Tag: 2020 Election

Posted on

If you care about the future of democracy, then we must count every single vote

coronavirus

As I type at 6:30 a.m. on the morning after, we still don’t know who won the presidency. There are nine states and 87 electoral votes undecided, and few of those states (Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, and Pennsylvania) will ultimately determine the winner.

Yet, in the wee hours of the morning, Donald Trump took to a White House podium and stated his clear and unambiguous intent to go to the Supreme Court to stop the counting of outstanding votes, which he says is “a fraud on the American public.”

Let me make this as clear as possible. This is not about left/right, blue/ ed, or Biden/Trump. This is about the legitimacy and future of our democracy.
We need to make sure every vote that has been lawfully cast is counted. Otherwise, we will never know who legitimately wins this election. Whether it’s a Biden win or a Trump win, we need to know who actually wins. Otherwise, why have an election at all? If we can’t trust the results of our election as the will of our nation, why bother?
If you care about the future of our democracy and the future of our country, then we must count every single vote. Period. The fraud here isn’t in uncounted votes. The fraud is in not counting them at all and declaring a winner by disenfranchising millions of voters.
Posted on

Results — Would you boycott a business based on the candidate it supports?

employee activism

The results are. Thank you to the 244 of you took the time to answer my question: Would you boycott a business based on the candidate whom it (or, more accurately, its ownership) supports for President in this election?

The results:

Yes = 58.6%
No = 41.4%

The comments, however, are more interesting than the results themselves. Here’s a sample.

  • I would boycott a business that supports Trump because he is a racist and anyone (owner of a company included) who supports him signals, to me, that they are fine with racism.
  • I did it with Chik-fil-a because of their stance on LGBTQ so I would definitely do it if I knew they were supporting a racist / conspiracy theory promoting candidate.
  • This election is more than just politics- the candidates have different morals. I want to make sure where I work and who I work with have similar morals to myself.

vs.

  • I prefer to base my business selections on the quality of the products/services offered.
  • It’s time to calm the rhetoric. And that means if someone has a product or service I want, and they didn’t vote the way I liked, I should still buy the product/service. Why? Because that’s the only way to keep America working.

vs.

  • You can’t preach tolerance and then boycott people who don’t agree with you.
  • We need to be tolerant of others’ views- just basic civility. I’m a democrat and Biden supporter and I still feel this way.

vs.

  • This is the start of a slippery slope. First it is the candidate they support, then it is whether they like homosexuals, then it is whether they support abortions then it is whether they like Jews or Muslims or whatever, then it is whether they like whites, blacks or green people. This is how Hitler started.
  • I am tired of boycotts and cancel culture. This has gotten out of control.
  • That’s fascism.
Such a fascinating conversation that I’d never thought about approaching before this year’s election, which is as much (or more) about values than it is about candidates, issues, or ideologies.
I’ll leave you with this thought. No matter the candidate you support or lean towards (or against), please just vote!
Posted on

PLEASE don’t tell your employees which candidate to vote for

employee activism

This post at the Evil HR Lady Facebook group caught my attention yesterday:

Florida company’s president warns employees their jobs could be in danger if Trump loses election

Here are the detail:

Some employees at a Florida manufacturing company feel they were threatened with being laid off if they did not support President Donald Trump.…

Their paystubs included a letter from [the employer] warning them that their jobs could be in danger.

“If Trump and the Republicans win the election, DMC will hopefully be able to continue operating, more or less as it has been operating lately,” the letter read. “However, if Biden and the Democrats win, DMC could be forced to begin permanent layoffs in late 2020 and/or early 2021.”

While it’s not illegal for employers to talk to their employees about the upcoming election and suggest how to vote, there are laws regulating this type of conduct if it goes too far.

The federal government criminalizesintimidation, threats, or coercion for the purpose of interfering with one’s right to vote one’s choice in a federal election. A few states (Michigan, for example) expressly prohibit employers from discharging or otherwise coercing employees to influence their votes in political elections. Ohio is not one of those states.

Legal or illegal, however, you need to ask yourself whether holding meetings to discuss political issues, threatening employees’ jobs, mandating their attendance at political events, or otherwise telling them how they should vote is a valid business practice. How you answer the question of whether you think it’s okay to try to shape or influence your employees’ votes helps define the kind of employer you are. Voting is an intensely personal choice. I don’t think it’s my business how my family or friends cast their votes. I certainly don’t think it’s an employer’s business how its employees cast their votes. Voting booths have privacy curtains for a reason. Exercise some discretion by not invading the privacy of your workers regarding their choice of candidates or political parties.

Posted on

The Employer’s Voice in the Future of American Health Care

shrm health care

I went to the Society for Human Resource Management’s annual conference in Las Vegas this past week with one very specific goal: Get a feel for what HR professionals are excited and worried about in the benefits space, especially regarding health care and the 2020 election.

Tracy Watts, senior partner at Mercer, began here health care presentation with her “favorite quote from the president”: “Nobody knew health care could be so complicated.”

shrm health care

This obviously got a lot of laughs from the audience of HR professionals.

Watts’ main message to employers in the course of her session was that employers, who insure 54 percent of the American population, have a vital role in helping to shape the future of the country’s health care. She cited that employers collectively spend about $668 billion annually on health benefits to cover employees and their dependents. “[Employers] have a bigger stake in this than anybody,” she said.

She also listed the health-related issues that different governing bodies can address and the ones that they’ve already begun to address. For example, the Trump administration has the ability to address HSA guidance, mental health parity, drug prices, HRA guidance and ACA Section 1557 nondiscrimination, and it’s currently addressing the latter three. Meanwhile, Congress has the ability to address the Affordable Care Act employer mandate, HSA reforms, drug prices, the ACA Cadillac tax and out-of-network “surprise” medial bills, and it’s currently addressing the latter three.

My question for employers: What power do you have to impact the health care environment? How are you currently utilizing that power? Where is there still room for improvement?

This session also gave me the opportunity to overhear gossip from the audience about the latest developments in the benefits space. For example, a major piece of health care-related breaking news had just happened in the past 24 hours: President Donald Trump announced his “Executive Order on Improving Price and Quality Transparency in American Healthcare to Put Patients First.”.

Meanwhile, more major changes were happening on the state level. California had just voted to reintroduce the individual mandate for health insurance. Also, a few women around me were expressing frustration about how difficult it is to keep up with what’s happening on the state level in the paid sick leave and paid family leave areas. They expressed exhaustion at dealing with “the nuance of state laws.”

Overall, the 2019 conference meant many HR folk were feeling confused and overwhelmed by the massive regulatory changes happening (or likely to happen) in the benefits space.

Also watch: Tracy Watts on the Executive Order and its Implications for Employers:

More 2019 SHRM Conference Coverage:

Brené Brown at SHRM Conference: ‘Leaders Are Never Quiet About Hard Things’

Exclusive Video Interviews from the 2019 SHRM Conference

The State of #SHRM19 Speech: Wait Until Monday

Day 2 at #SHRM19: It’s All About the Underutilized Talent Pool

SHRM Releases Annual Benefits Survey

Gary Kusher on Workplace Health Care Issues and the 2020 Election