saying is that it's good to have someone managing you who has been in your situation, who used to be working alongside you, and who therefore is easy for everyone to connect with and respect. And I just have absolutely no resonance with that. I simply don't care if my manager understands me or I can connect with them. I'm not AGAINST that, but think I might actually prefer someone removed from my job, because they wouldn't have baggage about it that could affect me. The times I've had shitty workplace situations have been the ones where my superiors can get away with anything because everything's unspoken and unofficial and 'handled within the team.' I don't want a boss who understands me as an individual or who I can respect; I want a boss who has a list of specific expectations associated with my position written down somewhere. Give me a bureaucracy any day. And, I mean, we're both right, right? You can be a shitty manager because your rules are too vague and you don't want anything to be handled above-board, and you can be a shitty manager because you fundamentally don't understand your employees, right? I think it's just a matter of which we think is shittier.
|
|
|
Post by 2coldMack is even more baffled on Feb 10, 2019 16:16:04 GMT -5
A lot of the comments against this just don't make sense to me. I've been reading this thread over and over and I just don't get it. I don't know if it's a culture shock thing, people just being overly paranoid but man, I really wonder why there's a disconnect between us here because unlike other threads related to wrestling this one extends in all areas of working a job. It's something that we're all familiar with.
I think you and I, specifically, have told each other all we can tell each other and it just keeps bouncing off. We're equally perplexed by one another's perspective. This may be a side topic that doesn't fit here, but I actually legit find it really interesting... I think you're right that it is a culture shock difference, and I'm really curious what that difference is. Looking at the same thing, seeing something different. I think part of it is that you're seeing Henry in a 'team leader' position, which might be the right way to interpret it, but the big difference for me is that "team leader" is an official position, while "sheriff of the locker room" isn't. I also don't think "paranoid" is the right word for distrusting a company like the WWE. But more interesting, one thing you keep saying is that it's good to have someone managing you who has been in your situation, who used to be working alongside you, and who therefore is easy for everyone to connect with and respect. And I just have absolutely no resonance with that. I simply don't care if my manager understands me or I can connect with them. I'm not AGAINST that, but think I might actually prefer someone removed from my job, because they wouldn't have baggage about it that could affect me. The times I've had shitty workplace situations have been the ones where my superiors can get away with anything because everything's unspoken and unofficial and 'handled within the team.' I don't want a boss who understands me as an individual or who I can respect; I want a boss who has a list of specific expectations associated with my position written down somewhere. Give me a bureaucracy any day. And, I mean, we're both right, right? You can be a shitty manager because your rules are too vague and you don't want anything to be handled above-board, and you can be a shitty manager because you fundamentally don't understand your employees, right? I think it's just a matter of which we think is shittier. Right, I would 100% have it hard and fast written down somewhere what's expected of me, rather than nebulously leading it up to a "team leader's" interpretation based of their experiences, which, while similar, won't be identical to mine, and who isn't part of any actual "chain of command".
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Feb 10, 2019 16:18:10 GMT -5
Where have some of y’all worked though cause some of these answers are just weird
Also once again you can argue intent but it’s Mark Henry not JBL, I just don’t see any negatives in this
As I mentioned before dudes have to wear a dress code and that doesn’t effect morale so why would someone monitoring and making sure they act like responsible adults do so as well
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Feb 10, 2019 16:25:37 GMT -5
This is, without a doubt, the stupidest, silliest, most asinine "controversy" this board has ever seen.
|
|
|
Post by 2coldMack is even more baffled on Feb 10, 2019 16:28:45 GMT -5
Where have some of y’all worked though cause some of these answers are just weird Also once again you can argue intent but it’s Mark Henry not JBL, I just don’t see any negatives in this As I mentioned before dudes have to wear a dress code and that doesn’t effect morale so why would someone monitoring and making sure they act like responsible adults do so as well Again, that dress code is laid out in black and white, though. It's not open to interpretation. Mark's opinion of "appropriate behavior" very much is. Putting one person in that position with no apparent oversight, regardless of their reputation.....yeah, that worries me.
|
|