ftwdrummer Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, Terri Schehr said: That’s a husband and wife. Like the Rennicks with SCV. I can’t imagine that anyone would have a gripe with that. And that relationship would seem to not be a superior/subordinate thing (just because in my mind FE and the line are equivalent). That said, if that's not the case, shame on Catherine for having a relationship with a subordinate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84BDsop Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 49 minutes ago, Terri Schehr said: That’s a husband and wife. Like the Rennicks with SCV. I can’t imagine that anyone would have a gripe with that. Given how things are today, I wouldn't be entirely sure. How about a boy/girlfriend who join the staff then? The policy's aim is all well and good, but it appears to make no allowances for previously existing relationships....and it makes no distinction between husband/wife, boy/girlfriend, or something that starts between 2 people after they join the org. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbc03 Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 7 minutes ago, 84BDsop said: Given how things are today, I wouldn't be entirely sure. How about a boy/girlfriend who join the staff then? The policy's aim is all well and good, but it appears to make no allowances for previously existing relationships....and it makes no distinction between husband/wife, boy/girlfriend, or something that starts between 2 people after they join the org. Previously existing relationships shouldn't matter when it comes to subordinates. Just because a relationship started before a professional relationship started doesn't mean that someone wouldn't feel pressured to stay in a relationship because it could hurt their professional life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84BDsop Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 37 minutes ago, dbc03 said: Previously existing relationships shouldn't matter when it comes to subordinates. Just because a relationship started before a professional relationship started doesn't mean that someone wouldn't feel pressured to stay in a relationship because it could hurt their professional life. True....but someone with an axe to grind could use the wording to take a swipe at someone, even if that relationship started before. Not taking that into account in the wording is asking for trouble in the future. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 (edited) nm Edited May 10, 2018 by GUARDLING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liahona Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 2 hours ago, Terri Schehr said: That’s a husband and wife. Like the Rennicks with SCV. I can’t imagine that anyone would have a gripe with that. it sure would be a real long summer for them if that was the case... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 4 hours ago, 84BDsop said: What about a sitch where 2 people ALREADY in a relationship join the staff? Tom Float as perc cap head and his wife Catherine as FE arranger, for example? Married couples would be an exception to this rule, of course it is also good to remember that often in the business world, relatives are not hired. There are many exceptions, but it is considered good practice. It is very unlikely staff members would be married to marching members. In theory, this is a no fraternizing rule that is not all that different from college policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Tim K said: Married couples would be an exception to this rule, of course it is also good to remember that often in the business world, relatives are not hired. There are many exceptions, but it is considered good practice. It is very unlikely staff members would be married to marching members. In theory, this is a no fraternizing rule that is not all that different from college policies. 1 Oh this has happened over the years. Edited May 10, 2018 by GUARDLING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbc03 Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 3 hours ago, 84BDsop said: True....but someone with an axe to grind could use the wording to take a swipe at someone, even if that relationship started before. Not taking that into account in the wording is asking for trouble in the future. I'm specifically saying that it should be taken into account and NOT allowed. Nobody should be in a relationship with someone that is under them in the management chain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 1 hour ago, GUARDLING said: Oh this has happened over the years. I know many staff members have married marching members, but how many married couples are there in drum corps today where one is staff and the other is marching? The average age today for a couple getting married is 27 for women and 29 for men, and those who are older than the average have usually attended college. I believe that the last time the average age of someone getting married was under 22 was 1960, perhaps a bit earlier. 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.