Monday, February 03, 2020
Sports talk is wrong?
Chartered Management Institute CEO Ann Francke believes workplaces should move to curtail “chat about football or cricket” as being divisive; excluding women, and “a gateway to more laddish behaviour.” Francke does not want such behaviour banned — just ‘moderated.’ In corporate HR speak this is a meaningless distinction – why moderate when you can ban?
Further, does Francke think sports talk should be penalised? If she wants employers to ‘moderate’ such chat, if an avid football fan does not comply will there be consequences? And if so, what consequences are appropriate?
Perhaps employees should be provided a pre-approved list of conversation topics. Although, if sports are an offensive gateway drug to debauched discussion it is hard to imagine what topics are appropriate.
We all appreciate feeling included in the workplace. But employees should not be forced to stop discussing topics they’re interested in because someone might feel excluded.
SOURCE
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Clearly Ann Francke doesn't realize that men don't feel excluded if women talk about: what was on Oprah, where to get that new dress/shoes/jewelry/makeup, the newest diet/exercise fad. Men simply have no interest in those things and just ignore those conversations, just like women should ignore conversations men have about things women have no interest in.
And what about the women who are sports fans?
She's just being sexist by saying that only men are interested in sports.
Think of all those women who go to the stadiums to watch a ballgame and not always with their Husbands or Boyfriends they just go because they enjoy sports
Post a Comment