McDonald’s Workers Are Told Whom to Vote for

[tater]

The employer could fire them then anyway, after reading their minds and determining they voted wrong.

You have to bend over backwards to make this a "threat." It's ridiculous. My guess is that it has the opposite effect, too, my reaction to being told to do something has traditionally been to try and do the opposite

[Gerald]

They employees are brainwashed,

[Catfish]

Hello,
it is a bit like this sign "Do not pee against the lamp post."
No one would ever have thought of doing it, but this sign ...
Maybe the republicans just lost a lot of McD workers.
Greetings,
Catfish

[Gerald]

Or is it vice versa,

[Méo]

Originally Posted by tater

The employer could fire them then anyway, after reading their minds and determining they voted wrong.

True story.

2 months ago, my cousin wrote on Facebook that he had an interview on Friday (IIRC, and he took a day off or half a day?? anyway..). Many of his ''Friends'' were workmate. On Monday, his boss told him to come in his office and told him: ''So it looks like you hate your job...''

For some reason, I don't think his employer read his mind...

[Diopos]

Originally Posted by tater

The employer could fire them then anyway, after reading their minds and determining they voted wrong.

You have to bend over backwards to make this a "threat." It's ridiculous. My guess is that it has the opposite effect, too, my reaction to being told to do something has traditionally been to try and do the opposite

As I said before the criterion is if "they" are elected not if the employees vote for "them" . You know, when the "managment" wrote down that note, they should be more specific on what they actually communicated to the employees, putting aside the legality or how proper the whole thing was. You are quite on the point, on the "reactionary" effect all this might actually have!

.

[SteamWake]

I just realized this morning that all this tizzy is over one single store where the manager decided to do this.

Now I dont know about your office / workplace but we discuss who to vote for alot.

I'm pretty confident that most of the burger flippers saw this note in their pay envelope and promptly filed it in the waste basket unread.

As always this seems to be much to do about nothing.

[Méo]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

I'm pretty confident that most of the burger flippers saw this note in their pay envelope and promptly filed it in the waste basket unread.

As always this seems to be much to do about nothing.

Of course, I agree.

What amaze me is that some folks here seems to see it as an interesting concept (i.e. for any jobs).

[DarkFish]

Originally Posted by August

1. McDonalds has absolutely no way of determining how an employee will vote.

Doesn't matter, since McDonalds isn't the "executing force" behind the threat.

2. They could get full employee compliance and it will still make little difference to the outcome of the election.

Doesn't matter either, they try to make their employers think otherwise.

3. If the Dems win the Federal laws that are responsible for the pay cut will remain in force and the pay cut will happen even if every employee voted for the recommended candidates like they have been asked.

Doesn't matter. At the very most this makes it an empty threat, but a threat nonetheless.

Now every one of these ridiculous and increasingly violent analogies you and the others put forth here are rendered totally invalid by those essential facts.

Facts that have no influence whatsoever over if it's a threat or not.

If you're going to make analogies at least make them plausibly accurate. This isn't Hollywood, vivid imagery doesn't substitute for substance.

Does "vivid imagery" make an analogy false?

EDIT: Just a reminder: who came up with the "vividly imagined" false analogy of the man warning you to step in front of a bus? It wasn't me. Pot calling the kettle black.

[Gerald]

@DarkFish! In your headline "edit" (at the bottom of your mail) on any bus story so it can be taken from the "air"

Originally Posted by Castout

You know slipping political pamphlet into paycheck envelope is at the very least UNETHICAL.

And to add negative implying that could be interpreted as soft threat in it is DISGUSTING.

The methods of THIRD WORLD flop democracies.

i see it as an advance notice of a change in benefits and its a common practice done by many companies and as someone else has already stated its even worse by unions who DO actually tell you who to vote for by name.

the notice these employees got was only pointing out the truth by stating facts which is no more of a threat then telling someone if you touch a hot stove you will burn your hand. there is no difference there.


if the democrats continue and the republicans cant put a stop to the madness then yes companies large and small will continue to cut benefits and lay off more and more workers.

[August]

Originally Posted by DarkFish

Just a reminder: who came up with the "vividly imagined" false analogy of the man warning you to step in front of a bus? It wasn't me. Pot calling the kettle black.

It's ridiculous to compare an accurate friendly warning meant to save a person from harm with a threat uttered during the act of a heinous crime like rape. If you don't understand the difference it is a waste of my time arguing with you about it.


Have a nice day *























































* That was not intended as a threat.

[DarkFish]

Originally Posted by August

It's ridiculous to compare an accurate friendly warning meant to save a person from harm with a threat uttered during the act of a heinous crime like rape. If you don't understand the difference it is a waste of my time arguing with you about it.

It would be utterly easy to explain this to you, but since you don't give me the chance as you've finished discussing, why should I?

Have a nice day *

you too. Please know I don't have any ill feelings towards you.

[Méo]

Originally Posted by August

an accurate friendly warning

This is where we disagree, you think of them as ''friends''.

I think they are neither my friend nor my enemy, they just want to maximise their profits no matter what it takes (even if they have to get in very unethical practices).

Honesty, probity and transparency are not qualities of a ''good corporate manager''.

[August]

Originally Posted by Méo

This is where we disagree, you think of them as ''friends''.

I think they are neither my friend nor my enemy, they just want to maximise their profits no matter what it takes (even if they have to get in very unethical practices).

Honesty, probity and transparency are not qualities of a ''good corporate manager''.

Dude, it comes down to this:

You either prefer that a company share this type of information with it's employees or you don't.

For those who don't, perhaps you could explain why being blindsided by a pay cut later on is preferable to being given advance warning.


Edit: Oh and "friendly" was referring to a warning against stepping in front of moving bus.