Check Out This Gem

[BarTopDancer]

One of many [to come] sent to us by our company president.

Hello All: As you ponder who to vote for in the upcoming primaries and then later in the general presidential election, please understand that candidates who propose raising taxes, given the current mortgage, real estate and housing major downturn, would plunge our country into a serious recession that WOULD COST JOBS. In fact, every time taxes are raised the government generates less tax revenue not more because economic activities are curtailed. Only when taxes are cut do we see greater economic activity and job growth. This is Economics 101 and it has been proven time and again. It is no coincidence that the Red States tend to have more job growth and healthier economies than the high tax blue states that typically have higher unemployment. I am not going to tell you who to vote for; though I am sure you know my leanings; but I am going to tell you that higher taxes would be bad for our country and clients and that would be bad for our industry. So please listen carefully to what all candidates are saying before you vote. Those that talk about taxing the “rich” always end up taxing everyone because they support big government programs that are bad for the economy and lead to even more deficit spending. The federal government already has trillions of tax dollars much of which is wasted. We don’t need to give them any more of our money especially when it will cost jobs.

[sleepyjeff]

Sounds like a JFK fan:



Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now.

~John F. Kennedy

[Pirate Bill]

Makes sense to me.

Although, I do question the appropriateness and professionalism of the company president sending political messages to employees.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Makes sense to me.I have to disagree - this is quite the collection of general statements. "Raising taxes is bad." I could say "cutting programs is bad" and be equally right/wrong.

[Pirate Bill]

I have to disagree - this is quite the collection of general statements.

Well, then it's a poorly crafted letter. But reducing spendable income does hurt the economy.

[Betty]

Politics needs to stay out of the workplace unless that's what you do for a living. Religion too. What was he thinking? Why not add - you may not have a job if you don't vote the way I say to?

[Capt Jack]

yeah, I do see this as a bit on the inappropriate side. encouraging voter turn out is one thing but it really should stop at that IMO

[Morrigoon]

He didn't technically say which way to vote. He encouraged you to consider certain issues.

[sleepyjeff]

He didn't technically say which way to vote. He encouraged you to consider certain issues.


Exactly!

Besides; free speech is for everyone.....not just people who have "activist" on their business cards;)

[Prudence]

There can be a significant power dynamic between the company president and the average employee. From some people, "I don't care how you vote, but if you vote for the wrong people you're voting against our industry" means "If you vote the wrong way, as determined by me, you're being disloyal to the company and that will have professional ramifications for you." And, of course, it's not a public forum; employees aren't free to present opposing view points.

Now, it's the president of the company, it's not a government workplace, he didn't expressly order employees to vote a certain way, and I'm not saying that he did anything illegal.

But, I think it's inappropriate.

Of course, I also think it's inappropriate for my workplace to bludgeon me over the head with pressure to donate to their United Way campaign, including sending people around to personally confront those who haven't elected to give in that way.

[Chernabog]

Besides; free speech is for everyone.....not just people who have "activist" on their business cards;)

But again, totally inappropriate to send to everyone at work.

I mean yeah, speech is free, the CEO can send an email saying that gay marriage would cause a slippery slope that would end in men marrying cats, cats marrying dogs, and Nazis riding dinosaurs, but it's still inappropriate for the workplace and consequences should be expected.

[CoasterMatt]

My workplace gave me pumpkin pie yesterday. Somebody from senior management even wished me a 'Merry Christmas'.

We get asked by management from time to time to donate to some of the charities that the company helps support, or to volunteer at same charities = totally appropriate

I agree with Prudence on this one, nothing illegal, but inappropriate.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Agreed on inappropriateness.

Well, then it's a poorly crafted letter. But reducing spendable income does hurt the economy.So does cutting programs. Both are equally true and untrue, simultaneously, depending on the exact changes you're talking about. Both can make things better, both can make things worse. If you want to get into examples, we can...

He didn't technically say which way to vote. He encouraged you to consider certain issues.Oh yes, the issues of "higher taxes are bad" and "those that talk about taxing the “rich” always end up taxing everyone". Yup, those are issues, all right. :rolleyes:

[Not Afraid]

I wonder what would happen if you "replied to all" and wrote your own rebuttal or gave your own "SUGGESTIONS"?

[BarTopDancer]

If *I* did it I'd probably lose my job for some technical failure [that would mysteriously occur and I'd be blamed for]. He already tried to have my job when his wireless at home went out (because his son configured it wrong) and I couldn't tell him right-then-and-there how to fix it. :eek: Thankfully I have some awesome bosses who said uhhh that's not her job. We'll help you.

We used to have a few managers who would do just that. However, they had the established interpersonal relationship with him to do it.

I posted this note for a few reasons. I wanted to see what an objective eye thought of its appropriateness. I also wanted to see what an objective eye made of the content and ideals in it.

[Morrigoon]

Well, again, if the issues at hand affect the industry of your company in some way, then I could see how they would want you to be aware of that. Just like Disney tells its employees about their progress in the struggle between SOAR and whatever the deveoper's "public interest" front is called. Disney isn't telling you who to vote for, but they make it clear that these issues affect the company you work for, and by association, you.

He's not saying you, individually, will be fired for not voting this way. But he is stating that some issues on the table affect the health of your employer, and by association, your job security. He's also not promising that you won't be fired if you vote his way.

But to be fair, he also doesn't sound like a peach of a person, either.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Well, again, if the issues at hand affect the industry of your company in some way, then I could see how they would want you to be aware of that. Just like Disney tells its employees about their progress in the struggle between SOAR and whatever the deveoper's "public interest" front is called. Disney isn't telling you who to vote for, but they make it clear that these issues affect the company you work for, and by association, you.That email had nothing to do with any specific business activity. It was a general, personal political appeal (full of generalities and speculative assumptions stated as "fact"). Entirely inappropriate for someone in a position of power to send. He wasn't updating his employees on any company matter, he was trying to influence personal political beliefs. Not illegal, but very inappropriate.

[Ghoulish Delight]

My response if I got this from someone that high up in my company:

Dear [jerk]:

I appreciate your passion regarding your political stances, however I do not feel that your email message is an appropriate forum for expressing them. You are in a position of power in this company and while I do not have any reason to expect that you would use that power to punish anyone for disagreeing with you, I believe it's important for someone in that position to recognize the implicit conflict you create by sending such a message. As president of this company, you act as the voice of this company, and by communicating your political views in this fashion, you are creating the impression of an "official company position."

While you express no specific recommendation or threat in your message, I hope you can understand that it risks putting undue pressure on your employees and creating an atmosphere where people can feel that their personal standing in the company is contingent on their political beliefs or actions. It is unlikely that this was your intent, but I'm sure, with your experience in the business world, you are aware that how a message is presented and how it can be perceived is just as important, if not moreso, than actual intent.

I would be happy to engage you, if you were interested, in friendly discussion/debate over the generalities you expressed in your message as I have some disagreement with your conclusions. I simply do not feel that you've expressed them in an appropriate forum.

Sincerely,
[Liberal employee who's goal is clearly to undermine our economy]

[Pirate Bill]

So does cutting programs. Both are equally true and untrue, simultaneously, depending on the exact changes you're talking about. Both can make things better, both can make things worse. If you want to get into examples, we can...

Okay, I see what you mean now. My mind has been preoccupied with work things and I didn't give sufficient thought to what you had said. So, yeah, I can understand that and I do agree.

It's my opinion though that we all (everybody, lower-, middle-, upper-class) are way overtaxed at the moment anyway. I'm anti-"special tax" (cigarette tax, fuel tax, etc.) I'm anti-lottery. I think sales tax is too high (although I am enjoying living in a sales tax-free state). We're taxed on our phones, our utilities, our property. Even renters are paying the property tax for the landlords. The government dips its sticky fingers into my paycheck and takes out even more tax that's above and beyond income tax.

However, there are government sponsored programs that I am in favor of that do require tax dollars, and so taxes are a necessity. I just wish it could be done in a more favorable way. No nickel and diming us at every turn. Equitable across all incomes. And sufficient to efficiently fund a smaller government.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

It's my opinion though that we all (everybody, lower-, middle-, upper-class) are way overtaxed at the moment anyway. I'm anti-"special tax" (cigarette tax, fuel tax, etc.) I'm anti-lottery. I think sales tax is too high (although I am enjoying living in a sales tax-free state). We're taxed on our phones, our utilities, our property. Even renters are paying the property tax for the landlords. The government dips its sticky fingers into my paycheck and takes out even more tax that's above and beyond income tax.

However, there are government sponsored programs that I am in favor of that do require tax dollars, and so taxes are a necessity. I just wish it could be done in a more favorable way. No nickel and diming us at every turn. Equitable across all incomes. And sufficient to efficiently fund a smaller government.See, now that is a decently written, pointful opinion piece. Even if the person reading it doesn't agree with all of it, it's worth engaging, and shows that you're an intelligent person with specific ideas.
That's all I ask in political discussions.

On another note - I don't think I'd ever have the guts to send the letter GD posted above, unless I were actively looking for another job.

[BarTopDancer]

Our HR director has told him he is a lawsuit waiting to happen and he is not to send out emails other than company updates (new offices open, new acquisitions) or congratulations without her approval.

He's ignoring it.

One of these days he, or the company is going to be sued for a hostile work environment, if not discrimination.

[Kevy Baby]

One of these days he, or the company is going to be sued for a hostile work environment, if not discrimination.If I knew it wouldn't be a nightmare that I would have to deal with for many years, I could EASILY file one of those.

[€uroMeinke]

The Key is to file while the company is still lucrative

[BarTopDancer]

If I knew it wouldn't be a nightmare that I would have to deal with for many years, I could EASILY file one of those.

There are a lot more where that came from.

The Key is to file while the company is still lucrative

There is the issue. Real estate is not lucrative right now.

[Morrigoon]

Feh... tell me.

What is it you do, BTD?

[BarTopDancer]

I do tech support for a relocation company. Our profits are tied to people selling and buying homes and the moving that goes with it. We also have a mortgage division.