For those of you that enjoy seeing Barry Cooper get the beat down, I submit this cut and paste from Robb Wof's blog postings about why he was fired. Robb has a friend/client named Dave who is a lawyer. Barry tries to butt heads with Dave and loses rather spectacularly. The Barry beat down mostly starts of page 11 here:
http://robbwolf.com/?p=976
Barry Cooper's points in
italics.
Ok, Barry, if you REALLY want to go there:
I am, thankfully, not an attorney. I don’t know any attorneys who like their >jobs, the bulk of the time, although they like cashing the checks.
So is this supposed to intone that ALL attorneys hate their jobs? Or what. You kind of lost me there with your ‘logic’. Its kind of funny that you mention lawyers not liking their jobs however, because I had gotten to that point a couple of years ago. The reality was, however, that not only did I not like my job, I did not like much of anything. I was tired all the time, I had no energy, I was depressed and short tempered. I blamed it on all kinds of things, stress, having a weak immune system, medical issues, etc. Now why am I including this personal information, in this Robb v HQ debate, because you made it relevant. I LOVE being an attorney again. I Love almost everything about my life now. You know why……because when the doctors finally told me that they did not know what else to do for me, Rob gave me a simple, but scary suggestion: Try Paleo.
Turns out I suffer from Celiac’s Disease, (even my allergist had missed that possibility). My doctors have been amazed at my turn around, and have the testing results SHOWING how my blood tests went from universally horrible and off the scale bad, to being in almost all “excellent” range within 90 days. So here I am 60 lbs lighter, strong as an ox, all of the myrid medical problems I had been dealing with my entire life virtually vanished over night. I still don’t like the punishing WOD’s, I still have at least another 25 lbs to lose, and I think many of you “athletes” are crazy for the things you like to do, but I feel Great. I have two attorney friends who have now joined our gym, guess what, they are feeling better too. So watch out, there is a growing movement of revitalized attorneys looking to make sure that everyone knows the benefits of Paleo. =)
Now on to your points:
…is that this was not an official CrossFit event. If it had been, HQ would have determined the content. Dave and others were there in their own capacities. Legally, this exempts the corporation from responsibility, in my understanding.
Wow, for not being a lawyer, you sure try to make a legal conclusion. Problem is that Dave was there as a representative of CF Inc. He was there in an official capacity. If you think I am wrong, let him show you his receipt for being simply a ‘paying participant’.
Moreover, this was not a workplace event. This was a seminar put on by a group of individuals, and attended by people who were unconnected corporately. It was the legal equivalent of a seminar on how to get rich in Real Estate. To the extent there is legal culpability, it would fall on those whose names were on the room reservation, and who took the fees that were paid. This would include, presumably, Greg Everett himself.
BUZZZ…. Wrong again. The issue of “work place” violence and “hostile work environment” is not limited strictly to a conventional office or factory. Robb had a personal services contract with CF Inc. as an independent contractor. So while not technically an “employee” he had an employment contract with CF Inc. Dave is a supervisor for CF Inc. He was there representing CF Inc. There is your “corporate” connection, (though technically such is not required under current law). The issue is that Dave, as a supervisory employee of CF Inc., engaged in what appears to be hostile, demeaning and violent behavior WHILE representing CF Inc. That gives Robb an issue of hostile work environment, Greg an issue of assault, and the sponsors of the Black Box a claim for tortious interference.
Let me make it easy for you: IF what Dave did and said was not “relevant”, if this was some “off the record” meeting having no professional or CF connection such that what Dave said and did should not be seen as having anything to do with CF Inc., THEN that same rational would require that what Robb and Greg said would have to be viewed in the same light, and therefore immune from CF Inc. review, comment and punishment YET, you have Dave there, representing CF Inc., and then telling both Robb and Greg that they were “done” with CF, based on what they said at this event. Hmmm, good luck finding a jury to buy that hunk of cheese.
It doesn’t surprise me that the first impulse of an attorney would be to think legal sanctions and litigation. If your only tool is a hammer, all problems start to look like nails.
Hmm, again. Is this supposed to mean something? Or do you just like reading such nonsensical tripe? I have a whole tool chest at my disposal, (both literally and figuratively). The point is that the law imposes certain duties on Corporations. If you don’t understand this, the primary reason why owners choose to operate their businesses through a corporation is to acquire both liability and tax protections. In return for these protections, the corporation is held up to a higher legal standard and can not be unilaterally operated by a single individual. Failing to live up to these standards or allowing one person to have unfettered control, thereby violates those standards, and allows shareholders, (potentially affiliates), and 3rd parties to sue the individual shareholders, officers and directors of the corporation. This is commonly known as “piercing the corporate veil”.
As far as the legal interests of the Corporation, you do understand, don’t you, that affiliation is not ownership in CrossFit, Inc (or whatever it is) itself?
Yes, I understand that, but do you understand that ‘ownership’ is not required to file such lawsuits against a corporation in this situation. Rather than ownership, all one has to be able to allege, is that they 1) relied on CF Inc. to follow the law, 2) that CF Inc., failed to follow the law, 3) they were somehow damaged thereby. That is a negligence primer, (Duty, Breach and Causation). When discussing work place violence, then you have the added statutory duties that may impose punitive damages for failure of the Corporation to fully meet its duty under the law. What do you think it would do to the CF Brand, and the individual affiliates that paid money to affiliate with CF Inc., if Dave’s tantrum became an internet sensation. What do you think would happen if CF Inc., failed to properly investigate this situation, only to have Dave physically hurt someone later?
As a lawyer, I admit to having a different view of things. That different view is a capability to remove emotion, and look at the underlying issues. If you actually read my posts, you will notice that I have not said Robb did nothing wrong. What I originally stated, (and still believe), is that there is blame to go around for the situation developing as it did. HOWEVER, if what has been related is remotely accurate, Dave created a potential firestorm of liability problems for CF Inc., (especially for any future events). All someone will have to claim down the line, is that Dave hurt them, created a hostile work environment, etc. and that CF Inc., and all of its officers, directors, and shareholders should have known his propensity for violence, that they failed to make an adequate investigation in this case, and such failure to take these mandated steps, thereby caused the person’s injuries. Then…..there goes CF Inc., there goes the affiliation, there goes the brand, there goes the community, (and honestly, there goes Glassman’s house, retirement, etc., along with everyone else involved with the corp.
The people who own CrossFit the brand are small in number, and may actually be limited to the Glassman’s themselves. Their “fiduciary duty”, such that it is, is to themselves, legally. Your argument, therefore, is empty.
Please review your first statement, “you are not a lawyer”. Second, review what a corporation is, legally. I have an 8 volume set in my office called the California Corporations Code. Please note that the vast majority of duties of the officers and directors of a corporation, are DUEL duties to those of their stockholders and the STATE. Their knowing failure to follow such rules, laws and duties, make them not only liable to the stockholders, but to anyone else who relies on the Corporation, (affiliates), to anyone hurt by their failure to follow the law, and to the state and potentially federal government. Not only are there reporting requirements to both state and feds, there are also required reports to their corporate liability carrier. If CF Inc., does not investigate this incident appropriately, I doubt they will appropriately fill out their disclosure statement to their liability carrier. This form is signed under penalty of perjury. Get my drift. This is a mine field of both civil and criminal liability.
but I do think that the attendees will in fact be getting a Nutrition Expert, as promised.
Again, you apparently missed the point. The relevant issue is not that Robb is “irreplaceable”, the issues is that CF Inc., should be employing a flexible corporate structure that allows its experts to give the best information they have, in a continual effort to support the best training and information available. That is how the brand is going to continue to grow, because rather than Excluding ideas, it is a system for INCLUDING and PROMOTING those practices that show actual success. That is the basic framework of an “open source” system, (which is why this is so reminiscent of Wizards of the Coast and Peter Adkinson), who pioneered this very concept in the publication industry, and who later lost his empire due to succumbing to his own dictatorial and control demons. What CF Inc., seems to be saying, (and you have even admitted to), regardless of data, proof, and evidence against the Zone Diet being the one stop shop for everyone, CF Inc. wants to continue to promote that idea to the exclusion of all others. Why? Because that is the way Glassman wants it? Because that is what Dave wants? If it is any answer other than because it is the BEST answer, then it is repugnant to the corporate mission, and will devalue the brand.
”… that does not affect the brand of CrossFit at all. Most people will never meet Coach Glassman.
If you happen to read my posts, you will see that I have Never mentioned such old issues. However, CF Inc., is the issue here, not Glassman. If CF Inc., does not follow the law, (and if someone wants to go after them for it), then we will all suffer. Even more likely, nothing will happen “this time”, because Robb and Greg will move on and not want to dwell on this. But the next time Dave gets out of line, those lawyers who are just looking at a paycheck, are going to carve up CF Inc., and the Glassman family, and will be able to do so, because of their failures to live up to their legal obligations.
Bill Gates has ALWAYS been notorious for his tirades. His business, none the less, has done well, as I think we can agree. This aspect of his personality is, for most people, completely irrelevant.
You do know that Bill Gates has not had any management control in almost 15 years, right? His tirades, control issues, and bad business practices, and the law suits they spawned, caused his institutional investors to push him out of management. He cost his company BILLIONS of dollars that they are still paying. Again, many times, the most gifted, smart and creative individuals, have a horrible time managing businesses, because their ‘character’ flaws, tend to multiply in severity.
More generally, I can see why I annoy some of you: I argue my case rationally, and you have no response.
Oh please, get over yourself. If your posts are what you believe constitute “logical arguments”, then you need to take a course in Logic and Critical Thinking. You might then understand the difference between a logical analogy and a self-serving example. Your posts are devoid of the first, and filled with the second, (I wanted to make sure you understood my comment). You annoy people for the same reason I do. We are long winded, full of ourselves, and ultimately stroking our own egos. The only difference, is that I let people know when I am jerking them off, and you think you are actually getting away with it unnoticed.
It must be frustrating.
Nope, I rather enjoy this. Please continue dithering on if you must. But then again, I am an ass.
You COULD use this as a learning experience. You COULD try to see things from my point of view.
I have learned much from you, and I always try to see things from others points of view. I don’t think what I learned is what you intended, and unfortunately, part of what I have learned is that you don’t really have a point of view…..other than you want to give Glassman cart blanch to do, say, or act in any way he wants, (even if such violates the law). Everything else you have written, is just “your” justification for your position.
Or, of course, you can insult me. If you’ve been reading me long, surely none of you are stupid enough to think that will make an iota of difference, except in the direction of increasing my mental focus, and tenacity in the defense of my viewpoints, which you have otherwise left untouched?
When I addressed you directly in my post, it was in the hope, that I could bait you to do what you have done, (respond). I don’t need to insult you, I just need to keep you writing. So please, do increase your mental focus, and your tenacity…..it is your only hope. =)