Reference no: EM133627398

Homework: Why You Need Digital Transformation Agency?

Textbook: Sports Leadership in the 21st Century by Laura J. Burton, Gregory M. Kane and John F. Borland, Second Edition. Chapter 6.

Case Study: Legalizing Discrimination and Sport

On March 26, 2016, the North Carolina legislature passed the "Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act" most commonly known as House Bill 2 (HB2) or the "Bathroom Bill." HB2, signed into law by then-governor Pat McCrory, effectively "nullified local ordinances around the state that would have expanded protections for the LGBT community" (Gordon, Price, & Peralta, 2016). Under the new law, sexual orientation and gender identity expression were not considered "protected classes" (i.e., race, religion, color, national origin, age, disability, or biological sex) against discrimination. Furthermore, and perhaps the most controversial aspect of this law, is that it required transgender people to use public restrooms based on their birth sex rather than their gender identity.

Backlash to HB2 was immediate. Major corporations, national, and international corporations, including PayPal, Deutsche Bank, and Time Warner, halted expansion efforts that would have added thousands of jobs and millions of dollars to the North Carolina economy. By December 2016, seven states and over two dozen cities and counties issued travel bans prohibiting government employees from non-essential travel to North Carolina. Trade shows and professional associations canceled events and conferences in cities around the state, resulting in the loss of several million dollars. Bruce Springsteen, Ringo Starr, Pearl Jam, Demi Lovato, Nick Jonas, and Maroon 5 canceled shows in cities around the state in protest of the anti-LGBT legislation (Bort, 2016).

Sport organizations also expressed their opposition to HB2. The National Basketball Association (NBA) relocated the 2017 NBA All-Star game from Charlotte to New Orleans, Louisiana. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) stripped North Carolina of hosting rights for seven NCAA-sanctioned tournaments and championships. The Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) moved all neutral-site sport championships, including the ACC football championship, out of North Carolina. Leaders of state colleges and universities in Minnesota deemed sport travel non-essential, thereby banning travel to North Carolina (Shipley, 2016). This move also prevented some student athletes from participating in national championships. The University of Vermont women's basketball team also canceled their game at the University of North Carolina (UNC) in protest of HB2. Because Vermont canceled the game, they also forfeited $17,500 of guaranteed money from UNC (Carter, 2016).

HB2 has since been partially repealed and many companies and organizations, including the NCAA, have reinstated events and travel to North Carolina. However, given the potential for discriminatory legislation in other states, leaders in sport must follow ethical decision-making principles when considering their organization's position on discriminatory practices and practices that might harm the health and well-being of their athletes. In addition, sport leaders must also recognize the potential ethical issues (e.g., athletes lose opportunities to participate) that may arise when banning or boycotting activities.

Task

Question I. An important part of the ethical decision-making process is to first recognize an ethical dilemma. Considering the examples provided in this section, should sport organizations boycott participation in states with discriminatory laws?

Question II. What situational factors in sport can provide leaders with the tools to successfully navigate an ethical dilemma? Read through the chapter to help answer this question.

Question III. Explain how you could use the ethical decision-making model described in the chapter to determine whether you would allow your team to participate in a state with discriminatory laws.