The Constitution only applies to individuals in two ways, and neither has anything to do with punishment for crimes. So long as you don’t own slaves and don’t violate state liquor laws, the Constitution doesn’t care.
I think there’s a practical reason to keep the taboo on men hitting women stronger than women hitting men. The average man is considerably bigger than his wife. My own marriage is an example (not that I’ve ever hit my wife, or vice versa). I’m nearly a foot taller than she is, twice as heavy, and much stronger. My punching her is not remotely the same thing as her punching me.
Hell – when my baby sister was, oh, maybe 14, she was about the size my wife is now, and she punched me. I put the palm of my hand on her forehead to fend her off and that ended it, as the difference in reach was such that she couldn’t do anything but look silly. If I’d hit her back, my father would have been fully justified in tanning my hide.
OK - so the OP has been updated to add a video.
-
Does this situation violate company policy in any way? For example, is there an ethics or morals clause that the video OR the publication of the arrest mentioned in the OP would violate.
-
Has the employee’s temper been interfering with his ability to do his job? The OP makes specific mention of it, so it may be. This may be a case of 1 + 1 = at the least “you’re on a plan buddy”
-
Does the employee ever interact face-to-face with customers or is it all over the phone? Because, this is cold, but there’s a video out there, and that public arrest record.
At a minimum, I would recommend that the employee uses the EAP to get anger management counseling (cause you have that right?).
If there is any possibility that he will be publicly associated with the company, then you have the brand and the company’s reputation to consider as well. Moving him away from a public role, with anger management counseling, and termination upon full investigation of the facts if warranted. And if you don’t have the resources to do all that, can him.
Sorry, I can’t agree. Not all women are considerably smaller than men. And some women are violent. In the Ray Rice situation he admitted guilt. Unfortunately I know of cases where men were justified in hitting a woman. But I do admire a couple of cases where men did not hit a woman back when they would have been justified in doing so. In one case the guy lost a tooth. It’s just not clear cut in every case. And of course women don’t always strike out with a fist. If a woman comes at me with a weapon I’ll punch her if needed to avoid injury.
Now if you have enough video to see that he was unjustified in hitting her then I’d find myself in a tough spot based on the OP. I stated what was ethical and what should be done on that basis. But I’m not always ethical, I just recommend it for others.
Probably a good case for a man POSSIBLY being justified in hitting a woman, is the case of another NFL star YEARS ago. That of quarterback Warren Moon (that’s IF the facts as I understand them, are true). He and his wife were having issues and he was trying to leave the home. As he was gathering his things, she kept hitting him and throwing stuff at him. Then she tried to block the door to keep him from leaving. So he eventually hit her back. That turned into a big case against Moon for domestic assault. I believe the charges were ultimately dropped once those facts came out.
I think that’s the ONLY scenario where a man could be justified in hitting a woman.
Btw, the above scenario or one similar is the ONLY one where I might find hitting a woman justified. Where the man is trying to leave and the woman is impeding him. I DON’T believe in the “tit for tat” argument that anytime a woman hits him first, the man can hit back. Maybe men aren’t always bigger than their women but they ARE almost always stronger. Just because someone hits you first doesn’t mean you get to beat them into a coma.
This is my opinion as well. An employee’s arrest for a misdemeanor simply doesn’t affect 99% of businesses out there, so there should not be any punishment in that regard. Let the legal system do its job.
In the case of the NFL, the employee’s arrest does affect it negatively, so they probably should do something pre-conviction.
Are you a tax-free business subsidized by the local citizenry? Did we give you an interest-free loan to build your facility? Do we invest millions in security and infrastructure to support the crowds of customers getting safely in and out of your office? Are the daily activities of your office broadcast over the Federally subsidized and controlled airways?
And do we, the people, allow all of this on the assumption that your business will provide a unifying force in the community? Are you expected to be a public rallying point? Are your employees held up as role models to our children?
Will the incident be splashed across the local media, causing your business and indeed the entire industry to lose customer base unless you immediately and wholeheartedly take action to prove your absolute condemnation of this act?
Is there obvious and irrefutable proof of the crime available to the aforementioned media and customer base?
No?
Well, in that case, you can probably afford to wait and see whether he is convicted of the crime before you fire the sunuvabeech.
Unless whatever you saw that let you know his temper was bad could be used as a reason, and this just confirms to you that he’s a potential danger to other employees, in which case you have to fire the sunuvabeech now.
Fire him. If he’s willing to commit acts of violence towards someone he supposedly loves I’d be worried about the safety of my other staff. Since the gossip is already out in the office I also wouldn’t want people to have to work with someone who is known to be violent. Keeping him around will just make people uncomfortable, that in itself is reason enough to get rid of him.
If these are the only criteria that you think matter, then you’d be a godawful employer.
If, on the other hand, you’re trying to make some point about how this situation differs the NFL’s, then you’ve missed the entire point of his OP.
There is too much ignorance and misinformation in this post to warrant any kind of reply.
Not having waded thru the entire OP even I will say that in our society the idea of punishing one for having been accused of something is not the usual way of doing things. Yes I am aware that most people prefer to suppress the idea that she hit him first and that a man should never hit a woman even in retaliation.
What right does an employer have to “Punish” Employees?
It depends on the company, but placing employees on some sort of probationary period is quite common in the corporate word. Leagues like the NFL punish employees on a weekly basis.
If you want to make the case that they don’t have that right, be my guest.
Take 1 and 2 in any order:
-
Innocent until proven guilty, FFS, whether the charge is domestic violence, street violence involving trash containers on fire, road rage involving kicked puppies or armed robbery.
-
Let the justice system do its job, that’s what you pay those people for.
The opposite is vigilantism, which I’d rather avoid outside of comic books.
The last day of 1999, remember Y2K? I was driving in Tampa, Florida with the lady whom I lived with at my side in her car. She told me to get in the left lane. I looked and a city bus was coming up along side me, so I didn’t. She slapped me and shouted "I said ‘Left lane!’ " I jerked the wheel and slammed into the side of the bus. Her car, her insurance. She was punished more than if I had hit her back.That wasn’t the first time she had chosen to slap me, but was the last. I packed up and left “Our” house that night and slept 300 miles away.
Yep. If you’re a person, and you bloody or bruise other people (baring the occasional, once-in-a-lifetime justifiable circumstance), odds are, you’re the kind of person I want as far from me as possible. If I have the power to send the spouse beater away from me, instead of having to look at him/her and play nice, you’d better believe I’d avail myself of that power.
“Oh, good morning Ray Rice. Let’s sit in a cubicle together and have meetings and company outings and team building exercises where I have to work really hard to pretend to get along with you and not be disgusted by you and your alpha male dominant aggressive bullshit actions, because it wouldn’t be fair to poor widdle you to have to suffer in society beyond what the government deems appropriate.”
It’ll come down to the following. How much money is the accused bringing into your organization?
Being a suspected domestic abuser is not, to my knowledge, a prohibited reason for terminating someone’s employment in any state. Edit: Maybe in Montana. It’s the only state that’s thrown out at-will employment.
(Although, I don’t know, maybe there’s a case to be made that if the demographics line up a certain way, it’s some kind of discrimination if you can’t prove that firing suspected domestic abuser is a business necessity.)
And just because you hit someone back doesn’t mean they’re going to end up in a coma. Returning *a[/] blow for a blow, if only to demonstrate what a bad idea it is to hit someone who can hit back much harder, strikes me as much more reasonable even though I’ve never found it necessary.