# 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:** 6\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/61 "2012-11-12T22:03:40Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Does anybody argue that the boss/employee relationship is not such a relationship, and that bosses should avoid the appearance of impropriety wrt their employees’ voting rights? Show how the employer can gain knowledge of how the employee voted and you would have a point. But employers can be jerks, there’s no way to legislate around that. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/62 "2012-11-12T23:22:38Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Once again, though, the retaliation Murray was threatening his employees with had effectively nothing to do with how THEY voted. > > What it depended on was how the WHOLE COUNTRY voted. > > I agree that by saying “If Obama wins it will be terrible and I’ll have to fire people!”, Murray definitely sent his workers the message that he strongly believed that Obama’s reelection would be a very bad thing that they should strive to avoid. But I don’t think it’s possible to pin on him any threat of retaliation directly linked to THEIR acts. > > As I said before, if Romney had won, Murray would not have been firing anybody even if every employee and their dog had voted for Obama. That right there, AFAICT (and of course IANAL), lets him off the hook for even “appearing” to threaten retaliation against their actual exercise of their voting rights. Oh, PUH-LEEZE! Why did he send the letter to his employees if not to influence their votes? This is what I hate about legal wrangling, you aren’t allowed to simply state the obvious, which was that those letters were intended to coerce their employees to vote a certain way by threatening their livelihoods. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/63 "2012-11-12T23:26:36Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > Show how the employer can gain knowledge of how the employee voted and you would have a point. But employers can be jerks, there’s no way to legislate around that. Yes, the employees have the ability to say “Yes boss, you have made a very good point,” and then go vote for Obama, otherwise, of course, elections would be travesties. But is there not merit in avoiding moving in the general direction of electoral travesty? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/64 "2012-11-12T23:59:29Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Oh, PUH-LEEZE! Why did he send the letter to his employees if not to influence their votes? I didn’t say he **wasn’t** trying to influence their votes, in fact I pointed out that he **was** : > [@Kimstu](#): > > I agree that by saying “If Obama wins it will be terrible and I’ll have to fire people!”, Murray definitely sent his workers the message that he strongly believed that Obama’s reelection would be a very bad thing that they should strive to avoid. But there’s a difference between trying to influence somebody’s vote and actually threatening somebody with direct retaliation if **they personally** don’t vote the way you want them to. And I’m sorry, but although I fully agree with you that Robert Murray is lower than an iguana’s penis and that his neo-serfdom management tactics are vile and despicable, I don’t think you’ve got a leg to stand on when you accuse him of literally “threatening the livelihoods” of his workers if they did not follow his lead in their electoral preferences. No, he threatened their livelihoods if the WHOLE COUNTRY didn’t concur with his electoral preferences. Not the same thing. > [@Evil Captor](#): > > But is there not merit in avoiding moving in the general direction of electoral travesty? What kind of “avoidance” are you recommending? Should employers be legally forbidden to discuss electoral politics issues with their employees? ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2012, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/65 "2012-11-13T01:45:40Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > But is there not merit in avoiding moving in the general direction of electoral travesty? What electoral travesty are you referring to? Because as much as I think this employer is a scumbag, I also believe he has the right to be a scumbag. ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2012, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966/66 "2012-11-13T17:12:21Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > The good news is that with the safety net probably still in place, those unfairly terminated will be able to get benefits… For a while, anyway. > > If I wanted to make my voters think about voting my way, I’d just forward them this story and let them draw their own conclusion. Perfectly legal. Benefits are horrendous! The government has gotten people reliant on benefits so that they’ll literally die if they’re thrown off them, so they’re forced to vote against their economic interests for the welfare party! - See sig. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-there-be-a-law-against-employers-threatening-employees-on-how-to-vote/639966.md?page=3)