3 ms·
There have been a few high-profile reports in this election cycle of people threatening layoffs with a secret ballot. They tinge it with, if these policies are
by shawn-butler 14y ago
There have been a few high-profile reports in this election cycle of people threatening layoffs with a secret ballot. They tinge it with, if these policies are enacted we will cut hours, not hire, etc to hedge. The Papa Johns CEO was fairly candid, I also think I read of a coal mine announcing layoffs the day after the election, etc.
I'm fairly certain it is a violation of most state civil right laws and probably explicit state constitutional guarantees to discriminate in employment on the basis of political affiliation just as it is race, gender, etc. I know it is in the state in which I reside.
So I think this is a red-herring.
- makomk 14y agoThe mere fact of it being illegal didn't stop it from happening...
- shawn-butler 14y agoThe salient point being that having a "secret" ballot has not stopped it from happening either. My employer can easily verify if they choose if I have donated to the "correct" candidate already and rampant job discrimination seems not to occur in a significant amount. So, one has to balance the risk of someone acting illegally in either case to discriminate against/coerce versus the increase in voter participation that would naturally occur in having online voting that was verifiable. I think it's an easy case to make, but perhaps I'm overlooking something.