Capitalist Definitions: "HR Generalist"...
Groupon Lawsuit: Guess the FLSA Infraction...

The Mets and MLB Say No to 9/11 Hats Due to Funky Non-Solicitation Policy...

Say it with me: Too many of the decisions we make are driven by fear of confronting things that suck.

Case in point:  The New York Mets and Major League Baseball forbid players to wear 9/11 hats on Reyes Sunday.  To be more clear:  The Mets and MLB said no to 9/11 hats in NYC, on the 10 year anniversary of 9/11.

Why would they do that you ask?  If you're in HR, you know there's a horribly flawed policy interpretation coming up.

ESPN's Jason Stark reported this morning that the real reason the Mets and MLB said no was to have the ability to enforce their strict uniform rules in the future.  Apparently, the Washington Nationals had asked to wear "Seal Team Six" hats a few weeks back, and were told "no" under the same policy.

Of course, saying no to 9/11 hats wasn't about having the ability to say no to "Seal Team Six".  It's about saying no to the owner who wants to wear "Masonic Lodge 234" hats because that's what he's into.  You get the vibe...

"We're saying no to this one so we can say no to the terrible ones that are coming.  It's a slippery slope"

Yes - just like the non-solicitation rule you have at your company.  You say no to distributing marketing material of great local organizations because you don't want to deal with Jenny from accounting being pissed off because she can't distribute 200 flyers in the call center.  And more importantly, also because you want the ability to say no to the Teamsters if they want to distribute their stuff.  Legally, you have to do that.

"We're saying no to this one so we can say no to the terrible ones that are coming."  9/11 hats in NYC on the 10-year anniversary of...wait for it...9/11.

Use this example to say no to an incredibly inept policy interpretation in your company today, and in doing that, say yes.  Give your team some credit for knowing the difference between good and bad.

Comments

Steve Boese

The MLB coming down on the Mets for this was indeed, ridiculous. An absolute perfect example of the policy police gone amok. That and the fact that the Mets were indeed wearing 'special' caps for the game. Standard issue Mets caps with an American flag patch sewn in on the side. Special caps that are oddly enough for sale on MLB.com for about $40.

TJ

Lifelong Mets fan here, so the following statements should be treated with the appropriate grains of salt.

MLB should be ashamed of themselves. The hat policy is wholly inconsistent with their previous stances. They said it was because they considered the hats sacrosanct, but as Steve notes above, not too sacrosanct to put a price tag on. Also, anyone else remember 2004 when they tried to put advertising on the bases? Apparently the bases are fair game to the highest bidder, but showing respect on the anniversary of a tragedy is disrespectful to the game.

Also, what makes the hats different? It's OK for a team to put a patch on the uniform in remembrance of someone/something, but the hat has to be just so?

I've never been more angry at Major League Baseball, or disappointed in the Mets, who should have told MLB to shove it. Imagine the PR backlash from fining players for where NYPD/FDNY hats on 9/11. No way MLB follows through in that case.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)