USAT Board Member and Domestic violence
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
2014-10-16 8:45 AM |
Veteran 2297 Great White North | Subject: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence http://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Fo... http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/breaking/chi-usa-triathlon-res... Should national governing body board members be subject to a code of conduct / ethics contract? Edited by simpsonbo 2014-10-16 8:46 AM |
|
2014-10-16 11:42 AM in reply to: 0 |
Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence I'm all for it as long as it's across the board. Illegal activity off duty is an indication of a person's integrity. Domestic violence, illegal drugs, DWI, robbery, bye. (edit) Not sure why there's an add your own when it doesn't add Edited by DanielG 2014-10-16 11:44 AM |
2014-10-16 11:44 AM in reply to: Guest |
754 | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence At pretty much any job, you are subject to a code of conduct. I can get fired for committing a felony, even if it does not have anything to do with work. |
2014-10-16 12:17 PM in reply to: Guest |
Member 1748 Exton, PA | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence If there is an issue with the image of the organization, then they need to be up front when people accept their positions. I work in a high security facility and if I'm involved in criminal activity, my job would be on the line as I would become a risk to the corporation. In the same sense if these public figures do something that hurts the image of the organization they need to be accountable. However they should know this from the time they take the job. |
2014-10-16 12:34 PM in reply to: mike761 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence I think almost everyone here would be surprised at how many men have hit their wives or girlfriends. I'm really glad to see it get the attention it is getting....but there is quite a bit of thinking to be done as far as how it affects someone's job, etc. I'm not saying it shouldn't affect a person's job, I'm fine with it, but it needs to be done equally, and with fairness. I say that because I would like someone to tell me how you deal with the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of cases that you will never hear about but have been reported and then dumped because the other party signs a no prosecution form. Just because your significant other doesn't want you arrested deosn't mean you are not as morally bankrupt as the person who got charged...so what happens to that person? Don't tell me about the state laws that require a person be arrested for domestic assault.......it's a great idea, but crowded prosecutor's offices have long ago figured their way around that. The reality is that the VAST majority of abusers are never charged. |
2014-10-16 1:34 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence Originally posted by Left Brain I think almost everyone here would be surprised at how many men have hit their wives or girlfriends. I'm really glad to see it get the attention it is getting....but there is quite a bit of thinking to be done as far as how it affects someone's job, etc. I'm not saying it shouldn't affect a person's job, I'm fine with it, but it needs to be done equally, and with fairness. I say that because I would like someone to tell me how you deal with the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of cases that you will never hear about but have been reported and then dumped because the other party signs a no prosecution form. Just because your significant other doesn't want you arrested deosn't mean you are not as morally bankrupt as the person who got charged...so what happens to that person? Don't tell me about the state laws that require a person be arrested for domestic assault.......it's a great idea, but crowded prosecutor's offices have long ago figured their way around that. The reality is that the VAST majority of abusers are never charged. I probably would, then think about it, and then NOT be surprised just thinking about who people really are... It's sort of unfathomable because I have never struck a women in my LIFE. Never struck ANYONE in anger. Wrestled around a bit in a schoolyard tussle or push someone down, but never hit anyone. Just the thought of hitting someone in the face is sort of disturbing to me. Go figure I have a black belt in karate... BUT leaned to Jiu Jitsu where you get to choke people out and joint lock instead if hitting! |
|
2014-10-16 1:49 PM in reply to: Guest |
Champion 7036 Sarasota, FL | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence I certainly don't condone domestic violence in any way, but I also don't like to make judgements not knowing all the facts and based on third-hand information at best. I've served on a number of non-profit boards over the past twenty-five years. Most organizations will have by-laws or convenants that prohibit such things as conflicts-of-interest, or "actions detrimental to the organization". And just as importantly, it will empower the board (or executive committee) to remove a member for cause. I've been through the process of removing a board member and it's not a pleasant task, but sometimes is necessary for the good of the organization.. My concern would be a knee-jerk reaction that starts making moral judgements by listing specific violations in the by-laws. OK, so we can agree on murder, rape, and domestic violence as not being acceptable. But what about DUI's? Speeding tickets? Smoking pot? Adultery? Certainly Mr. Weiss' actions have had a negative effect on the reputation of the USAT. He evidently refuses to leave, and according to my understanding, the board doesn't have the authority to remove him. In a perfect world you would hope that he would put the good of the USAT over his own interests and quietly resign. But it appears that isn't going to happen. As a USAT member, what I intend to do is work through the system and contact our regional board (several of whom I know personally) to express my concerns. Mark
|
2014-10-16 2:11 PM in reply to: Guest |
Extreme Veteran 933 Connecticut | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence To the extent that I don't think people who lack the self control necessary to restrain themselves from hitting *anyone* when angry deserve to be in a decision making role, no, I don't think the person in question should be allowed to continue to serve on the Board Of Directors. However, a Board member is seated due to a process, and unseated due to a process. If there existed no code of ethics or behavior at the time the board member was charged with the act, then it could be (not *IS* just *COULD BE*) considered unfair to remove them from the board simply based on a writing a new policy, and applying it retroactively. If the election process is like most boards, the board could simply call a motion before the voting constituency (whomever they are, be it the other board members or all USAT members, whatever is in the bylaws) to make a vote of confidence. If he loses the vote, he's out. If he wins, then he stays aboard. I'm purposely separating the way the USAT and the board works from the person and the act, they are not related. I don't think Augusta National should exclude women as members, but hey, that's their choice. I don't think this should be a referendum on domestic violence or the individual's penance. I'm glad the question was simply what it is: Should national governing body board members be subject to a code of conduct / ethics contract Yes, they should. I should think that all boards should strive to have the highest quality members possible, judged openly on merit and character, given whatever weight the voters ascribe to each. If you think a guy is a sleazebag criminal, but he's very educated and can help the board and you think those two things balance out in favor of the guy, then hey, vote that way. Your call. I get my vote, you get yours. I probably won't vote the same way, but what do you care? |
2014-10-16 3:09 PM in reply to: Guest |
1300 | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence Yes = Should national governing body board members be subject to a code of conduct / ethics contract? I've followed the ST thread from the start and I do wonder how far all of this will go. |
2014-10-16 6:55 PM in reply to: fisherman76 |
80 naperville, Illinois | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence Originally posted by fisherman76 To the extent that I don't think people who lack the self control necessary to restrain themselves from hitting *anyone* when angry deserve to be in a decision making role, no, I don't think the person in question should be allowed to continue to serve on the Board Of Directors. However, a Board member is seated due to a process, and unseated due to a process. If there existed no code of ethics or behavior at the time the board member was charged with the act, then it could be (not *IS* just *COULD BE*) considered unfair to remove them from the board simply based on a writing a new policy, and applying it retroactively. If the election process is like most boards, the board could simply call a motion before the voting constituency (whomever they are, be it the other board members or all USAT members, whatever is in the bylaws) to make a vote of confidence. If he loses the vote, he's out. If he wins, then he stays aboard. I'm purposely separating the way the USAT and the board works from the person and the act, they are not related. I don't think Augusta National should exclude women as members, but hey, that's their choice. I don't think this should be a referendum on domestic violence or the individual's penance. I'm glad the question was simply what it is: Should national governing body board members be subject to a code of conduct / ethics contract Yes, they should. I should think that all boards should strive to have the highest quality members possible, judged openly on merit and character, given whatever weight the voters ascribe to each. If you think a guy is a sleazebag criminal, but he's very educated and can help the board and you think those two things balance out in favor of the guy, then hey, vote that way. Your call. I get my vote, you get yours. I probably won't vote the same way, but what do you care? you should go read his statement over on ST, one of his unrepentant defenses is, "I signed no morality clause" and "I'm a volunteer" and "Ray Rice did worse." being charged with a felony is pretty bad, his response to the ST guy who posted about it, is even more disturbing. |
2014-10-16 7:56 PM in reply to: Raansnel |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence Originally posted by Raansnel Originally posted by fisherman76 To the extent that I don't think people who lack the self control necessary to restrain themselves from hitting *anyone* when angry deserve to be in a decision making role, no, I don't think the person in question should be allowed to continue to serve on the Board Of Directors. However, a Board member is seated due to a process, and unseated due to a process. If there existed no code of ethics or behavior at the time the board member was charged with the act, then it could be (not *IS* just *COULD BE*) considered unfair to remove them from the board simply based on a writing a new policy, and applying it retroactively. If the election process is like most boards, the board could simply call a motion before the voting constituency (whomever they are, be it the other board members or all USAT members, whatever is in the bylaws) to make a vote of confidence. If he loses the vote, he's out. If he wins, then he stays aboard. I'm purposely separating the way the USAT and the board works from the person and the act, they are not related. I don't think Augusta National should exclude women as members, but hey, that's their choice. I don't think this should be a referendum on domestic violence or the individual's penance. I'm glad the question was simply what it is: you should go read his statement over on ST, one of his unrepentant defenses is, "I signed no morality clause" and "I'm a volunteer" and "Ray Rice did worse." being charged with a felony is pretty bad, his response to the ST guy who posted about it, is even more disturbing. Should national governing body board members be subject to a code of conduct / ethics contract Yes, they should. I should think that all boards should strive to have the highest quality members possible, judged openly on merit and character, given whatever weight the voters ascribe to each. If you think a guy is a sleazebag criminal, but he's very educated and can help the board and you think those two things balance out in favor of the guy, then hey, vote that way. Your call. I get my vote, you get yours. I probably won't vote the same way, but what do you care? In my experience, every statement by any man that's ever hit a woman is friggin' disturbing. Those goys are weird.....all of them. |
|
2014-10-16 8:59 PM in reply to: Guest |
Member 1083 | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence I didn't get involved in the slowtwitch discussion but I'll put my opinion here. Obviously I don't have all the facts of the situation so this is based on random forum information. Here's my line of thinking for this specific type of thing. If your volunteer or employment position puts you in a position of "responsibility" where you are making judgement calls that affect members, employees, students whatever then you should absolutely be subject to a morality clause. To put it in a cliche, "Caesars wife must be above suspicion." My reasoning is that if you make a judgement mistake in one area of your life (you get a dui, you are arrested for brawling, you throw a clay pot at your wife, you embezzle money from your church" it could be representative of overall poor judgement. Your employer, or volunteer coordinator should be able to remove you before you perhaps make another error. That's my thinking anyway. |
2014-10-17 6:48 AM in reply to: Raansnel |
Extreme Veteran 933 Connecticut | Subject: RE: USAT Board Member and Domestic violence Originally posted by Raansnel you should go read his statement over on ST, one of his unrepentant defenses is, "I signed no morality clause" and "I'm a volunteer" and "Ray Rice did worse." being charged with a felony is pretty bad, his response to the ST guy who posted about it, is even more disturbing. I did read it, and I think the guy sucks based on what he's said publicly and what he did. Nowhere did I say I personally thought he should continue to serve on the board. The question posed, however was : Should national governing body board members be subject to a code of conduct / ethics contract The dude sounds pretty bad in my view, but as much as can legally served, he's paid his due. No matter how despicable I find him, I can't demand another pound of flesh for the act itself. As a member of USAT I can voice my displeasure at the quality of the board of directors so long as he is on it. They are separate and distinct issues. I suspect we agree 100%. |
| ||||
|
| |||
|
|