Corporate Boycotts and Employee Termination

[Diopolis]

I’m of the school of thought that boycotting businesses for political reasons is usually stupid but broadly within the pale of acceptable behavior. Firing, not so much.
So not eating chic fil a is acceptable, even if it is dumb. Mozilla firing Brandon Eich, on the other hand, is both unacceptable and dumb.

[Ifreann]

Workers have rights, including protection from arbitrary termination. Businesses do not have rights. Therefore I can choose to boycott any business for any reason, but businesses, whether multinational corporations or sole traders, cannot arbitrarily fire their workers.

[The Black Forrest]

People choose to fire others for violation of policy; failing to do the job; hurting the business, etc. They are not boycotted.

Politics is usually not a measurement of work. Just like religion. If I don’t like Christians, I can’t fire them or not hire them because of them being one. Now if they try to evangelize while on the job and ignore warnings? Termination is warranted.

Then is not the work of a company the sale of its products? If so, then why is politics a measure of that work?

If it is right for you, as a purchaser of chicken sandwiches, to decline to do business due to politics then why would it not be right for you, as a purchaser of labor, to decline to do business due to politics?

Politics is a measure of work when the business is involved with it. Politics is a measure of work when it becomes destructive influence to work. For example; a trumpest who gets rather mouthy about Trump and disrupts the other workers, etc.

Unless you are in the political process; a person’s politics is their own business. You the business owner have no say in the matter. You the business owner can’t ask about it or judge. You are only paying for a function to be done. The fact the person likes/hates trump is irrelevant to the job. Now if the worker bothers others and customers about it? You can talk to them and if they refuse to change; as you call it “boycott” them.

[Risottia]

Looks like he didn't associate his work and workplace to the expression of his political (shitty) ideas, so yeah, I think he shouldn't have been fired.

I will be honest with you I am all for firing nazis and communist.

I will be honest with you, I am all for firing capitalists. Not from workplaces, though. From the muzzle of a forty-pounder.

[Risottia]

So what if it is not a corporation but one person hiring another? Is that the same thing?

Depends.
It's a private citizen buying a service from a professional? Then the service contract can be terminated as per law and eventual rules agreed by contract.
It's a single-owner company hiring an employee? Then no.

[Cekoviu]

I’m of the school of thought that boycotting businesses for political reasons is usually stupid but broadly within the pale of acceptable behavior. Firing, not so much.
So not eating chic fil a is acceptable, even if it is dumb. Mozilla firing Brandon Eich, on the other hand, is both unacceptable and dumb.

He resigned, mate.

[Elwher]

So what if it is not a corporation but one person hiring another? Is that the same thing?

Depends.
It's a private citizen buying a service from a professional? Then the service contract can be terminated as per law and eventual rules agreed by contract.
It's a single-owner company hiring an employee? Then no.

Why not? If I can decide not to spend my chicken sandwich money due to the producer's politics, why can't I decide not to spend my employee salary money due to the producer's politics?

[Elwher]

Then is not the work of a company the sale of its products? If so, then why is politics a measure of that work?

If it is right for you, as a purchaser of chicken sandwiches, to decline to do business due to politics then why would it not be right for you, as a purchaser of labor, to decline to do business due to politics?

Politics is a measure of work when the business is involved with it. Politics is a measure of work when it becomes destructive influence to work. For example; a trumpest who gets rather mouthy about Trump and disrupts the other workers, etc.

Unless you are in the political process; a person’s politics is their own business. You the business owner have no say in the matter. You the business owner can’t ask about it or judge. You are only paying for a function to be done. The fact the person likes/hates trump is irrelevant to the job. Now if the worker bothers others and customers about it? You can talk to them and if they refuse to change; as you call it “boycott” them.

As a consumer of chicken sandwiches, You are only paying for a function to be done. That function is making a chicken sandwich. How does the politics of the sandwich maker affect that function?

[Elwher]

Workers have rights, including protection from arbitrary termination. Businesses do not have rights. Therefore I can choose to boycott any business for any reason, but businesses, whether multinational corporations or sole traders, cannot arbitrarily fire their workers.

I understand and agree on the legal position. My question, however, is not is it legal but is it right? Why should a person not have the right to stop patronizing an employee due to politics but have the right to stop patronizing a business for the same reason.

[The Black Forrest]

Politics is a measure of work when the business is involved with it. Politics is a measure of work when it becomes destructive influence to work. For example; a trumpest who gets rather mouthy about Trump and disrupts the other workers, etc.

Unless you are in the political process; a person’s politics is their own business. You the business owner have no say in the matter. You the business owner can’t ask about it or judge. You are only paying for a function to be done. The fact the person likes/hates trump is irrelevant to the job. Now if the worker bothers others and customers about it? You can talk to them and if they refuse to change; as you call it “boycott” them.

As a consumer of chicken sandwiches, You are only paying for a function to be done. That function is making a chicken sandwich. How does the politics of the sandwich maker affect that function?

Simple. You make a choice to purchase that sandwich. Your views on homosexuality feel violated by the company’s stated views on homosexuality. Boycott is your choice.

You the business owner needing somebody to work a microwave; the operators views are irrelevant. Are they doing the job? That’s all that matters.

[The Black Forrest]

Workers have rights, including protection from arbitrary termination. Businesses do not have rights. Therefore I can choose to boycott any business for any reason, but businesses, whether multinational corporations or sole traders, cannot arbitrarily fire their workers.

I understand and agree on the legal position. My question, however, is not is it legal but is it right? Why should a person not have the right to stop patronizing an employee due to politics but have the right to stop patronizing a business for the same reason.

Patronizing an employee can get you sued.

Customers patronizing your store make that choice.

You pay the employee to be there and to do a job. Unless his politics is disrupting the business, they are irrelevant.

[Elwher]

As a consumer of chicken sandwiches, You are only paying for a function to be done. That function is making a chicken sandwich. How does the politics of the sandwich maker affect that function?

Simple. You make a choice to purchase that sandwich. Your views on homosexuality feel violated by the company’s stated views on homosexuality. Boycott is your choice.

You the business owner needing somebody to work a microwave; the operators views are irrelevant. Are they doing the job? That’s all that matters.

I make a choice to hire that employee. My views of equality feel violated by the employee's stated support of Al Sharpton's Antisemitism. No longer employing him is my choice.

Or

I the consumer need someone to make me a chicken sandwich, the maker's views are irrelevant. Are they making me a chicken sandwich (doing the job)? That's all that matters.

[The Black Forrest]

Simple. You make a choice to purchase that sandwich. Your views on homosexuality feel violated by the company’s stated views on homosexuality. Boycott is your choice.

You the business owner needing somebody to work a microwave; the operators views are irrelevant. Are they doing the job? That’s all that matters.

I make a choice to hire that employee. My views of equality feel violated by the employee's stated support of Al Sharpton's Antisemitism. No longer employing him is my choice.

Or

I the consumer need someone to make me a chicken sandwich, the maker's views are irrelevant. Are they making me a chicken sandwich (doing the job)? That's all that matters.

Nope. Is he doing the job as expected? Is he being disruptive? Nobody is going to argue if you tried to correct his work output or talked to him over being disruptive and the problems continue.

The operative word is “customer” if you want them; their views matter. If you want the customers who support homosexual rights; don’t get the business involved in the issue. This is not a new thing. Most businesses avoid politics and religion for that reason. Rember the dominos CEO who was highly involved with Operation Rescue. They chose to separate ties due the the publicity issues.

[Kubra]

Yes, if it means demand for Popeyes goes up.
I'd like a Popeyes nearby.

[Bear Stearns]

Businesses can only grow through structured debt financing transactions syndicated by Bear Stearns

[Cekoviu]

Yes, if it means demand for Popeyes goes up.
I'd like a Popeyes nearby.

I've never been. Is it good?

[Grinning Dragon]

Yes, if it means demand for Popeyes goes up.
I'd like a Popeyes nearby.

I've never been. Is it good?

Popeye's Chicken is meh.

[Kubra]

I've never been. Is it good?

Popeye's Chicken is meh.

well sure but it's deffo the best fast food fried chicken
And I mean that gravy oh man
That gravy, man

[Elwher]

I make a choice to hire that employee. My views of equality feel violated by the employee's stated support of Al Sharpton's Antisemitism. No longer employing him is my choice.

Or

I the consumer need someone to make me a chicken sandwich, the maker's views are irrelevant. Are they making me a chicken sandwich (doing the job)? That's all that matters.

Nope. Is he doing the job as expected? Is he being disruptive? Nobody is going to argue if you tried to correct his work output or talked to him over being disruptive and the problems continue.

The operative word is “customer” if you want them; their views matter. If you want the customers who support homosexual rights; don’t get the business involved in the issue. This is not a new thing. Most businesses avoid politics and religion for that reason. Rember the dominos CEO who was highly involved with Operation Rescue. They chose to separate ties due the the publicity issues.

As an employer, I am the customer for the employee's work. If he wants me to continue as his customer, my views matter in the same way that if a business wants me as a customer for their product.

[Vetalia]

As an employer, I am the customer for the employee's work. If he wants me to continue as his customer, my views matter in the same way that if a business wants me as a customer for their product.

That's not a valid analogy; you're not "buying" their work like a good or service, you're paying them to perform work for you in order to meet the objectives of the business with the ultimate goal of growing your business and/or improving its operations. A more appropriate comparison would be the decision not to hire someone based upon their political views or actions; there is an ongoing contractual relationship involved in employment that doesn't equate to the decision to buy or not buy a particular product.

[Bear Stearns]

If someone found out that someone was a bogeyman ideology (for the sake of argument here let's say they're a Nazi), is that person right to out that person to their employer and get them fired?

[Thermodolia]

I've never been. Is it good?

Popeye's Chicken is meh.

Bojangles is better

[Cekoviu]

Popeye's Chicken is meh.

Bojangles is better

We don't get that out west.

[Thermodolia]

Bojangles is better

We don't get that out west.

You poor people. Y’all need to get one. Bojangles offers great chicken biscuits, Cajun chicken biscuits, and buttermilk biscuits all day long. They are to die for.

[Cekoviu]

We don't get that out west.

You poor people. Y’all need to get one. Bojangles offers great chicken biscuits, Cajun chicken biscuits, and buttermilk biscuits all day long. They are to die for.

I do love a good biscuit, although I normally make those myself because my family has a good recipe.