Kentucky Factory workers threatened with firing if they left before tornado - 8 Dead

[Edge-]

As it stands right now there are workers saying both they were threatened and not threatened. they were told they could leave, and some were told they would lose their jobs if they left. The company says their policy would not cause these people to lose their jobs and no one has yet found any policy to dispute this.
So, do you only believe the employees who said they were threatened?

I believe they got a lot of mixed messages, yeah, and that those who say their jobs were threatened are absolutely telling the truth.

Also, if you leave your job, it's not always an immediate job loss.

I think they would also have one hell of a case with emergency funds/unemployment if the facility gets destroyed right after you walked off your job because of a fear of your safety. you think the company is going to appeal your unemployment filing because you walked off the job right before a tornado destroyed it? you think the state is going to deny this claim?

I guess, but do you think you'd want to spend weeks/months on the phone haggling with agencies and corporate and following up to try to get some movement on your case, all while receiving no unemployment or anything else? I mean, if you've got savings maybe you can soak up the costs while fighting over it, but if you don't you're in the same position either way.

[Zan15]

No, I'm not saying that. Please stop gaslighting this thread and forum. If you don't want to have the conversation about what forced means in context, you can just stop replying. I've offered to help, I've patiently explained the point over and over - as have others, but you seem to just push aside the adult responses and continue with your juvenile posts.

Since you're obviously not open to learning new things, we can be done.

My juvenile post? As you question my comprehension through veiled insults of not even being an English-speaking individual? How you make claims about my history here and never being able to say I was wrong with nothing to back that logic up? Being ridiculous about 17 inches is not quite 20 inches as it relates to snow???? Your "attempts" to offer "help" in a condescending way.

I mean come on.

What's next you going to insult how my mother raised me?

I know what forced means and how you are using it.
I can relate that back to personal choice if you refuse too then that is on you. So, I guess we are done then.

- - - Updated - - -

I believe they got a lot of mixed messages, yeah, and that those who say their jobs were threatened are absolutely telling the truth.

What about the ones at the same factory in the same story I posted that said they were not threatened? Who were told it was ok to leave? Do you not believe them?

I am glad you have such conviction for those claims, I am still skeptical of some of them. I am also skeptical of corporates claims too btw, i would want to see it in writing and see the history of actions taken in the past.

I guess, but do you think you'd want to spend weeks/months on the phone haggling with agencies and corporate and following up to try to get some movement on your case, all while receiving no unemployment or anything else? I mean, if you've got savings maybe you can soak up the costs while fighting over it, but if you don't you're in the same position either way.

Do you think this doesn't happen regularly even in normal unemployment situations? A lot of times your claim will be approved, and you will get unemployment while your case is investigated. If it comes to it that you shouldn't have got the benefits, it will be clawed back.

No, it's not a great position to be in that is why i said previously many changes need to happen in how this country handles employment and unemployment. how it handles corporations/businesses who abuse labor laws and take advantage of the working class.

As it stands right now even in normal situations, help for people fucking sucks donkey balls in this country. And not even good donkey balls. The old hairy smelly half dead ones.

[cubby]

My juvenile post? As you question my comprehension through veiled insults of not even being an English-speaking individual? How you make claims about my history here and never being able to say I was wrong with nothing to back that logic up? Being ridiculous about 17 inches is not quite 20 inches as it relates to snow???? Your "attempts" to offer "help" in a condescending way.

They weren't veiled insults. You don't seem to understand that the word forced includes non-physical coercion. Myself and others have explained it to you time again. Moreover, I pointed out where you claim the varied responses from employees and managers seemed to have only a binary answer, and it didn't. All the claims you referred to and quoted could have been simultaneously true. You never responded to that point - after I've brought it up three times now. Do you recall this point you previous made and have now abandoned?

As it stands right now there are workers saying both they were threatened and not threatened. they were told they could leave, and some were told they would lose their jobs if they left. The company says their policy would not cause these people to lose their jobs and no one has yet found any policy to dispute this.
So, do you only believe the employees who said they were threatened?

You still do not understand that both sides can be true - the situations are not mutually exclusive. If you don't understand why, I'm happy to explain it. Or maybe Edge can as we seem to be at loggerheads now.

I know what forced means and how you are using it.

Your really, clearly, don't. Because:

I can relate that back to personal choice if you refuse too then that is on you.

You can't seem to get past this, once again showing you're stuck on this one point, after many people in this thread have patiently explained it to you time and again.

[Shadowferal]

If mgrs used the options "job or no job" then they knew what to say that would sound a threat.

[Jotaux]

They should have been sent home once it was safe to leave even if there was no danger afterward.

[Draco-Onis]

What about the ones at the same factory in the same story I posted that said they were not threatened? Who were told it was ok to leave? Do you not believe them?

I am glad you have such conviction for those claims, I am still skeptical of some of them. I am also skeptical of corporates claims too btw, i would want to see it in writing and see the history of actions taken in the past.

Or you can think about it logically it's not exactly smart to openly talk badly about your employer not everyone can afford to lose their job or have the courage to say something bad about them. The corporate motivation of course are more clear cut and it's rather ludicrous to think they put everything in writing in cases like this. This is a clear instance of he said she said and people tend to believe the people who are in the short end of the stick when it comes to power dynamics.

Another way to think about it is, why would they risk their job and lie about this? the safest thing to do in these situations is to keep your head down and deny anything happen because rich companies got more lawyers than you.

[cubby]

If mgrs used the options "job or no job" then they knew what to say that would sound a threat.

Exactly. And of course Amazon is covering up any coercive actions by management and claiming no one did anything untoward, "per company policy". What else would they do? I'm curious if any litigation will even come out of this tragedy. I would expect so, but Amazon has some really interesting death benefits for surviving family members.

[Beefhammer]

*Bringing this over from another thread*

- - - Updated - - -



Finally you seem to be getting it. The above bolded by myself are evidence of "forced". If you don't understand the nuances of that word, we can have an aside chat.

Hate to be this guy, but none of that is evidence. It's all hearsay at the moment. Someone said forced, someone else said it wasn't. We just have varying stories at the moment.

As for proper shelters, I highly doubt anything would have been truly safe under those conditions. It's not common to see large scale concrete buildings destroyed by a tornado.

- - - Updated - - -

Or you can think about it logically it's not exactly smart to openly talk badly about your employer not everyone can afford to lose their job or have the courage to say something bad about them. The corporate motivation of course are more clear cut and it's rather ludicrous to think they put everything in writing in cases like this. This is a clear instance of he said she said and people tend to believe the people who are in the short end of the stick when it comes to power dynamics.

Another way to think about it is, why would they risk their job and lie about this? the safest thing to do in these situations is to keep your head down and deny anything happen because rich companies got more lawyers than you.

Or maybe, not everyone was forced. Maybe that was policy in the past but not recently due to COVID and those that felt forced were living in the past with old rules? But plenty have said forced, and plenty have said not forced.

[cubby]

Hate to be this guy, but none of that is evidence. It's all hearsay at the moment. Someone said forced, someone else said it wasn't. We just have varying stories at the moment.

That's the thing, it won't be hearsay - it would be admitted under Rules based on the "statements against their interests" exception to the Hearsay rule. If it goes to trial. Which, even though Zanny and I coming to blows, we both seem to agree won't happen.

Caveat: I mean, I think that's how it will play out, of course. Who knows if it goes to trial.

[Endus]

I know what forced means and how you are using it.
I can relate that back to personal choice if you refuse too then that is on you. So, I guess we are done then.

The problem is you're denying the reality of wage slavery.

Let's take an extreme example; imagine you're told you can either work mucking out elephant stalls full of elephant crap, or you can be a test subject for experimental drugs with a moderate chance of negative and devastating side effects, or hey, you could even get a job being a clown whose job is to get kicked in the nuts repeatedly by kids at birthday parties. You're paid by the nut-kick, so no ducking out.

There! Personal choice! You've got three options, and they're all wildly different! Clearly, there's nothing to complain about, right?

You don't like those options and would rather not take any of them? That's not on your list. You can take one of the three on offer, or you can start living on the streets.

In fact, this example is brutally unfair, because many people don't have three awful choices. They consider themselves lucky to get one terrible option.

Stating that the wage-slaves get to choose the flavour of their particular exploitation and claiming that's personal empowerment isn't just a dishonest argument, it's one that's directly misanthropic and seeks to justify that exploitation and abuse as some kind of acceptable norm.

Which, to be fair, it is. A big reason why dystopic films are seeing a bit of a downturn lately is that the public have started to catch on to how deeply dystopian modern society really is. It's a Huxleyian dystopia, where we're drugged into passivity and apathy rather than directly crushed beneath metaphorical if not literal bootheels, but Brave New World was just as much a dystopia as 1984.

[Masark]

Which, to be fair, it is. A big reason why dystopic films are seeing a bit of a downturn lately is that the public have started to catch on to how deeply dystopian modern society really is. It's a Huxleyian dystopia, where we're drugged into passivity and apathy rather than directly crushed beneath metaphorical if not literal bootheels, but Brave New World was just as much a dystopia as 1984.

Dystopic media like BNW these days tends to get the viewers going like "This world is supposed to be a dystopia? It looks better than the real world!".

[Draco-Onis]

Or maybe, not everyone was forced. Maybe that was policy in the past but not recently due to COVID and those that felt forced were living in the past with old rules? But plenty have said forced, and plenty have said not forced.

I find that scenario highly unlikely but even if it is as you say the same thing would happen, not everyone is going to risk their jobs telling the truth. You have more to lose than gain by publicly outing your rich bosses like this.

[Combatbutler]

Always trust in corporate greed, to spit on human lives, some things unfortunately never really change.

[Zan15]

The problem is you're denying the reality of wage slavery.

Let's take an extreme example; imagine you're told you can either work mucking out elephant stalls full of elephant crap, or you can be a test subject for experimental drugs with a moderate chance of negative and devastating side effects, or hey, you could even get a job being a clown whose job is to get kicked in the nuts repeatedly by kids at birthday parties. You're paid by the nut-kick, so no ducking out.

There! Personal choice! You've got three options, and they're all wildly different! Clearly, there's nothing to complain about, right?

.

Not denying it at all, I am saying at some point you still have a choice. If we are going extremes with our examples, then let's say someone set the place on fire and your boss said if you leave your station, you will lose your job. At what point as the fire gets close and closer to your station and you have trouble breathing do you bail on your job even though you are stuck in "wage slavery"??

The irony that you bring up shoveling shit because one of the options i had after losing my job back in the last economic crash was cleaning horse stalls. It's funny to cause i promised my EX that i would do anything possible to continue to financially support them even shoveling shit.
Instead, I found a job moving "shit" from truck to warehouse, to other side of warehouse, to another truck all night long.



4th option look for something else. Not sure the first option is that bad if they pay you well. It's just manual labor, millions of people do it daily.


https://www.salary.com/job/fairfield...medium=organic

LOL its not an elephant but fuck they have benefits i don't have at my warehouse job

401(k) matching
Health insurance


Seems you can be paid well for cleaning up poop.
https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salarie...medium=organic

Crazy maybe while cleaning up the elephant poop you have a path to a career?

https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/k...medium=organic

[Orange Joe]

Not denying it at all, I am saying at some point you still have a choice. If we are going extremes with our examples, then let's say someone set the place on fire and your boss said if you leave your station, you will lose your job. At what point as the fire gets close and closer to your station and you have trouble breathing do you bail on your job even though you are stuck in "wage slavery"??

The irony that you bring up shoveling shit because one of the options i had after losing my job back in the last economic crash was cleaning horse stalls. It's funny to cause i promised my EX that i would do anything possible to continue to financially support them even shoveling shit.
Instead, I found a job moving "shit" from truck to warehouse, to other side of warehouse, to another truck all night long.



4th option look for something else. Not sure the first option is that bad if they pay you well. It's just manual labor, millions of people do it daily.


https://www.salary.com/job/fairfield...medium=organic

LOL its not an elephant but fuck they have benefits i don't have at my warehouse job

401(k) matching
Health insurance


Seems you can be paid well for cleaning up poop.
https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salarie...medium=organic

Crazy maybe while cleaning up the elephant poop you have a path to a career?

https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/k...medium=organic

I can't tell you how many jobs I've come across that "offer" this stuff. They even list it as full time. Then when it comes down to it they keep you at just enough hours to not qualify for anything.

[Edge-]

I can't tell you how many jobs I've come across that "offer" this stuff. They even list it as full time. Then when it comes down to it they keep you at just enough hours to not qualify for anything.

Shit, we can dig up the folks who applied to jobs during the pandemic because companies were offering better pay and benefits. Only to find out that they would not start at the advertised pay - but a reduced rate for 3-6 months - while also not gaining any benefits until their "probation" period ends. Oh, and the full time job is part time for a few months so that was a lie too.

BUT THE ADVERTISEMENT SAID FULL TIME! BENEFITS! ROTH MATCHING! SICK LEAVE! $15/h STARTING WAGE!

[cubby]

Shit, we can dig up the folks who applied to jobs during the pandemic because companies were offering better pay and benefits. Only to find out that they would not start at the advertised pay - but a reduced rate for 3-6 months - while also not gaining any benefits until their "probation" period ends. Oh, and the full time job is part time for a few months so that was a lie too.

BUT THE ADVERTISEMENT SAID FULL TIME! BENEFITS! ROTH MATCHING! SICK LEAVE! $15/h STARTING WAGE!

It was brutal for awhile. Now, those same places are suffering heavily with the current job market. It's an employees paradise right now. We have people ghosting on the first day because they received a better offer somewhere else and just didn't bother to show tell us. Maddening, but also kinda cool. About time workers have some control over their destiny.

- - - Updated - - -

I can't tell you how many jobs I've come across that "offer" this stuff. They even list it as full time. Then when it comes down to it they keep you at just enough hours to not qualify for anything.

Walmart was especially known for doing that. Along with so many others.

[Endus]

Not denying it at all, I am saying at some point you still have a choice. If we are going extremes with our examples, then let's say someone set the place on fire and your boss said if you leave your station, you will lose your job. At what point as the fire gets close and closer to your station and you have trouble breathing do you bail on your job even though you are stuck in "wage slavery"??

The "choice" of which exploitation you'll suffer is not a free and open choice to begin with. Framing it as such is willfully misrepresenting the truth. That's the point you're evading.

[cubby]

The "choice" of which exploitation you'll suffer is not a free and open choice to begin with. Framing it as such is willfully misrepresenting the truth. That's the point you're evading.

He's not going to get it, not now, not later. Five different people have explained it to him, multiple times, and he still doesn't understand forced coercion. The links Zanny provided showed people were forced to stay, he posted them and cited them, and still didn't comprehend their meaning.

[Endus]

He's not going to get it, not now, not later. Five different people have explained it to him, multiple times, and he still doesn't understand forced coercion.

I just think a lot of people have been force-fed capitalist propaganda so thoroughly they really can't see it for the bullshit that it is. Even just basic ideas like "you need to work to earn your place in society" are so damningly and irrevocably misanthropic and brutalistic in their nature, but people think it's some kind of natural truth rather than just capitalist malarkey used to dismiss the value of human life.