From his speech at the National Federation of Independent Business
Discuss please.
Seems fine to me, if he’s right. I actually don’t know anything about the legality of it.
It’s one thing to promise job creation if you get elected. It’s quite another to threaten job losses as a form of extortion should you lose. He should be roundly condemned.
I’ll have a stab at it from the perspective of certain posters:
“As long as it’s legal, it is the moral and ethically right thing to do”
The one thing that would pretty much guarantee my voting for candidate B would be having my boss tell me I had to vote for candidate A.
I would lose all respect for my CEO if tried to influence my vote.
I don’t get these kinds of veiled threats, anyway. The employer may legally be allowed to say “You should vote for X, and if Y wins I won’t be able to keep many of you employed,” but attempts to specifically find out who employees voted for is illegal (or at least, the use of coercion in doing so is).
So all the employer has is which candidate wins, maybe which candidate wins in his state or precinct if he’s super-local. But that could happen anyway even if every last employee voted for X. How can you threaten when it’s entirely out of their hands?
Why should employees CARE who their bosses vote for? Just like why should they care about religious affiliations or sexual perversions?
My boss is an okay person, but I don’t plan to model my life after him. I do the work I am told to do and I expect to get paid for it. The End.
Seems kind of like an extension of the liberal laws to forewarn employees of upcoming layoffs.
Unless of course you are talking about Obama Defense Department layoffs. The law apparently doesn’t apply to them (story here).
This is more evidence that Romney is an incompetent politician. He actually thinks associating himself with The Man is the way to win this election. Guess he’s abandoned the populist act because no one was buying his “I get my clothes from Costco” thing.
You guys just never let up, do you?
I’m not sure what to think of it. It seems distasteful, and doesn’t surprise me that Romney would use this tactic. But it’s not illegal, or even effective that I know of. It sort of tells me he’ll be an ineffective president if elected. He seems to have bought or been given everything in life, never overcame any adversity, and doesn’t respect the efforts of anyone who isn’t a millionaire. Of course when we talk about effective presidents then Obama doesn’t rank that high either.
I’m wondering how many ‘employers’ pulled this stunt only to see their productivity go into the toilet because now all the employees are fighting about who to vote for and does the boss really have the right to tell them who to vote for and who on the team will probably vote for the ‘wrong’ guy because, no matter what they claim, we all know that they’re really a <name your poison> in disguise…
Yup… there’s a reason that you don’t bring politics up at work.
Isn’t what labor unions do in every election? I’ve never seen any organization carp so much about an election as much as labor unions.
But it’s okay to threaten that grannies will be eating dog food? Sorry, 1st amendment trumps all.
CEO to Workers: I May Fire You if Obama Wins
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ceo-workers-youll-likely-fired-131640914.html
*A real peach of a man. *
The, you don’t work as hard as me assertion:
Just think about this - most of you arrive at work in the morning and leave that afternoon and the rest of your time is yours to do as you please. But not me- there is no “off” button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekend all to yourself. I unfortunately do not have that freedom.
The be grateful you blood-sucking varmints assertion:
Now, the economy is falling apart and people like me who made all the right decisions and invested in themselves are being forced to bail out all the people who didn’t. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for.
The I’m not threatening you assertion:
So where am I going with all this? It’s quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company. Rather than grow this company I will be forced to cut back.
- Behaving as suggested by Mitt.
With all due respect… Cite? I’ve NEVER seen anyone on the SDMB express this opinion. Far more often, we say, “It may be legal, and cannot be prohibited, but it is still morally wrong and the action of a complete jerk.”
This is pretty much the whole point of First Amendment discourse. If it were “the moral and ethically right thing to do,” then where would the controversy be? No one is going to bother fighting to defend your right to say, “I love you, mama,” or “Support our troops,” or “If you can read this, thank a teacher.” The First Amendment only really starts to be important when the discussion is of speech that someone objects to.
Well, he’s going to have to, now. It’ll all be Obama’s fault when his business tanks.
It’s a Brickerism, particularly with reference to his posts concerning voter ID laws. He has conceded that the push for laws to be rushed through mandating voter ID are based on partisan politics to try to eliminate Democrat votes; but says that this is perfectly acceptable,* because it is being done legally.*
Phew, I’m glad we have adaher’s great legal mind to tell us that the first amendment has no exceptions whatsoever.