CEO threatens workers jobs if Obama is reelected

[MavsSuperFan]

What's wrong with what he said? I don't get the outrage. So the CEO should pay employees at a loss just because he's rich? lol. You don't become rich with that sort of mentality. That's not how your business stays competitive.

He is trying to intimidate voters into voting for his interests.

[IcanzIIravor]

Oligarchy.

Yep, those type of individuals long for the gilded age and the days of Robber Barons. They probably gather together and curse the name of Upton Sinclair each year.

[joe]

He is trying to intimidate voters into voting for his interests.

Obviously his interests in this case are their interests too. It's not intimidation, it's reality. Wouldn't you rather your boss tell you something like this, so you can at least be prepared for it?

[IcanzIIravor]

Obviously his interests in this case are their interests too. It's not intimidation, it's reality. Wouldn't you rather your boss tell you something like this, so you can at least be prepared for it?

I think it stops short of voter intimidation, but would you have a problem if it was voter intimidation even though the boss is having [in his opinion] their interests at heart, if it was a more blatant threat?

[kentatm]

Obviously his interests in this case are their interests too. It's not intimidation, it's reality. Wouldn't you rather your boss tell you something like this, so you can at least be prepared for it?

A man marries a woman and demands she makes him dinner every night. If she doesn't have it ready he may lose his temper and be forced to beat her. He doesn't want to but if he can't come home to a hot meal after a hard days work he will be forced to punish her. If that happens he may go to jail, lose his job, divorce her, and she will be left alone with no money. Obviously his interests are hers as well. It's a good thing he told her what would happen so she is at least prepared for it.

[joe]

I think it stops short of voter intimidation, but would you have a problem if it was voter intimidation even though the boss is having [in his opinion] their interests at heart, if it was a more blatant threat?

It would depend on how he intimated them. Physical threats, I have a problem with. Saying he'd have them assaulted for voting Obama or something.

But if he threatened to fire them for voting Obama, I don't have a problem with that. I mean I do have a problem, because I think that's a stupid demand to place on someone. But I think it should be within his rights to do so. It's an employers choice who he hires and fires. The employees must decide if they're willing to work for someone who puts such strange demands on them. It's a give and take.

[kentatm]

It would depend on how he intimated them. Physical threats, I have a problem with. Saying he'd have them assaulted for voting Obama or something.

But if he threatened to fire them for voting Obama, I don't have a problem with that. I mean I do have a problem, because I think that's a stupid demand to place on someone. But I think it should be within his rights to do so. It's an employers choice who he hires and fires. The employees must decide if they're willing to work for someone who puts such strange demands on them. It's a give and take.

If you don't make me a meal I'll divorce you and take the kids with me woman!

No dinner? YOU'RE FIRED!

[KevinNYC]

What's wrong with what he said? I don't get the outrage. So the CEO should pay employees at a loss just because he's rich? lol. You don't become rich with that sort of mentality. That's not how your business stays competitive.

There's no ****ing way the CEO would be incurring a loss. None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

This is about will he be able to spend $4 million dollars for the doors on his 90,000 foot house. Or will he have to spend only $3 million and cut back to 80,000 feet.

Also aren't you a libertarian? Do you think your boss should be able to dictate your personal political beliefs?

[joe]

A man marries a woman and demands she makes him dinner every night. If she doesn't have it ready he may lose his temper and be forced to beat her. He doesn't want to but if he can't come home to a hot meal after a hard days work he will be forced to punish her. If that happens he may go to jail, lose his job, divorce her, and she will be left alone with no money. Obviously his interests are hers as well. It's a good thing he told her what would happen so she is at least prepared for it.

This is not an accurate analogy. The CEO has not threatened the employees with physical violence, the husband has.

This is more like, a husband demands a wife makes him dinner every night, or else he will leave her. The wife can make a choice... make the husband dinner or leave him. Nobody will blame the wife if she leaves. It is what it is.

But what the wife CAN'T do, is use the government to force the husband to stay with her, against his will, even if she refuses to make him dinner. That's unfair to the husband.

[bmulls]

You fcking liberals I swear

Did you even read the article you posted?

He goes on to say,

[quote]
Of course, as your employer, I can

[joe]

There's no ****ing way the CEO would be incurring a loss. None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

This is about will he be able to spend $4 million dollars for the doors on his 90,000 foot house. Or will he have to spend only $3 million and cut back to 80,000 feet.

Also aren't you a libertarian? Do you think your boss should be able to dictate your personal political beliefs?

If the CEO is truly firing these employees for a silly reason, all he's doing is helping his competitors, by giving them trained employees to hire. The boss isn't dictating anyones political beliefs. The employees can quit if they don't like the bosses demands.

And regardless, he didn't even threaten to fire them if they voted Obama. He said if Obama is re-elected, he might have to make cut backs. Big difference.

[Myth]

I cannot imagine being so rich that a tax increase (not all of my taxes, but just the part added) is more than the salaries of tons of workers.

[Myth]

I got this rep for this thread: "I'm gay - Millwad"

[Rasheed1]

Are we gonna act like we don't see the real issue here?


The problem with what he said to his employees is that he telling them HOW to vote.

Nobody is saying he should go under... If he wants to close his business? then, that is his prerogative, but "warning" his employees about it is an obvious threat and an attempt to intimidate them into voting a certain way.

That's crazy... Americans dont go into voting booth to vote for their boss's candidate..

They go in to vote for their own candidate...

Between all the voter suppression with guys throwing registration forms in the dumpster, to these f'd voter I'D laws, to the supposed "mistake" in translation telling latino folks to vote on the 8th instead of the 6th?

This sh*t is starting to get out of control..


Its got to stop..

[KevinNYC]

Oh yeah, Huffington Post, NY Daily, and some liberal blog, great sources.

Honestly, can anyone think that talking away from the companies doesn't hurt them? That you can take what you want from them and have them expect to stay exactly the same?

Headline from NY Daily News Political blog from yesterday

A new low for the liberal media

So conservative views are verboten over there.