Great comment of an instance.
The class:
"Letting <anything> ruin it for others is a management problem, not an <anything> problem."
I have rarely run into the "brilliant jerk" problem.
I have almost always run into the "incompetent manager" problem.
"Incompetent Managers in Engineering". Now there's an article I'd really like to read.
Management has part of blame, but jerk is responsible for his own behavior. Jerk is responsible for what strategies he choose to look brilliant. (And people with autism don't count as jerks unless they are. Most of them are willing to stop behavior when explained what the issue is directly.)
But most people are pretty set in their ways. Everyone who yells at cashiers when they're 40 has done so before, they've probably faced some consequences for their actions and the behavior persists so either you need to be more persuasive than the totality of their lived experience or you can adjust your sails.
If we can accept people who miss work for sick kids, we can accept jerks. But we don't have to accept either. Everything is subservient to money. You can simply pay for excellent people, but some corporations need to compete elsewhere.
I wouldn't pay a jerk as much as a team player (all other things equal), but for the right price I'd put up with the headaches. That's the right call for me, it's not the right call for others. What's important is that corporations and managers get creative about making things work for people.
1.) Many jerks are considered brilliant because they act like jerks, not despite or in addition to. Acting like jerk makes people less likely to question you, it makes your collegues look less capable if managent believes your crap. It makes them more angry and less confident.
Association between jerk and brilliant does not help, I have seen (literally) people finish complaint about bad behavior with "but he is great coder" over dude they knew nothing about profesionally. Zero information. He acted arrogant, therefore they assumed higher competence.
2.) Parent comment put all the blame on management and none on jerk. That is not fair and amounts to blaming other tribe.
Management hires jerks and puts people into situations with the jerks they hired.
Further, why should I tolerate someone who is making my work life that much unpleasant? I can easily get a job somewhere else.
And the situations aren't perfectly analogous with respect to the intention behind leaving work for a sick kid, or being a jerk. But the effect is the same and they can use the same solution: accommodations.
Now, you shouldn't tolerate someone making your life worse and if you change jobs to improve your life, more power to you. But I humbly argue that management could solve your problem so you changing jobs is an issue of bad management, not a bad coworker.
Jerks affect productivity of those around, people who were bacstabbed, people who were not told information, people who were lied about, people who were smeared (including professional reputation aka calling good ideas stupid to get dominance), etc.
So yeah, if local jerk has lower salary and is refused promotion, then it is kinda fair.
Still, he himself is to be blamed for his behavior.