Chaos Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 8 hours ago, Bob Chandler's Hands said: You mean they have been married for 30 years and have three kids together? Yes, they're involved. Yes. If Roth and D'Angelo had gotten married, would that have saved their jobs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 4 hours ago, GunnerBill said: Is it? Why? If the relationship is entirely consensual and not affecting them doing their jobs what is the problem? I explained it above - their particular roles (GC and COO) makes it highly problematic, especially if it violates a written policy. That said, even though she reported to him, I wouldn’t be casually referring to the General Counsel as an “underling.” They’re both usually c-suite titles. This probably could’ve been handled differently by everyone - they should’ve promptly disclosed the relationship (they may not have wanted to because one or both of them may be married), and then her reporting line should’ve been moved over to Terry directly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_In_NH Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 13 hours ago, HappyDays said: Pretty much. Wow I almost made a sarcastic post saying this was happening. Lots of lust in the bills front office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 4 hours ago, GunnerBill said: Is it? Why? If the relationship is entirely consensual and not affecting them doing their jobs what is the problem? They were doing it in Terry's office while the team was in London. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said: I explained it above - their particular roles (GC and COO) makes it highly problematic, especially if it violates a written policy. That said, even though she reported to him, I wouldn’t be casually referring to the General Counsel as an “underling.” They’re both usually c-suite titles. This probably could’ve been handled differently by everyone - they should’ve promptly disclosed the relationship (they may not have wanted to because one or both of them may be married), and then her reporting line should’ve been moved over to Terry directly. That is a different point though - you are saying you think it stops them doing their job properly. Which I accept in theory it could. Not sure in practice it necessarily does but there you go... I understand the need for caution. It is the optics point I don't really agree with. Two adults have sex isn't an optics problem from my perspective. And it feels overly moralistic to make it an optics point. 1 minute ago, Lost said: They were doing it in Terry's office while the team was in London. One thrust for every Bills injury? Edited October 12, 2023 by GunnerBill 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 1 minute ago, GunnerBill said: One thrust for every Bills injury? At least someone enjoyed the game I guess 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 10 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: That is a different point though - you are saying you think it stops them doing their job properly. Which I accept in theory it could. Not sure in practice it necessarily does but there you go... I understand the need for caution. It is the optics point I don't really agree with. Two adults have sex isn't an optics problem from my perspective. And it feels overly moralistic to make it an optics point. One thrust for every Bills injury? I’m not saying that - I’m saying it opens up the organization to unnecessary risk, for a slew of reasons. Agree with you about the optics. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 4 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said: I’m not saying that - I’m saying it opens up the organization to unnecessary risk, for a slew of reasons. Agree with you about the optics. which risks—everyone will start banging everyone else? She’s not a secretary he could promote to VP over a more qualified candidate. She’s the teams lawyer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pocoboy Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 13 hours ago, RobbRiddick said: The happy couple. He's so much bigger than her Quid pro DOH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 was that wrong..... https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/fb412315-0a1f-4cb7-9cd7-8c216d290a34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaenon Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 Ter, Hit me up if you are looking to replace them both with just one sensible and logical person. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgewaycynic2013 Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 47 minutes ago, PBF81 said: Was that the movie where Pacino says "Hooah"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your Brown Eye Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 Time to trim the fat folks. Too many people were sucking on the teet of Josh Allen's success with nothing to show for it themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 14 hours ago, JJGauna said: Should I leave my resume under the door? Please do, we will enjoy posting about your firing six months or so from now 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Day 10 Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: which risks—everyone will start banging everyone else? She’s not a secretary he could promote to VP over a more qualified candidate. She’s the teams lawyer. It exposes the company to allegations of quid pro quo, serial harassment, favoritism/gender discrimination, retaliation, and numerous other problems. It's not limited to a promotion. It can include wages, overtime, company functions/perks, office space, and general treatment in the workplace. This could create a massive problem. NYS is a tough place for this as well. If they were PDA-ing at work (or a business trip), which seems to be what was happening in London, that's another issue. Both these people are replaceable. If this were handled early and properly, they would have separated them on the org chart (or maybe one resigns). If it were a Mail room employee and supervisor, they could go to management and one could be moved to a separate area. Edited October 12, 2023 by May Day 10 1 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBF81 Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Ridgewaycynic2013 said: Was that the movie where Pacino says "Hooah"? Scent of a Woman Either that or you're thinking of Elaine Benes. Edited October 12, 2023 by PBF81 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: which risks—everyone will start banging everyone else? She’s not a secretary he could promote to VP over a more qualified candidate. She’s the teams lawyer. Have you ever worked for a professional company? You're outing yourself as someone who has never had to sit through a manager-level HR training program (good for you, they suck). The risk that other employees would bring harassment claims and point to that relationship as evidence of a lackadaisical workplace culture (or worse). The risk that she would sue for retaliation if fired. Many others. This is standard practice. Want more risk? The risk that Terry ends up being the subject of an article like this one. You just can't have this stuff going on between your chief risk officers, especially if it wasn't disclosed per company policy, violates company policy, and/or was so out in the open and reckless that it makes everyone uncomfortable. Edited October 12, 2023 by Coach Tuesday 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 8 hours ago, SUNY_amherst said: Stadium planning is 300 mil + over budget too. Pegula is doing a bang up job Yeah, that's Terry's fault. 56 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: which risks—everyone will start banging everyone else? She’s not a secretary he could promote to VP over a more qualified candidate. She’s the teams lawyer. And, again, entirely replaceable. As is he. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 27 minutes ago, May Day 10 said: It exposes the company to allegations of quid pro quo, serial harassment, favoritism/gender discrimination, retaliation, and numerous other problems. It's not limited to a promotion. It can include wages, overtime, company functions/perks, office space, and general treatment in the workplace. This could create a massive problem. NYS is a tough place for this as well. If they were PDA-ing at work (or a business trip), which seems to be what was happening in London, that's another issue. Both these people are replaceable. If this were handled early and properly, they would have separated them on the org chart (or maybe one resigns). If it were a Mail room employee and supervisor, they could go to management and one could be moved to a separate area. So if they moved her to a different box on a chart everything would be ok? 26 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said: Have you ever worked for a professional company? You're outing yourself as someone who has never had to sit through a manager-level HR training program (good for you, they suck). The risk that other employees would bring harassment claims and point to that relationship as evidence of a lackadaisical workplace culture (or worse). The risk that she would sue for retaliation if fired. Many others. This is standard practice. Want more risk? The risk that Terry ends up being the subject of an article like this one. You just can't have this stuff going on between your chief risk officers, especially if it wasn't disclosed per company policy, violates company policy, and/or was so out in the open and reckless that it makes everyone uncomfortable. I work for the largest employer in the county. We all do these mandatories every year. Which employees would bring "harassment claims" against the Bills solely because these two were dating? Who is being harassed by this? And if this was so out in the open, why did Pegula promote them just a few months ago? Is he that clueless that he's the only one who didn't know? If' he's the only one who didn't know, doesn't that dent your theory that wide knowledge of this would completely corrode workplace morale and bring a flurry of "claims"? Also, the article you linked doesn't describe what happened at OBD. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted October 12, 2023 Share Posted October 12, 2023 Just now, Doc said: Yeah, that's Terry's fault. And, again, entirely replaceable. As is he. No one is disputing that--it's not germane to the discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.