Timeline for Is it reasonable for me to complain about an objectionable newspaper being ordered for the office?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 1, 2017 at 16:30 | comment | added | ggiaquin16 | @Wildcard yes, whispers would suggest that many found the email to be unfavorable. As you say, something like this would be hard to write. I can't imagine how many hours the legal team probably spent reviewing it. Not a job I would like. Cheers for a civilized talk! rare to have these days... even on SE. | |
| Dec 1, 2017 at 15:45 | comment | added | Wildcard | @ggiaquin, fair enough. I can easily imagine that such an email would be both difficult to write, and easy for the recipients to find offputting. I'm glad we agree about my hypothetical email wording. And good you didn't have to deal with a conflict of interest, since you were already voting that way! | |
| Dec 1, 2017 at 15:35 | comment | added | ggiaquin16 | @Wildcard it was not quite worded that way but I do find that to be reasonable as you worded it. Unfortunately, I don't really want to give out specifics as it would make it known what company I work for (it's a fairly well known national company) and it would also be digressing from the real issue. As I said, even before the email I was going to vote as they suggested anyways. It was just odd to me as I have never had a company try to send out an email like that before. | |
| Dec 1, 2017 at 3:28 | comment | added | Wildcard | @ggiaquin, "According to the accounting department's analysis, if this bill is passed it will put this branch office in the red unless we triple our revenue. Layoffs would unfortunately be extremely likely." Would you find such an email objectionable (assuming it were factual)? I wouldn't. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 23:27 | comment | added | ggiaquin16 | @Pharap yes, it was definitely on a local prop and not a national thing or to vote for a certain politician. Still it was weird even if I shared the same values as the company prior to the mail, I found it slightly off-putting that they were wanting us to vote based on company interest instead of personal interest. I understand a company wants to protect their interests and expect employees to want to as well (cause you know we need a job) but I do hope next time we have a vote that they try not to influence people. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 23:22 | comment | added | Pharap | Perhaps they also got away with it because it's a bill rather than a particular party. The distinction between local and national politics sometimes blurs things. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 23:19 | comment | added | ggiaquin16 | @Pharap it seemed unusual as I have never had a job do it either in the past. They didn't TELL people how to vote which is where I think makes the distinct difference. They merely stated, "if this bill gets passed it does X for our company, if it gets denied it will do X for our company. Here are some facts and links provided both for the argument and against it. Please try to keep pros and cons in mind when casting your vote (or something like that)." Yea I suppose thinking back on it, they were implying that we should vote a certain way but it was done tactfully and nonconfrontational IMO. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 23:11 | comment | added | Pharap | "My company sent out an email to everyone during election time to ask people to vote a certain way with local bills." I must admit I'm slightly concerned about that. I think that would at the least be frowned upon in Britain and at the most might be illegal. I agree with the "don't like, don't look" sentiment though, so +1. | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 18:27 | history | answered | ggiaquin16 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |