Spoken like the true CRACK HEAD Dumb A$$ That you are!!! Got a problem with that? Suck * ME BOY!!! Come visit me and tell me all about it. My friend KARMA says DITO that!! Stupid* A$$!!!Obviously I have done a poor job of phrasing my question because you are all arguing points that I don't disagree with.
My perception of the outrage of the NFL's weak punishment is that people feel like Rice has suffered no punishment by the hand of law enforcement(and he hasn't) and SOMEBODY needs to punish him. So they expect his employer to do so. They feel his employer has a responsibility to step up where law enforcement failed. This is my perception of the situation and this is what I disagree with. I have no problem if an employer chooses to no longer employ such an individual or levy some other punishment, but I don't feel they owe it to the community at large to be the de facto judge & jury in lieu of the percieved failure of the legal system.
Dog, if you accepted a job that included drug testing and being clean as a condition of employment, then yes, you can be punished for it even if you were not smoking up on the clock. This illustrates what an employer has a RIGHT to do in order to protect their own interests, not something they are doing out of responsibility to the community. I have zero issue with this.
Toj, you agree with me that your employer would not have any responsibility to punish you...but could do so if there was some clause written into your contrct. Responsibiity vs right
Zap. Again. No argument from me over what the NFL has a right to do based on the terms of the player's contract.(However I disagree that they had an obligation to punish him. Unless the specific act committed is spelled out, the punishment or lack thereof is up to the discretion of the employer.)
Sub. I agree. Employer has a responsibility to protect their brand. But that is a responsibility they have to themselves based on self interest. My question is whether or not an employer has a responsibility to un-involved/unffected 3rd parties simply because they have the power to do what those parties want.
I agree with all of you, but its not the question I was presenting. Hopefully I have explained myslef more clearly.