Amy Palcic fired for 'cultural' reasons (1 Viewer)

... only woman to hold top public relations responsibilities for a team. The staff she led won the 2017 Rozelle Award for the NFL’s best PR staff as voted by the Pro Football Writers of America.

NFL media reacted to the news of Palcic’s firing on Twitter:

“This is a stunning move. Stunning. @amypalcic is one of the best media-relations people I’ve met in my 36 years covering the NFL. Top 5,” wrote NBC Sports’ Peter King.

“The Texans have turned into one of the worst organizations in football since Bob McNair died. @amypalcic was the best. She certainly was too good for what the Texans deserve,” wrote Pro Football Talk’s Charean Williams.

“Amy is widely respected around the league. This is a shocker,” wrote Newsday’s Bob Glauber, the president of the PFWA.

“A terrible decision by Houston. Amy is elite at her job. She was a true asset to that organization and a total pro,” wrote Yahoo Sports’ Pete Thamel.

“Shocked. Palcic is the consummate professional & always a pleasure to deal with...

Click to expand...

...  "If Amy Palcic isn’t a 'cultural fit,' then the Texans’ culture is absolutely rancid," tweeted ESPN's Jeff Darlington.

...  "The BS 'cultural fit' the @HoustonTexans are talking about is that Amy cares more for the players than the organization does. Anyone in the NFL knows she’s one of the best at her job, hence the Texans couldn’t cite her performance, but bad organizations always find a way to lose."

Watt also spoke highly of Palcic, who was key when Watt raised more than $37 million to help the city after Hurricane Harvey.

"I think you can tell from the universal response from prominent people in the business what type of person Amy is and how well-respected and well-liked she is, both inside of our building and outside the building," Watt said during a Zoom call with the media Wednesday. "Extremely professional. Just really good at her job. Cared a lot. Just wants what’s best for the team and what’s best for the organization. Always trying to do what’s best and was a massive helping hand with me during the hurricane and during my entire time here. I think it's a very difficult loss. She’s an incredible person and I think she’s going have another job in an absolute heartbeat."

Click to expand...

Mary Kay Cabot@MaryKayCabot

This is a shocker. Amy, formerly with the #Browns , is amazing

Matt Miller@nfldraftscout

Disgraceful. Amy is amazing. What are the Texans doing?

Click to expand...

• Pinned at the top of her page an RBG post honoring progressive groundbreaker.
  

• Hysterical tweet about a political gaffe by a certain campaign that would be sure to make some displeased.
  

Alex Sexton@SlexAxton  ·Nov 7

I feel like we didn’t focus enough on the fact that someone in the Trump campaign meant to schedule the “four seasons hotel” but definitely accidentally scheduled this “four seasons landscaping” store and they had to follow through with it.

Veep was not this good.

Click to expand...

Sea Duck said:

What does this story have to do with politics?

Click to expand...

Mookie said:

It appears she was fired because she made fun of the Trump campaign.  

Click to expand...

Kal El said:

Then maybe they shouldn't have been so easy to make fun of.

Click to expand...

Mookie said:

Low hanging fruit.  Me want.

Click to expand...

Sea Duck said:

What does this story have to do with politics?

Click to expand...

... Some in league circles also has asked, given the timing, whether the move was influenced by the recent outcome of the presidential election.

In 2017, then-Texans tackle Duane Brown shared with PFT a story from 2008, in the aftermath of team founder Bob McNair’s infamous “[w]e can’t have the inmates running the prison” remark during the anthem controversy. Specifically, Brown said that McNair expressed dismay to players regarding the outcome of the election that saw Democratic candidate Barack Obama defeat Republican candidate John McCain.

“He came to talk to the team,” Brown said regarding McNair, who died in November 2018. “He was visibly upset about it. He said, ‘I know a lot of y’all are happy right now, but it’s not the outcome that some of us were looking for.’ That was very shocking to me.”

McNair denied making the remarks, but former Texans tight end Owen Daniels confirmed the incident.

Palcic on Saturday tweeted that the election of Vice President Kamala Harris amounts to a “historic day,” adding that “[t]o every little girl out there … you can be ANYTHING you dream of!” Palcic also retweeted a message from actress Reese Witherspoon, who called it a “monumental day.” (Palcic’s most recent tweet contains a viral video of a girl struggling (and failing) to not cackle while explaining the Trump campaign Saturday press conference not at the Four Seasons hotel but at Four Seasons Total Landscaping, a business sandwiched between a sex shop and a crematorium.)

Given that the firing came within four days after the posting of those tweets, and that the Texans had a two-week break from October 25 through November 8 during which it would have made much more sense to make the move, it’s not unreasonable to wonder whether Palcic’s celebration of the election result sparked the termination.

Click to expand...

Mookie said:

It appears she was fired because she made fun of the Trump campaign.  

Click to expand...

Summer Wheat said:

Dam, now you can get fired for supporting Trump or making fun of Trump.  Who is she anyway?

Click to expand...

randall146 said:

I've never heard of this woman and have no idea why she got fired, but a PR professional should know better than anyone that you can get fired for expressing your personal political beliefs. 

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

This.

Is it sad that a qualified person lost their job because of posting about politics?  Absolutely.  But, she should know better.  It's her prerogative to share her thoughts about it and she's also at risk of losing her job if those above her hold a different take. 

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

randall146 said:

I've never heard of this woman and have no idea why she got fired, but a PR professional should know better than anyone that you can get fired for expressing your personal political beliefs. 

Click to expand...

This.

Is it sad that a qualified person lost their job because of posting about politics?  Absolutely.  But, she should know better.  It's her prerogative to share her thoughts about it and she's also at risk of losing her job if those above her hold a different take.

Click to expand...

Rich Conway said:

All true.  Similarly, those doing the firing shouldn't complain if fans organize boycotts of team gear or if players make their opinions known.

Click to expand...

Manster said:

Cancel culture continues

Click to expand...

Rich Conway said:

Haven't we been told over and over again how cancel culture is only promoted by "the left"?  This would seem to contradict that argument.

Click to expand...

Manster said:

I think the left has been waaaay more aggressive, and ridiculous with it, for sure.  But it's obviously not an exclusive thing. 

Click to expand...

Rich Conway said:

To be clear, I don't actually think this is an example of "cancel culture", to the extent that's a thing.  This is an example of "if you post things your boss or employer doesn't like on social media, you might get fired".  In other news, it's also a bad idea to march into your boss's office and call him/her a nasty name.

Click to expand...

randall146 said:

I've never heard of this woman and have no idea why she got fired, but a PR professional should know better than anyone that you can get fired for expressing your personal political beliefs. 

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

This.

Is it sad that a qualified person lost their job because of posting about politics?  Absolutely.  But, she should know better.  It's her prerogative to share her thoughts about it and she's also at risk of losing her job if those above her hold a different take. 

Click to expand...

Texas. Employers may not retaliate against employees for voting a certain way by reducing or threatening to reduce their compensation or benefits.

Click to expand...

randall146 said:

I've never heard of this woman and have no idea why she got fired, but a PR professional should know better than anyone that you can get fired for expressing your personal political beliefs. 

Click to expand...

Rich Conway said:

To be clear, I don't actually think this is an example of "cancel culture", to the extent that's a thing.  This is an example of "if you post things your boss or employer doesn't like on social media, you might get fired".  In other news, it's also a bad idea to march into your boss's office and call him/her a nasty name.

Click to expand...

IvanKaramazov said:

I don't like the term "false equivalency" because lazy people tend to use it as a way to avoid confronting uncomfortable parallels, but it seems to apply here.  We all presumably think it's okay to discipline workers for cussing out their boss -- it's insubordination, if nothing else.  On the other hand, posting something political on your personal social media account is a lot more like putting a political yard sign outside your house.  There's no valid reason why your boss should care who you support for what office, or why.

By making this particular comparison -- conflating this case with an uncontroversial for-cause termination -- you make it sound as if you support firing workers for their political views.  I doubt that's the argument you meant to make.  

Click to expand...

Rich Conway said:

I freely admit there's a fine line here.  I certainly don't support firing workers for having political views.  That's obviously not what happened here.  She was fired for expressing those views publicly in a manner which her employer found objectionable, which is where the fine line begins.  Do I think she should have been fired for this?  No.  Do I think it's within the employer's rights to fire her?  Yes.  Should she have maybe been cognizant of her employer's views and considered those before posting?  Probably.  Would I be fine with fans organizing boycotts or players refusing to sign free agent agreements in the future due to this?  Sure.

To carry this further, if I learned that one of my employees was publicly promoting QAnon theories, I would absolutely consider firing them, as I would consider such an act to reflect on their judgement and intelligence.

Click to expand...

Rich Conway said:

I freely admit there's a fine line here.  I certainly don't support firing workers for having political views.  That's obviously not what happened here.  She was fired for expressing those views publicly in a manner which her employer found objectionable, which is where the fine line begins.  Do I think she should have been fired for this?  No.  Do I think it's within the employer's rights to fire her?  Yes.  Should she have maybe been cognizant of her employer's views and considered those before posting?  Probably.  Would I be fine with fans organizing boycotts or players refusing to sign free agent agreements in the future due to this?  Sure.

To carry this further, if I learned that one of my employees was publicly promoting QAnon theories, I would absolutely consider firing them, as I would consider such an act to reflect on their judgement and intelligence.

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

Doesn't it also depend on state law? Texas is an at-will employment state, so as far as I can tell, no reason needs to be given for termination.  So as long as they aren't being discriminated against, which would be incredibly difficult to prove (and I don't think political speech falls under that anyway), then I don't see any leg she would have to stand on if she wanted to challenge it.

Click to expand...

IvanKaramazov said:

Things can be both legal and worthy of criticism.  I think the Texans -- and all other privately-owned firms -- should be free to hire or fire whoever they want for whatever reasons they want.  I also reserve the right to criticize them for exercising their freedom in ways that I personally disapprove of.

Click to expand...

IvanKaramazov said:

Things can be both legal and worthy of criticism.  I think the Texans -- and all other privately-owned firms -- should be free to hire or fire whoever they want for whatever reasons they want.  I also reserve the right to criticize them for exercising their freedom in ways that I personally disapprove of.  And I reserve the right to not feel bad for people in high profile positions, particularly those whose business is dependent on appealing to a universal audience, when they put all of their thoughts out into the public space and expect no repercussions.

Click to expand...

djmich said:

Added the last above, I'm not fan of cancel culture but its not an excuse for behavior that is bad for business...particularly folks that are self selecting into high profile positions for companies that depend on a universal audience.

Click to expand...

djmich said:

Added the last above, I'm not fan of cancel culture but its not an excuse for behavior that is bad for business...particularly folks that are self selecting into high profile positions for companies that depend on a universal audience.

Click to expand...

IvanKaramazov said:

I've become much less sympathetic to this view, mainly because it's way too easy to use "bad for business" as a lazy rationalization for canceling people because they hold the wrong political opinions.  I can't completely dismiss this one as totally illegitimate.  If a high-profile person tweets out "Actually, pedophilia is good and allow me to explain why. [1/63]" then yeah sure I can see where a business would probably want to cut ties and that would be fine. 

But that's almost never what we're talking about in these sorts of threads.  Instead, this is just some lady who happens to like Kodos instead of Kang and says so out loud, in a world where about half of the population also prefers Kodos to Kang.  If you like Kang, you should feel like this is a fairly anodyne difference of opinion.  If you learn that this lady is a Kodos supporter and your response is to get angry or offended or otherwise huffy, that's on you.  I'll go a little further -- when you read something on social media and you find yourself being offended, your first response should be to view your offendedness as a personal failure on your part.  You should stop and ask yourself whether this is really something that a mature, well-adjusted adult would reasonably get bent out of shape about, or whether you just need to grow some thicker skin.  I would argue that in about 99% of these cases, the answer is "I need thicker skin," not "this person really did something seriously wrong."    

The problem is that most people never engage in that kind of introspection.  Instead, their "reasoning" is something like this:

1. So-and-so said X.

2. I am offended by X.

3. I am justified in being offended by X.

4. Other people should be offended by X.

5. So-and-so has caused harm to other people.

6. So-and-so should be cancelled.

Obviously there are all sorts of problems with this line of reasoning.  Way too many people think that (3) follows automatically from (2), which is absolutely not the case.  Also, (4) doesn't necessarily follow from (3), and (5) doesn't follow from any of the previous statements.  This whole line of argument is sufficiently sloppy and leaky that most people would never actually try to spell this argument out.  In the rare instances where people do try to explain this thought process -- Emily VanDerWerff vs. Matt Yglesias, for a timely example -- they inevitably come off as unhinged.  But if we give a blank check to the "bad for business" argument, we encourage both witch hunting and intellectual sloppiness, both of which are bad.  

Click to expand...

• In principle you are correct, however you state the underlying issue that makes principles difficult in practice "The problem is that most people never engage in that kind of introspection."  People are quick to the the outrage thing.  We're expecting businesses (and specifically individuals that are evaluated based on profit) to make decisions on principle rather than how most people behave.
  
• I do think that the pendulum has swung too far and businesses are carelessly making cancel decisions that are not justified in terms of business impact.  In this case I agree with GroveDiesel that I dont think this would have any material impact and much more likely to be other factors that contributed to the firing.
  
• While I can't find fault with her tweets in this case, I do think folks in certain roles (like the head of PR) will and should be held to higher standard than the pastry baker.  If you want your personal voice heard, don't take a role where you are the voice of a business whose audience may not agree with your voice.
  

IvanKaramazov said:

I've become much less sympathetic to this view, mainly because it's way too easy to use "bad for business" as a lazy rationalization for canceling people because they hold the wrong political opinions.

Click to expand...

GroveDiesel said:

Sure, but I think businesses may end up doing more harm to themselves sometimes as well. In this specific case, it would appear that players and those in similar positions as Ms. Palcic thought she was excellent at her job and are upset she got fired. This could materially impact the Texans by making some free agents not want to play there because they don’t see it as a “culture fit” for them. And very worthy employees at other front office positions may choose not to pursue jobs with Houston for the same reason. I’m not sure that there would have been much impact if they had simply not done anything and ignored her social media postings.

Click to expand...

GordonGekko said:

A few years back, way before the pandemic obviously, I trained at a gym where one of the coaches was always late to his classes that he was supposed to teach. Would waltz in late, ignore the class, lay on the mat, check his cell phone, do some personal texts, and if one of his buddies was in the room, complain about his personal problems. Guy was a total jackoff but part of the story is he had long history with the guy running the place. Anyone who came to his class would leave soon after and never return. No one who was exposed to that class decided to go further into personal training ( where gyms make their real money) with anyone. After about a year and after a decent number of complaints, the guy was removed and put onto the sub list for coaches. But only after a year of cheating paying customers out of time and money and cheating coworkers out of members, class headcount and personal training clients. I'm almost sure some of the corporate accounts bounced as well.

The point I'm making is what if Amy Palcic and her actions cost the Houston Texans fans. What if it was 2000 fans. Or 1000. Or 500. While it might be an NFL team, there's a budget and when a team is losing money and losing customers, they don't stop the gourmet chefs for JJ Watt. They don't stop the swank charter jets flying those guys around. What they do is fire the janitor. Some clerk. Some secretary. Some guy working the parking lot. Someone in the sales department. They wipe out the little guy who just trying to keep food on the table for his kids.

Say controversial things - Lose fans - Lose money - Team looks at budget - Team fires people - Honest people trying to feed their kids lose their jobs

While it might be easy as pie for Palcic to find a new job, will it be so for a janitor? A parking lot person? A clerk?

I'm a business owner myself, I'm not the only one on this site. If I make a bad decision, it could mean the people who work for me don't get to feed their kids. That weighs on me. It weighs on me a lot. Many years back, someone stole from one of my companies. Not some nutty outrageous sum like you see in big government, but enough where when you factored in everything ( legal, logistics, replacement, investigation, law enforcement, insurance, time and stress, etc, etc) , it would have made sense to lay off some regular people to meet the shortfall. And many businesses would have done just that. I didn't but I know many others would have. That doesn't make me better or worse, it's not that simple.

I'm all for free speech, but nothing happens in a vacuum. This is not always about partisan politics, this is also about seeing the ripple effect of your choices.

Andrew Bynum, when he was on the Lakers, used to park his sports car in handicapped zones. And zagged across so no one could park next to him and scratch his car. He also nearly killed JJ Barea in the playoffs and didn't apologize until he was forced to do so. Let's say the Lakers lose fans over that. Not everyone wants to pay good money to see a worthless POS like Bynum. So Lakers lose some fans, then some money, then the accounting department calls and now some janitor loses his job. Do you think Bynum is thinking about how he impacts the people on the edge who need those jobs?

I don't care who Amy Palcic supports politically, but if she is going to scream out in social media about humanity while doing it in a manner that shows she doesn't give a flying #### about actual humans who need their jobs to feed their kids, then Amy Palcic is a worthless POS. I don't care how many people speak up for and say she's the best thing since bottled beer and free internet porn, if one person loses their job because Palcic cost the team fans, then she can take her butt hurt ego and go f**k herself.

And let's get real, if she wasn't a woman and well liked, that's exactly what would have happened. Someone would finally say in public - That was stupid, you cost yourself your job, you might have alienated some of the fanbase ( where pro sports is already at odds with this woke bulls**t killing their ratings), and cost someone else their job. Now here's a Hefty bag, go pack your trash and GTFO. You know what's just a slight tick more "American" than free speech? Telling someone who has earned it to just go f**k themselves.

"Do your job"

That's outside the Patriots locker room. Palcic's job was to engage the fan base in a positive way, not polarize some of them over something that had nothing to do with football. She didn't do her job, so she got clipped. Why does it need to be more complicated than that?  All that talk about how great she is at her job was about yesterday. The world is built around what have you done for me lately? What can you do for me today? How can you prove yourself as valuable and indispensable today?

Amy Palcic played stupid games. She won stupid prizes. Feel free to defend her some more in your partisan **** measuring contest political tribalism voodoo brainwashing rationalization.

Click to expand...

Bracie Smathers said:

You say Palcic is a POS and cost the Texas fans because she posted things on her personal account adding in so many-many-many words that anyone saying different is politically biased.  

Quite the leap to assume tweets that were tame lead to fans being outraged and costing the team money when most are not angry or are out searching social media seeking revenge.  

The person who fired her was sharing posts supporting the losing side of an election.  Not a leap but likely he was angry and took it out on someone doing their job in a petty hissy fit.  That sort of public bad behavior is the sort of things that would lose fans and I may add public bad behavior loses elections.

Furthermore Palcic likely would have brought in more fans than any lost because she sided with the winner who won with the most votes in history.  

Click to expand...

Bracie Smathers said:

The person who fired her was sharing posts supporting the losing side of an election.  Not a leap but likely he was angry and took it out on someone doing their job in a petty hissy fit.  That sort of public bad behavior is the sort of things that would lose fans and I may add public bad behavior loses elections.

Furthermore Palcic likely would have brought in more fans than any lost because she sided with the winner who won with the most votes in history.  

Click to expand...

Da Guru said:

I guess the moral of the story is unless you are high up on the totem pole keep your politcal comments to yourself. Numbers are numbers, Biden did get the most votes, but what is a shock is that Trump got 8 million more votes losing than Obama did when he won in 2012.

Plus if she want to share her views Amy might be better working for SF or Seattle than in Texas.

The most annoying friends I have on FB and Insta are the one who are always sharing their politcal views, does not matter the side.

Click to expand...

Bracie Smathers said:

You don't get it and neither do any politicos which I am NOT.

Taking action without cause is the crime.  

People shouldn't get hired or fired for non work personal views if their isn't a quantifiable cost. 

Attaining a job is about many things but once you are in your position then any decision should be about job performance.  Palcic got her job, performed well so it was about job performance until an election where the losing side made it all about the loss and seeking vengeance.   Being so angry as to go through social sights looking to find any evidence that someone doesn't agree with your personal point of view and getting angry enough to take action is not just petty it is creepy.  Very creepy.

Click to expand...

Da Guru said:

Bracie Smathers said:

Attaining a job is about many things but once you are in your position then any decision should be about job performance.  Palcic got her job, performed well so it was about job performance until an election where the losing side made it all about the loss and seeking vengeance.   Being so angry as to go through social sights looking to find any evidence that someone doesn't agree with your personal point of view and getting angry enough to take action is not just petty it is creepy.  Very creepy.

Click to expand...

I do get it.    Many employers don`t feel the same way.   Every HR person in know now goes through potential job canidates social media before they hire now.  Different world now.

Click to expand...