# Should there be a law against employers threatening employees on how to vote? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 5, 2012, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966 "2012-11-05T16:36:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/21 "2012-11-05T17:42:44Z")
Look: The employer has every right in the world–provided he’s not the government–to voice his opinion of the possible outcomes of the election. That’s called reality. What he does not have the right to do, and it is actually illegal, is to order his employees to vote for someone in particular. And you’re now pretending that the employer can actually determine how the employee voted? If not, then what’s with that “the employee chance it” comment? I know it’s not hard. I’m not a fucking simpleton. Don’t talk to me like I am. Got it? ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/22 "2012-11-05T17:43:15Z")
> [@tomcar](#): > > If it were honest it wouldn’t be as bad… > > I want the employees of this company to know that with Obama winning the election, instead of making $2.5 million next year, I will only make $1 million. As you all know, I won’t take such a decrease. Instead we will hire less people, you will work more, and there will be no pay raises. > > John Q. CEO I hope that John Q. CEO’s company isn’t publicly traded. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/23 "2012-11-05T17:43:59Z")
I think this one clearly crosses the line (from the link provided by **John\_Stamos’\_Left\_Ear** ): > [@](#): > > Robert Murray, CEO of coal company Murray Enterprises, not only put pressure on his employees to vote for Romney, _ **but also forced them to give up a day’s pay to attend a Romney rally** _. The Ohio Democratic Party is planning a criminal investigation. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/24 "2012-11-05T17:46:41Z")
Really? The Democratic Party is planning a criminal investigation? Interesting. I’d’ve thunk that’s the purview of the government. I mean this isn’t China. Well, where I am it’s China. But Ohio ain’t here. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/25 "2012-11-05T17:47:57Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > Look: The employer has every right in the world–provided he’s not the government–to voice his opinion of the possible outcomes of the election. That’s called reality. What he does not have the right to do, and it is actually illegal, is to order his employees to vote for someone in particular. We already curtail political speech. We do it in churches. We do it in and around the polling stations. So we do it in some cases as to whom and others as to where and when. It would not be difficult to do so here as well, just for different reasons. > [@](#): > > And you’re now pretending that the employer can actually determine how the employee voted? If not, then what’s with that “the employee chance it” comment? Just because an employee is ostensibly alone in the voting booth with his or her thoughts does not mean that those thoughts need to be clouded with threats from someone with economical power over them. > [@](#): > > I know it’s not hard. I’m not a fucking simpleton. Don’t talk to me like I am. Got it? I apologize for seeming snarky. Was not my intent. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/26 "2012-11-05T17:50:21Z")
Deleted because John apologized. Delted comments no longer apply. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/27 "2012-11-05T17:51:34Z")
Deleted because \*\*Monty \*\*deleted something. / Deleted. ---
**Author:** ![jonesj2205](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecc23a/32.png) [@jonesj2205](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jonesj2205)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/28 "2012-11-05T17:54:24Z")
I can’t see this as a threat because the boss is saying if Obama wins (regardless of whether you employee or anyone in this state) votes for him these bad things will happen. So even if Employee X videotaped himself voting for Romney and turned this video over to the boss and Obama wins, if the boss is right these bad things will happen. So in your analogy the shopkeeper paid the mob guy the money and had his place burned down because the people in Ohio and Florida didn’t pay. I don’t recall that technique on Sopranos. It’s the boss offering his political wisdom and how an Obama win will affect his employee. And employees are free to ignore as they will - especially since the boss has no way of knowing how they voted. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/29 "2012-11-05T17:58:56Z")
> [@jonesj2205](#): > > I can’t see this as a threat because the boss is saying if Obama wins (regardless of whether you employee or anyone in this state) votes for him these bad things will happen. > So even if Employee X videotaped himself voting for Romney and turned this video over to the boss and Obama wins, if the boss is right these bad things will happen. > So in your analogy the shopkeeper paid the mob guy the money and had his place burned down because the people in Ohio and Florida didn’t pay. I don’t recall that technique on Sopranos. > It’s the boss offering his political wisdom and how an Obama win will affect his employee. And employees are free to ignore as they will - especially since the boss has no way of knowing how they voted. You’re missing the point… The issue is how direct a threat has to be for it to be considered an actual “threat” by some posters here. Apparently some people have a much higher threshold for what the person who signs the checks that feed the children of their employees can say without it being sufficiently threatening. And it doesn’t matter that they have no way to knowing who I vote for. Why should I be subject to any kinds of threats just because they might not be able to follow through on them? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/30 "2012-11-05T18:00:42Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > We already curtail political speech. We do it in churches. We do it in and around the polling stations. So we do it in some cases as to whom and others as to where and when. It would not be difficult to do so here as well, just for different reasons. We curtail political actions in places and situations where the lack of such curtailment is unreasonable. Churches can easily avoid the curtailment by giving up their tax-exempt status. Heck, given a current situation right now, it seems they don’t even have to give that up to actively support a particular candidate. > [@](#): > > Just because an employee is ostensibly alone in the voting booth with his or her thoughts does not mean that those thoughts need to be clouded with threats from someone with economical power over them. The voter is never just alone in the booth, using your imagery if I may. He is always there with his thoughts. His thoughts may include comments from his boss (whom he may despise and wishes to go out of business, thinking the employee himself may have no problem on the dole or changing employment). His thoughts may include all of the pro-Party A or pro-Party B or both editorials in various news outlets. They may include nothing more than his hatred of one candidate’s race, his hatred of one candiate’s actual religion, or his hatred of one candidate’s incorrectly attributed religion. Heck, it might even include nothing more than “My wife says I’m not getting any if Person C gets elected.” The boss can state that, in his opinion, having a particular person as president will be bad for his business. That is not a threat to the employee. If the employee deems it a threat, then the employee needs to work out how he believes the boss will know he voted. > [@](#): > > I apologize for seeming snarky. Was not my intent. Apology accepted. May I repeat the question? How does the boss intend to discover how the employee votes? What’s to stop all the employees from voting for Person A, but Person B (the boss’s favorite {“B” for “Boss” of course}) loses, and the employees all tell the boss, “Drat. The guy we voted for lost!”? Come to think of it, various editorials for one side or the other make out the other side as bad for employees or bad for business or bad for whatever. Is that a threat from the editor to the reader? Another come to think of it: Isn’t that basically what Politics is, anyway, scaremongering? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/31 "2012-11-05T18:05:22Z")
Relevant: [Employers' Urging Employees to Vote a Particular Way, and Warning of Dangers if a Particular Candidate Is Elected - The Volokh ConspiracyThe Volokh Conspiracy](http://www.volokh.com/2012/10/29/employers-urging-employees-to-vote-a-particular-way-and-warning-of-dangers-if-a-particular-candidate-is-elected/) ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/32 "2012-11-05T18:30:58Z")
I think this should be illegal; and this is also why I’m the rare progressive who is against vote-by-mail. Early voting in a private voting booth, sure. But vote-by-mail violates the essential protection of the secret (“Australian”) ballot. How long can it be in VBM states before businesses like those cited upthread hold “ballot-marking parties” with required attendance for all employees? And how many households headed by Archie Bunker types already find the patriarch getting the little lady, and any adult children living at home, together to fill out ballots? Terribly, terribly shortsighted for progressives to support this concept. ---
**Author:** ![jonesj2205](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecc23a/32.png) [@jonesj2205](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jonesj2205)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/33 "2012-11-05T18:44:08Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > You’re missing the point… The issue is how direct a threat has to be for it to be considered an actual “threat” by some posters here. Apparently some people have a much higher threshold for what the person who signs the checks that feed the children of their employees can say without it being sufficiently threatening. Right, the threat should be direct enough that it points to an action the employee controls - which “if Obama is elected” doesn’t. And should punish those who didn’t do what was demanded - which “I’ll have to drop health care (for everyone)” or “there will be high taxes” doesn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/34 "2012-11-05T18:48:35Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > You’re missing the point… The issue is how direct a threat has to be for it to be considered an actual “threat” by some posters here. Apparently some people have a much higher threshold for what the person who signs the checks that feed the children of their employees can say without it being sufficiently threatening. > > And it doesn’t matter that they have no way to knowing who I vote for. Why should I be subject to any kinds of threats just because they might not be able to follow through on them? What about if it’s a local election instead? Suppose that you know/believe that someone running for mayor hates your business and will have the ability to harm it financially if they are elected. Should you tell your employees so that they can consider whether or not they want to get involved or should you remain silent? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/35 "2012-11-05T19:08:27Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > There are [several states with laws on the books](http://www.wvillustrated.com/story/19967632/voter-coercion-election-presents-liability-for-employers), as I said. Do you have a cite that they have been declared unconstitutional? > > Either you can show me some or you can jump on getting the SCOTUS to address these issues at once. > > Let me know how the latter goes if you cannot come up with anything on the former. From your cite: > [@](#): > > The relevant Kentucky statute makes it illegal for an employer to “coerce or direct any employee to vote for any political party or candidate.” The Kentucky Supreme Court previously held unconstitutional a separate portion of this statute which made it unlawful for an employer to “give out or circulate any statement or report that employees … have been requested … to vote for any person.” Do you contend that any of the statements you’ve mentioned would have violated any of the state laws you mention? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/36 "2012-11-05T19:11:03Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Relevant: [Employers' Urging Employees to Vote a Particular Way, and Warning of Dangers if a Particular Candidate Is Elected - The Volokh ConspiracyThe Volokh Conspiracy](http://www.volokh.com/2012/10/29/employers-urging-employees-to-vote-a-particular-way-and-warning-of-dangers-if-a-particular-candidate-is-elected/) From that cite, which is indeed relevant: > [@](#): > > All this means, I think, that employers remain largely free to argue to their employees how the employees should vote, and to warn of dire economic consequences for the employer — and therefore to the employees — if an election (whether union, local, state, or federal) comes out a particular way. The mere possibility that some employees will take any message from their employer as coercive does not strip the employer of its constitutional rights. > > If the employer threatens reprisals “to be taken solely on [its] own volition,” for instance because of management pique, that speech would indeed be treated as a constitutionally unprotected, and could lead to civil liability or even criminal punishment (if the relevant jurisdiction’s law does prohibit such speech). But if the employer is making an argument based on projected economic consequences “beyond the employer’s control,” such as forecast greater regulation, higher taxes, and so on, then that speech is constitutionally protected. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/37 "2012-11-05T19:45:06Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > That is debatable. But regardless, you admit that it’s not unconstitutional. No, I do not. I think that a law that would fit your post: > [@](#): > > My boss has no business lecturing me on how to vote under any circumstances unless I want to ask them. Period. Would be unconstitutional. ---
**Author:** ![BigAppleBucky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigapplebucky/32/178_2.png) [@BigAppleBucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAppleBucky)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/38 "2012-11-05T21:48:16Z")
As much as I dislike the cause and the method of supporting it, I believe employers have the right to try to persuade/intimidate their employees this way. The tactic could backfire on any employers who acts this way. It’s bad for their business. ---
**Author:** ![dba\_Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c37758/32.png) [@dba\_Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dba_Fred)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2012, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/39 "2012-11-06T01:45:03Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > Deleted because John apologized. Delted comments no longer apply. You know what else might might get deleted if you vote for the wrong guy? 😉 Somebody said [“Elections have consequences.”](http://rlv.zcache.com/obama_quotes_elections_have_consequences_magnet-p147156999490494452envtl_400.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2012, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/40 "2012-11-06T20:26:29Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > Ah right. Like the guy from the mob who says “Nice store you have here. Would be a real shame to have something happen to it…” Not a threat at all! Just friendly advice from one bidnessman to another… :rolleyes: > > If I desperately need my job and particularly if I work in an isolated place or niche industry where I would be really screwed financially if I were to lose it, I would take all of those things as threats to my future with the company. > > I should not have to worry about that when it comes to what I do in the voting booth. If you worry about your vote getting back to your boss, when you’re inside a voting booth, you have more to worry about than your vote getting back to your boss. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966.md?page=3)