Deryk Engelland forced to shave beard off because of Vegas team policy

[Dogewow]

No...wanting your emloyees to maintain a uniform appearance is not juvenile.

You don't get it at all. You just think you should be able to do whatever the **** you want, and that's just not the way it always works. You can't have a tattoo that says "**** you" on your forehead either. I'm sure certain establishments frown on employees having nose rings, or huge gaping holes in their earlobes, too.

When you employ people, those people are a reflection of your company, and your product. As such, you can have whatever rules you want regarding their appearance. It's not juvenile. It's real life adult ****. You signed a contract to work for a company, and you'l do it under their rules or you won't get paid. You can feel free to pout on the sideline like an entitled brat under suspension for violation of team/company policy.

These are professional athletes. They're not corporate business people, salesmen, in a respective field that requires a specific policy, or needs to sell themselves and be presentable in that fashion.

Yes these owners have the right to institute such a policy, but it doesn't mean that it makes sense, applies to their situation, isn't outdated or that people can't speak out against a policy for being those things.

 

[KingBran]

I disagree with it but I don't see what the big deal is honestly.

 

[haveandare]

No...wanting your emloyees to maintain a uniform appearance is not juvenile.

You don't get it at all. You just think you should be able to do whatever the **** you want, and that's just not the way it always works. You can't have a tattoo that says "**** you" on your forehead either. I'm sure certain establishments frown on employees having nose rings, or huge gaping holes in their earlobes, too.

When you employ people, those people are a reflection of your company, and your product. As such, you can have whatever rules you want regarding their appearance. It's not juvenile. It's real life adult ****. You signed a contract to work for a company, and you'l do it under their rules or you won't get paid. You can feel free to pout on the sideline like an entitled brat under suspension for violation of team/company policy.

IMO, feeling that you need to control the minutia of your employees lives outside of work is pretty ridiculous. Not sure juvenile is the word, but it's definitely silly and more than a little self-destructive for reasons I'll explain below.

This isn't "real life adult ****" for a lot of people. Not sure how old you are or what type of work you're in, but plenty of very, very successful companies don't care about this sort of stuff, or dress, or any number of small details about their employees' personal decisions.

Generally, if you want to get the best talent and performance, you judge people by their talent and performance first, second and third. You can find a lot of hacks who will cut their hair the way you want because they need a job. The truly gifted people will go somewhere else where they're treated like the competent adults they are. Not all of them of course, but some will, and the organizations that lose out on them aren't doing themselves any favors by losing talent over silly stuff like this.

You say if you don't like it you can pout on the sidelines, but most people who don't like it will avoid those organizations all together, many of whom will be immensely talented and will go to other organizations that will benefit from their immense talent. Is it worth losing out on talent to have a bunch of adults groom themselves the way you want? I don't think so but apparently some people do.

 

[Dogewow]

I'd like to see where it says there's any correlation between the two. The point being anyone who was bu++ hur+ about the team policy during that time and either didn't sign or asked to be traded easily could have missed out on some rings.

The way you framed your post made it seem like you were implying a correlation.

 

[ColdSteel2]

IMO, feeling that you need to control the minutia of your employees lives outside of work is pretty ridiculous. Not sure juvenile is the word, but it's definitely silly and more than a little self-destructive for reasons I'll explain below.

This isn't "real life adult ****" for a lot of people. Not sure how old you are or what type of work you're in, but plenty of very, very successful companies don't care about this sort of stuff, or dress, or any number of small details about their employees' personal decisions.

Generally, if you want to get the best talent and performance, you judge people by their talent and performance first, second and third. You can find a lot of hacks who will cut their hair the way you want because they need a job. The truly gifted people will go somewhere else where they're treated like the competent adults they are. Not all of them of course, but some will, and the organizations that lose out on them aren't doing themselves any favors by losing talent over silly stuff like this.

You say if you don't like it you can pout on the sidelines, but most people who don't like it will avoid those organizations all together, many of whom will be immensely talented and will go to other organizations that will benefit from their immense talent. Is it worth losing out on talent to have a bunch of adults groom themselves the way you want? I don't think so but apparently some people do.

You put it perfectly. If it's a coin flip between Vegas and another team, stupid stuff like this and the general tension that comes with it will make the decision easier.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Just because you can make whatever rule you want, does not mean that your rules can't be juvenile.

How does the word juvenile even apply here-specifically to your argument?

 

[Lord Helix]

 

[izlez]

How does the word juvenile even apply here-specifically to your argument?

It applies here, because people were talking about juvenile actions and the action of a boss makisng employees shave beards being "real life ****"

Sure a boss can make and enforce (pretty much) any rule they want. But the fact that it's coming from a boss doesn't in and of itself make it not stupid.

 

[sr edler]

Yes, Lamoriello was all about everyone conforming and no "individuals". No beards, no high numbers, no long hair, no social media, no open practices, nothing. It was so bad that Henrique did a Reddit AMA one time and someone asked what would happen if he did this when Lamoriello was still around he said he'd be fired.

Argentinian former soccer coach Daniel Passarella also banned long hair, so Real Madrid star Fernando Redondo had to cut his beautiful mane off. Also banned by Passarella were earrings and homosexuals.

 

[CelticPride]

Very Nice, wish the Sharks would encorporate this too.

 

[ColbyChaos]

Dont all the players still have their beards? I distinctly remember Engelland having a beard on the home opener

 

[Sol]

How is this thread still going..

 

[Sol]

So let me get this straight, me not wanting to shave my face is juvenile but them wanting me shave face is not juvenile?. Got it.

Look this topic is dumb and should have died a while ago. I didn't want to respond, but I saw this.

These people who you call juvenile set you up for life and want to set up a standard for their employees. They make millionaires out of athletes. I have a beard, I'll shave my beard every day of the week to make a yearly 650k salary...

Sheesh. People making such a fuss about a beard. I've been growing my beard for a while and if my employer is making me a millionaire, I'll happily shave my head too lol. The hill some people want to die on...

 

[Dogewow]

Dont all the players still have their beards? I distinctly remember Engelland having a beard on the home opener

It looks like he definitely trimmed it down, but I noticed that it wasn't fully clean shaven as well. Not sure what the point of that would be, unless they're shooting for a business casual look. But even then, I work in a business casual environment and I see dudes with decently long beards walking around here. Not sure what the point of that would be, either.

 

[tarheelhockey]

These are professional athletes. They're not corporate business people, salesmen, in a respective field that requires a specific policy, or needs to sell themselves and be presentable in that fashion.

Yes these owners have the right to institute such a policy, but it doesn't mean that it makes sense, applies to their situation, isn't outdated or that people can't speak out against a policy for being those things.

This is what I see as the crux of the matter. The players aren’t selling cell phone plans or holding doors at a restaurant. They’re in the entertainment business for goodness sake.

If anything, this is exactly the opposite of the direction the NHL should be going. Recognizable players are good for business.

 

[ManofSteel55]

This is all I can think of in regards to this topic.

 

[izlez]

These people who you call juvenile set you up for life and want to set up a standard for their employees. They make millionaires out of athletes. I have a beard, I'll shave my beard every day of the week to make a yearly 650k salary...

Do they make millionaire's out of athletes?
Does shaving a beard make their skillset?

Or do they have an elite skillset that puts them in the top .01% of an extremely desirable occupation that generates tons and tons of money?

I have a feeling this will be the comment to put an end to this thread, but this comment reminds me a lot of the Kaepernick thing. All the arguments against him are "your employer chooses to pay you" and "your country gave you this opportunity"....at what point are these athletes worth something on their own? (not a real question)

 

[Dogewow]

Look this topic is dumb and should have died a while ago. I didn't want to respond, but I saw this.

These people who you call juvenile set you up for life and want to set up a standard for their employees. They make millionaires out of athletes. I have a beard, I'll shave my beard every day of the week to make a yearly 650k salary...

Sheesh. People making such a fuss about a beard. I've been growing my beard for a while and if my employer is making me a millionaire, I'll happily shave my head too lol. The hill some people want to die on...

They're making the athletes millionaires? Really?

The athletes certainly need the assistance and structure that the NHL and ownership provides, but lets not pretend that these athletes don't make their own way with their own high end talent and ability. If we're really going to get down to the nitty gritty, the fans are the ones paying the millions and the player/game is the product that is generating the interest. You need to remember that a vast majority of the worlds population cant replicate what they provide, and thus puts these high end athletes in a different scenario.

I don't get why people insist on applying the average corporate experience and the standards that apply to some to these .001% athletes , but here we are 12 pages in...

 

[mouser]

Dont all the players still have their beards? I distinctly remember Engelland having a beard on the home opener

Yeah, I'm confused here. Engelland distinctly had a beard in the Vegas games I've watched.

Maybe they just made him actually trim it properly? Thornton and Burns could take a cue from that.

 

[FeatherHead]

It's a hockey team.


You do realize that hair grows on almost all adult men's faces right? That's not the same as a tattoo or piercing.

How would a company that forces women to shave their anything go over in 2017? I honestly don't know if that's a policy at any corporations but I can't imagine it is. Or force them to wear make up.

Yes personal appearance is important, I agree. But it's a hockey team. Show me some kind of proof it matters what a that facial hair matters to a teams performance.

It's not a hockey team. My kid plays on a hockey team. This is a business. A multi billion dollar business. This isn't a rec league. It's their job...at the highest possible level. Your desire to do whatever the **** you please...just doesn't come into play. The people paying your salary don't give a rats **** about you wanting a beard...and your opinion means zippo to them.

 

[FeatherHead]

It's a hockey team.


You do realize that hair grows on almost all adult men's faces right? That's not the same as a tattoo or piercing.

How would a company that forces women to shave their anything go over in 2017? I honestly don't know if that's a policy at any corporations but I can't imagine it is. Or force them to wear make up.

Yes personal appearance is important, I agree. But it's a hockey team. Show me some kind of proof it matters what a that facial hair matters to a teams performance.

You do realize that having that hair remain on your face is voluntary, just like getting a tattoo and letting it remain there, right?

If you don't think a company couldn't force a woman to shave her legs and armpits in an environment where appearance matters, I think you're sorely mistaken. Appearance isn't about performance. No one said it was. When kids attend Catholic school, do you think wearing uniforms is about performance?

I have a job that dictates I wear a suit and tie. I don't get to choose how I appear. If I showed up with an untucked shirt, an unbuttoned collar, a hoop in my nose, etc...I'd never have gotten my job to begin with, much less been able to maintain it...and that would be completely justified.

 

[FeatherHead]

These are professional athletes. They're not corporate business people, salesmen, in a respective field that requires a specific policy, or needs to sell themselves and be presentable in that fashion.

Yes these owners have the right to institute such a policy, but it doesn't mean that it makes sense, applies to their situation, isn't outdated or that people can't speak out against a policy for being those things.

You are wrong. Sports is a HUGE corporate business. Every sports team out there is a corporation. The very fact they have uniforms like so many other professions is indicative of this. And it makes complete sense. It just doesn't make sense to you. You're free to speak out because YOU feel it's outdated. But that doesn't mean you're right. The day you own a professional franchise, you can dictate how the employees whom you pay millions to, dress and groom.

 

[FeatherHead]

IMO, feeling that you need to control the minutia of your employees lives outside of work is pretty ridiculous. Not sure juvenile is the word, but it's definitely silly and more than a little self-destructive for reasons I'll explain below.

This isn't "real life adult ****" for a lot of people. Not sure how old you are or what type of work you're in, but plenty of very, very successful companies don't care about this sort of stuff, or dress, or any number of small details about their employees' personal decisions.

Generally, if you want to get the best talent and performance, you judge people by their talent and performance first, second and third. You can find a lot of hacks who will cut their hair the way you want because they need a job. The truly gifted people will go somewhere else where they're treated like the competent adults they are. Not all of them of course, but some will, and the organizations that lose out on them aren't doing themselves any favors by losing talent over silly stuff like this.

You say if you don't like it you can pout on the sidelines, but most people who don't like it will avoid those organizations all together, many of whom will be immensely talented and will go to other organizations that will benefit from their immense talent. Is it worth losing out on talent to have a bunch of adults groom themselves the way you want? I don't think so but apparently some people do.

I'm aware there are plenty of companies that don't care about it. But there are plenty that do. Saying you don't respect those that do, just because you like the ones that don't....doesn't make the opinion of greater value.

The right response is "I don't agree with their decision, but it's their business and I respect their decision to run it as they see fit."

 

[FeatherHead]

This is what I see as the crux of the matter. The players aren’t selling cell phone plans or holding doors at a restaurant. They’re in the entertainment business for goodness sake.

If anything, this is exactly the opposite of the direction the NHL should be going. Recognizable players are good for business.

You don't think Derek Jeter or Alex Rodriguez were recognizable? You don't think Aaron Judge is recognizable? Not only do none of them have facial hair to make them "recognizable," but they don't even have their names on their jerseys...home or away. But the Yankees are only what, the 2nd most valuable franchise on the face of God's green earth at 3.7 BILLION dollars?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes'_list_of_the_most_valuable_sports_teams

And you say it's the entertainment business for god's sake.... It's routine for directors to have their actors and actresses grow or cut their hair for a part...to gain or lose weight for a part...to pretty much do whatever the **** they tell them to. That's what they're paying them for. Not to express themselves how they see fit. They have a roll to perform, and they signed on the dotted line knowing the terms and conditions of their employment. So did Engelland.

 

[Crease]

Maybe it's because I'm from New York and the Yankees have a similar policy I don't find this to be a story.