Thursday, June 26, 2008

consequences

When you choose to engage in a particular course of action, I don't understand how you can turn around and say that you don't understand why you have to pay the consequences that resulted from that course of action. One of my biggest irritants is when people take no responsibility for their actions - yeah, I did that but look at what they did! They made me do it! Ummm, yeah, what, are we back in second grade?

One thing that I figure most people would know - you cannot physically assault your boss. A couple of days ago, Houston Astros pitcher Shawn Chacon had a confrontation with general manager Ed Wade wherein Chacon ended up shoving Wade, effectively his boss, to the ground. Twice. He was suspended, and then today, he was released from the team for breach of contract. OK, there are technicalities involved wherein another team could pick him up, but that's extraneous. There is about $1 million in regular compensation owing on his contract as well as potential bonuses that could have been earned, none of which the Astros would have to pay him.

Counsel for the players' union said, "Based on the information we have to date, we believe the Astros' response violates the Basic Agreement. If Shawn Chacon clears waivers and is released, we will pursue appropriate relief on his behalf." OK, I have no idea what the union agreement says, but I would be incredibly surprised if there's a provision in there that says a player physically assaulting another member of the team, much less his BOSS isn't sufficient grounds to terminate the agreement for cause. Heck, Chacon is lucky that Wade isn't pressing criminal charges for assault.

Chacon's agent further says, "As the process unfolds there will be more facts revealed which will shed more light on the situation. By no means does that mean the physical confrontation was appropriate, and Shawn knows that." Really? What kind of facts are going to come to light that makes the assault ok? Did Wade insult Chacon's wife? His mother? His clothes? Wade says that he didn't yell at Chacon, didn't swear at him or make any insulting remarks to him. There were many witnesses to this confrontation, so I expect there are lots of people who know whether that's true or not. However, even if Wade *had* done all of those things, that's still not enough to justify Chacon's physical attack.

The article goes on to detail numerous incidents where Chacon was insubordinate and ignored the instructions of his manager and pitching coach, all of this before Chacon apparently became more upset because he had been pulled from the starting rotation for poor performance.

OK, so Chacon is having a bad year, so he's probably frustrated and angry and might have some issues with controlling those feelings and not letting them manifest in his actions. His manager asks to speak to him. He ignores him. His general manager comes down to the team dining room to ask him to go back to his office so they can talk. He refuses. All of those are actions he chose to take. And then he lost his temper and assaulted the general manager. But now, he's surprised that he's been cut, and it's not fair? Dude, step up. Admit that you made a mistake, that you lost your temper, and you're really sorry for it, and you understand there are consequences to your actions. You know that the physical confrontation wasn't appropriate. So what do you expect them to do? Just ignore it? Slap you on the wrist? Wag their finger at you? You've shown a history of ignoring your bosses, and they didn't pull you from the rotation because you're wearing the wrong color hat - they did it because your poor performance is hurting the team. You probably can't help but take it personally, but in the light of day, you cannot see that your actions were so wrong that they are entirely within their rights to terminate you for cause? And you are not entitled to whine that it's not fair?

1 comment:

Sherry said...

Perhaps "assaulting one's boss" is a right found in the constitution. ;)