“If I were you, I’d pay attention.”
It wasn’t a suggestion. It was a warning as well as a threat. Because if you messed up just one thing, your ass would be grass. If you didn’t already know this, you’d find out soon enough how not paying attention would add to your misery. After that one lesson, you’d make certain to always pay attention going forward.
Are they really incompetent losers or sneakily clever scam artists?
Without a doubt, this kind of guy was hated by everyone else on the “team.” So what was the point? How could such a person possibly be good for the team? Each of his successive screw-ups would just make the team hate him even more, as it would mean more punishment for them.
The loser does serve a purpose in being an example of the kind of people to scorn, hate and detest. It doesn’t matter that he’s still young and shouldn’t be expected to know everything about being an adult, especially when the intricacies are still mostly unexplored.
The point is to build cohesiveness within the team. The team would actually be better off without the bum, but since he is still part of the team, the other team members must share in the negative outcomes arising from his lack of responsibility, rather than angrily rising up against him and bringing about division within the team.
It didn’t work out that way though; or maybe it did. Either way, to the team it hardly seemed beneficial.
One was particularly troublesome to the team. Well, he actually wasn’t part of the team, but a problem child that was brought in from another team, and was now starting on their third attempt to get him to shape up.
Remember that this team already had a chronic slacker and now they had to absorb the addition of an even worse example; a trouble-making bum.
Those running the show had to have known what would happen. They’d trained them after all, and they’d molded the team to their liking. And of course, they knew the complete, past record of the loser.
Tensions naturally built up until finally, the team decided on a blanket party to teach the problem child a lesson. A blanket party first, then a scrub down with hard, abrasive brushes, since the guy also refused to wash. Something ultimately went wrong though.
As he fought and squirmed and kicked and screamed, the guy was smacked around and then transported, still blanketed, to the shower room for the scrub down; but with all the kicking and screaming one of the guys holding his legs lost his grip and the guy fell and broke his leg on a commode, breaking it as well.
Who, (or possibly what), is really at fault here? In any other scenario, would the same thing happen?
It could be said that the organization put undue pressure on the team by bringing in a proven two—time failure of a louse after weeks of training had already been accomplished, despite the fact they’d had their own loser to put up with in the first place.
It didn’t seem fair, either to the louse with the broken leg or to the guys that were expected to cope with two losers, (when one is quite enough), with the second one being brought in late and being known to be a repeat failure and trouble-maker. Those making the decisions caused the division.
Nothing at all positive resulted from this “experiment,” but much negativity did. The louse with the broken leg was sent somewhere else, and the guys involved in throwing his blanket party were punished. Division was created when the team saw its guys get punished over the louse.
They deserved the punishment, but perhaps the case could be made that the crime for which they were punished, had been forced upon them by those who should have known better.
The Team © free-reign 2019
This story is based partially on events that I witnessed.
Sources for images used in this post: