Reference no: EM132111345

Bullying in the Locker Room The team locker room was a tough place for everyone, but especially for new players like Thomas. As part of a culture designed to “toughen up” players, every player felt free to harass every other member of the team. Slurs and taunts were hurled openly on the field and in the locker room with seemingly no topic being off limits. To an outsider it would appear that many of the players were being bullied by stronger, more senior, members of the team. However, these same players often commented that although “things were done in a humorous and maybe off-color way, they were not intended to make anyone feel bullied or abused or anything of that nature” and actually stemmed from the desire to develop a culture of locker-room “brotherhood,” not bullying. Thomas felt differently, and even though the teasing and vulgar banter went on between him and all the players, with references to sex, drugs, violence, and bawdy behavior, often in a jocular tone, he still felt uncomfortable. Often complaining to his parents and friends that bullying and harassment at the hands of his teammates caused him “significant emotional distress,” everyone was surprised when he abruptly left the team, was briefly hospitalized, and then underwent counseling for emotional issues. His teammates commented that Thomas should have toughened up and not let the “sticks and stones” break his bones. They felt that as far as some of the words that were used toward him, he should have been more confident and secure in his sexuality, not letting anything that anybody called him or said to him affect his need to go about his business and do the best he could for the team. Teammates went on to say that, “bullying was not the appropriate term for what happened because nobody physically harmed him or made him do anything and he always had an option to say yes or no. It was never like he got bullied and was in fear for his life.” Privately some of his coaches commented that he shouldn’t have kept the situation to himself and should have let others know how he felt. The coaches and even some of his teammates felt completely blindsided because everybody wasn’t aware of the extent of the taunting. In fact, since Thomas was also sending messages back and forth and kind of joking with them, everyone thought he was in on the joking and they didn’t see the situation for what it was. Responding to the Case

1. Thomas’ coach survived the fallout but was heavily criticized for claiming he was unaware of the fraternity-house behavior happening in the locker room. Is it reasonable to believe a coach or any supervisor responsible for creating and monitoring the workplace environment could not know what was happening in their organization? Why or why not? 11-18. Discuss the topic of group norms as related to this case. How might revising the group norms improve this situation?

2. Is it reasonable to assume that regardless of your relationship with your teammates, or coworkers, you will still show them respect in the workplace? Why or why not?

3. Should an organization be expected to monitor and discipline employees engaged in abusive “locker room behavior” intended to toughen up fellow workers and develop an organizational “brotherhood?” Why or why not?

4. Is the concept of a team bonding through the subjugation and humiliation of some of its junior members valid or do these behaviors exist primarily for the amusement of the more senior members of the group? What does this behavior say about organizational values??