Employers Should Not Be Able To Intimidate With Political Views

**** the people that power belongs to, they can all lick my ass. We have to work, we have the capability to get more than we are, so we should do it. Our bosses make their profits off of us. They need us, we don't need them.

 

I was well aware of what the implications of what you were saying were. Glad that you have finally come to realize this as well.

When you say "a company should be able to fire someone for any reason" ... although you do not say "should be able to fire for personal behavior" , it is obvious that "any reason" includes the subset "personal behavior".

What this also means is that you are fine with discrimination and the use of coercion by some in society to try to tell others what they can or can no do in their personal lives and what they can and cannot think - at least out loud.

 

Then unions should not be able to threaten businesses over political beliefs.

 

I don't have a problem with employees going along with the management way of doing things in terms of business strategy and how management views how to implement that strategy in terms of what products are to be presented, the methods in which those products are produced, how tools and products are procured, how products and services are advertised, and what types of customers to pursue. These are all certainly items in which an employee should be willing to going along with the management way of doing things. That said, I strongly disagree with your IMPLIED notion that having political views that differ from those in management, stink up a work environment. Neither management NOR employees should create disturbances to others by attempting to force their political views on those who may not agree with them. It is just like sexual advances. If someone makes it clear that they don't share your political views and that they would rather not discuss them, that should be the end of the matter. Management and employees who try to force their political views on the unwilling are what stinks up a work environment, not employees who may have a different political stance than management.

 

If you're unskilled they don't need you there are probably hundreds of thousands of people that will do that labor just as good as you do and they'd be happy to do it. They don't need you you are replaceable.

 

Again nothing makes you stay there there are other jobs.

Further there are regulations regarding hostile work environment so this is already solved.

 

I have said why. It is because it erodes the principle of democracy that people are free to choose their political beliefs without fear of coercion of any type.

No. Your words implied that because employers are in the business of making money, they will employ whomever helps them regardless of their political beliefs. Here is what you said.

Although the statement in bold DOES NOT EXPLICITLY state that employers will employ those who makes them money REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL BELIEFS, IT IMPLIES THAT EMPLOYERS DO JUST THAT. IF you did not mean that, your statement should have read that "If you help them make money AND agree with their political ideology they will give you some of it."

What you have done here is to ignore the complete thought that was put forward. The complete thought is as follows

Only to a person who wants to live in a corporate controlled corporatocracy would believe that employers should be able to dictate the political views of employees and discriminate against those whose political views that they disagree with.

 

The question was do you think that capitalists are willing to give unlimited economic power to China?

 

Although I understand your point of view, I think that because, as you have pointed out, employers will abuse this ability, it would be better if they refrained from engaging in this type of activity. If they are allowed to do it, it should under the circumstances that if an employee informs them of their disagreement and that they would prefer not to hear such political advice, then the employer should refrain and not engage in any type of discrimination against the employee because of their point of view.

 

you aren't allowed to choose your political belief without coercion of any type. If that were true you wouldn't be able to run political ads politicians wouldn't be able to views dirt on other politicians coercion is the name of the game.

why would I have said that? For the most part I don't think employers are interested in forcing their Politics on people they're interested in money.

That's incorrect a person that wants to live in a free market capitalism would not care if employers discriminate against people because of their opinions. Your opinion is not a protected class and it should never be.

 

You can repeat it to didn't make sense the first time. It won't magically make sense if you state it again.

 

Again, employers should not have the power to discriminate in this way. It erodes the principle of democracy that people are free to chose their political beliefs without fear of coercion of any kind.

And what I am saying is that there should be specific legislation meant to address this type of political discrimination and harassment, thereby making it more difficult for people to get away with harassing employees in this way.

 

I disagree.

such a principle does not exist.

there is no need. They're already just legislation to protect you from a hostile work environment making new legislation to protect you from a hostile work environment because of opinions is superfluous.

 

I said FEAR of coercion. There is a difference between simply being exposed to coercion, and having a reasonable fear of it. People depend on employment for there sustenance. Having to fear being denied your means of sustenance because of your political beliefs is an unacceptable form of coercion in a democratic society.

They should not force their political beliefs on their employees, they should be focused on making money. IF you believe that for the most part, employers don't engage in forcing their beliefs on their employees, then you should have no problem with the notion that it should be against the law for them to do so.

First of all we do not live in a system where the markets are totally free. If that were so, the government would not have come to the aid of big banks when they engaged in behavior that was to their detriment. Furthermore, we live in a society in which we strive to adhere to democratic principles. As such, people should be free to chose their political views without fear of economic coercion from their employers.

 

I disagree with you and that is why we are having this discussion.

I qualified what I meant by that statement. Specifically, people should be able to freely choose their political views without fear of economic coercion by their employers.

And again I say there is a need so as to make it harder for those who would engage in such harassment to get away with it.

 

No it makes sense. You just may not be able to comprehend what was put forward. If it does not make sense to you, then you should be able to articulate why.

 

yes I agree in one case it's absolutely necessary for it to exist and then the other case one only needs to feel afraid. We should not base any laws on feelings. Your fear may be unfounded.

I would agree if there was some sort of faction that barred you from employment. Just because a company fires you does not mean you cannot find another job. We do not live in a Democratic Society. We live in a republic.

they can't.

it is there are protections for employees you are not allowed to create a hostile work environment.

I believe they should be as free as possible.

I believe the government should have let them rot.

no we do not.

for the third f****** time there are laws against creating a hostile work environment so such coercion is already not okay.

 

Yes like in Silicon Valley where if you let it out you are a conservative you're likely to first be totally ostracized and then fired. Like on college campuses where if it becomes known you are likely to see demands you lose your chair and are dismissed.

 

Communism at it's finest. It's why the public likes it. They have known no other way, since birth. From public school to University to work, it's all they've been accustomed to.

 

For the Love of Christ you are already protected against that it is not okay for an employer to make a hostile work environment there is an entire organization devoted to this called the EEOC.

how would we do that?

 

How about a mandatory union?

 

it may make sense to you but you're not asking you you're asking me. If you want to have the discussion about this you have to make it to where I understand what it means.

I have given feedback twice that it does not make sense. Your failure to explain is you failing to communicate.

because I don't understand the question.

It was your question if you can't explain it you probably don't understand it either.

 

You are wrong. We indeed do base laws in feelings. However, those feelings of fear should be based what a REASONABLE person would conclude are legitimate reasons for being afraid. Living in fear that a person will be denied their means of sustenance because of their political views is a legitimate fear.

You may be able to find another job, you may not be able to find another job, the point is that employers should not be able to coerce employees in this way. We live in a democracy that is in a republic.

If an employer can fire someone because they don't agree with their political beliefs that is an unacceptable level of coercion.

Laws that specifically forbid harassment by employers due to political beliefs make it more difficult for those who would engage in that behavior to get away with it.

We do strive in that direction, and the evidence for that is that we extend suffrage in a very liberal fashion.

If you want to engage in respectful debate then you don't need to use profanity. That said, I am going to say to you again, it is necessary so that it will be more difficult for those who would engage in that behavior to get away with it.

 

That's a different question, although it is a good one.

 

I am not talking about college campuses now, UNLESS IT CONCERNS EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES. In that case the same applies. Employers should not be allowed to dictate their employees political views. IF it does go on in Silicon Valley, it should not be allowed. I have stated that several times in this thread.