4 ms·

Because it's mostly a stage play. My father was the lead of Human Resources (don't know how it translates in English) in a bank. He was once hold for a night

Because it's mostly a stage play. My father was the lead of Human Resources (don't know how it translates in English) in a bank. He was once hold for a night during a strike, with 3 other persons. The union leader told him "It's not you sir, we like you as a person, but it's what you represents that we hold here". So they ordered pizzas and managed to sleep on coaches and were "freed" the next day. No one was hurt. He didn't liked it in any way, but what was the point of torching the offices down ? For the record, it was in the French West Indies, where unions are far more powerful than in metropolitan France.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
sesutton 8y ago
Kidnapping is kidnapping no matter how nice the the kidnappers are.
- roel_v 8y ago
  If you're being held at knifepoint by a mad man in a home invasion, your best course of action is to take the first opportunity to either escape or neutralize the kidnapper with violence. When you're symbolically held in an office for press coverage and you know you'll be fed, and released in a few days, your best course of action is to sit down and play on your phone for 24h. I'm not pro union, but is that so hard to understand? Are you really going to make a keyboard warrior claim here that you'd stick a fork in the neck of a union member holding you 'hostage' the first opportunity you get?
  - boobsbr 8y ago
    > When you're symbolically held It's not symbolical if the person is not allowed to leave.
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    No, it's not hard to understand: it's illegal. If someone restricts your movement against your will then depending on how much force they are prepared to bring to bear they should let you go or suffer the consequences. There is nothing symbolical about this, it is actual kidnapping.
    - roel_v 8y ago
      OK, it's actual kidnapping. And it's illegal. Now walk me through this: 1. you are held hostage in a home invasion. You kill a kidnapper. The police won't arrest you (in the Netherlands - maybe other European countries they will, I don't know many details of all EU countries - but this is just for argument's sake anyway). Most likely you will not be convicted of anything (depending on the exact circumstances). 2. you are held hostage during a strike by a union group. They put you in an office, bring you some water maybe, then lock the door (or let's make it more extreme - let's say they tape your hands together, just like the burglar in the scenario above). You wriggle yourself out, take the knife on the side table that is usually used to cut cake for someone's birthday, and when the door opens, you stab the guy on strike in the eye and run out. What do you think will happen? Will you be charged and/or convicted in this second scenario? If there is a (in terms of legal repercussions) difference in outcome between the two scenarios, why do you think that is? Would the defense in the court be 'oh but I was actually being held hostage, this was justified self defense'? (note that I'm not talking about what 'ought to be' here, I'm talking about 'what is'. I'm not interested in arguing hypotheticals based on legicentric fantasy legal theory. Although one might argue what a person in such a case could reasonably expect to happen, which is a real consideration in a legal argument on self defense.)
      - chrisseaton 8y ago
        Being completely realistic, what I would do would be to just attempt to leave. If they locked a door I would try to break it down or break a window to get out. They'll either let me leave, or they're going to have to start to use force to stop my leaving, right? At that point they're the ones escalating it. The more force they used to try to stop me leaving, the more force I'd try to match it with. If they get to the point where they're trying to make me stay using a knife, then yes I would literally stab them to escape, which would be totally reasonable force. If it's really as 'just a prank bro' as you say, I guess they'd just let me leave at the point where I start breaking things to get out. If they're willing to use violence to keep me then I'm going to try to overmatch that with more violence. The problem with just sitting there and accepting being captured is that you don't know how far it will escalate, and you have no control any more over what happens to you. You need to resist when you have the chance, not leave it until the point where things turn really ugly. There were several cases of bosses being stripped recently weren't there? They must have been terrified they were going to be raped. Any reasonable person is going to fight for their life in that situation.
jacquesm 8y ago
Stage play or not if you want to hold me against my will you'd better be prepared to back that up. Really, I understand the demands but if it has nothing to do with me personally then there is no need to hold me personally. Besides that managers have kids & spouses to get home to as well.
baud147258 8y ago
Well, there's a manager at Air France that lost his shirt in that type of labor dispute; it does not always end up peacefully.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

sesutton 8y ago

Kidnapping is kidnapping no matter how nice the the kidnappers are.

roel_v 8y ago
If you're being held at knifepoint by a mad man in a home invasion, your best course of action is to take the first opportunity to either escape or neutralize the kidnapper with violence. When you're symbolically held in an office for press coverage and you know you'll be fed, and released in a few days, your best course of action is to sit down and play on your phone for 24h. I'm not pro union, but is that so hard to understand? Are you really going to make a keyboard warrior claim here that you'd stick a fork in the neck of a union member holding you 'hostage' the first opportunity you get?
- boobsbr 8y ago
  > When you're symbolically held It's not symbolical if the person is not allowed to leave.
- jacquesm 8y ago
  No, it's not hard to understand: it's illegal. If someone restricts your movement against your will then depending on how much force they are prepared to bring to bear they should let you go or suffer the consequences. There is nothing symbolical about this, it is actual kidnapping.
  - roel_v 8y ago
    OK, it's actual kidnapping. And it's illegal. Now walk me through this: 1. you are held hostage in a home invasion. You kill a kidnapper. The police won't arrest you (in the Netherlands - maybe other European countries they will, I don't know many details of all EU countries - but this is just for argument's sake anyway). Most likely you will not be convicted of anything (depending on the exact circumstances). 2. you are held hostage during a strike by a union group. They put you in an office, bring you some water maybe, then lock the door (or let's make it more extreme - let's say they tape your hands together, just like the burglar in the scenario above). You wriggle yourself out, take the knife on the side table that is usually used to cut cake for someone's birthday, and when the door opens, you stab the guy on strike in the eye and run out. What do you think will happen? Will you be charged and/or convicted in this second scenario? If there is a (in terms of legal repercussions) difference in outcome between the two scenarios, why do you think that is? Would the defense in the court be 'oh but I was actually being held hostage, this was justified self defense'? (note that I'm not talking about what 'ought to be' here, I'm talking about 'what is'. I'm not interested in arguing hypotheticals based on legicentric fantasy legal theory. Although one might argue what a person in such a case could reasonably expect to happen, which is a real consideration in a legal argument on self defense.)
    - chrisseaton 8y ago
      Being completely realistic, what I would do would be to just attempt to leave. If they locked a door I would try to break it down or break a window to get out. They'll either let me leave, or they're going to have to start to use force to stop my leaving, right? At that point they're the ones escalating it. The more force they used to try to stop me leaving, the more force I'd try to match it with. If they get to the point where they're trying to make me stay using a knife, then yes I would literally stab them to escape, which would be totally reasonable force. If it's really as 'just a prank bro' as you say, I guess they'd just let me leave at the point where I start breaking things to get out. If they're willing to use violence to keep me then I'm going to try to overmatch that with more violence. The problem with just sitting there and accepting being captured is that you don't know how far it will escalate, and you have no control any more over what happens to you. You need to resist when you have the chance, not leave it until the point where things turn really ugly. There were several cases of bosses being stripped recently weren't there? They must have been terrified they were going to be raped. Any reasonable person is going to fight for their life in that situation.

jacquesm 8y ago

Stage play or not if you want to hold me against my will you'd better be prepared to back that up. Really, I understand the demands but if it has nothing to do with me personally then there is no need to hold me personally. Besides that managers have kids & spouses to get home to as well.

baud147258 8y ago

Well, there's a manager at Air France that lost his shirt in that type of labor dispute; it does not always end up peacefully.