Should Democrats fight to change the way removed employees are made to leave the workplace?

[Ken Burch]

It seems to me that Democrats could get a lot of resonance in raising the issue of "Separation with dignity" in the American workplace.

In many businesses now, people who are removed from their jobs(even if it was part of a mass layoff and had nothing to do with their own job performance) are given fifteen minutes to clear out their desks if their fired, then marched out, in the middle of the workday, IN FRONT OF THEIR CO-WORKERS, surrounded by armed guards as if they were criminals.

Seems to me we should work to challenge this practice or bar it legislatively and that doing so might get us a lot of new supporters.

Obviously, we should also be fighting to reduce the number of economic casualties in this society, but isn't the concept of a "Termination With Dignity" law something we should address?

It's not as if, unless we're talking about a senior executive who was caught raping an employee or embezzling from the company, anyone who loses their job actually DESERVES to be emotionally traumatized on their way out the door. If you just lose the job for an ordinary screw-up, losing the job should be punishment enough. If you're downsized, you shouldn't be intentionally shamed in any way at all.

And on the level of physical safety, I suspect that the "drumming them out" thing probably leads to a fair amount of workplace shootings, since the degree of trauma and degradation involved in that practice could easily push people over the edge.

What do people here think about the idea of taking this on?

[LisaM]

1. I agree with the concept, but the name needs work

It sounds like assisted suicide!

[Ken Burch]

2. Good point. I'm open to other names.

how about the "Humane Departure From The Workplace Act" or something like that?

[John_Adams]

3. I have never seen or heard of anything like you have described.

It seems to me that if a company treated its employees in such a manner, to be fired might not be such a bad thing (if they didn't quit first).

[Ken Burch]

4. It happens in a lot of businesses, from what I'm told

And has been used as "downsizing" practice in a number of places.

[Bluenorthwest]

7. From what I'm told? What does that mean? Who is telling you?

Are they describing their own experiences?

[Enrique]

21. i've seen it happen

in a call center environment. They do it in factories settings too.

[tblue37]

59. Read "Criminalizing Teachers," a thread in GD that is

specifically about the way a teaceher was bum-rushed out of school in just this way, right in front of her students. She was not allowed to say a word to her friends, whoc were waiting to say ood bye--and they were not allowed to speak to her. Nor was she allowed to gather her own personal items from her desk.

The post is from the Failing Schools blog: http://failingschools.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/criminalizing-teachers/

When it was posted in GD on DU, it got several responses from DUers who had seen similar things in their schools--or in their workplaces, even though they were not schools.

[hobbit709]

11. Then you must not have much experience in working for a big corporation

[John_Adams]

14. That is true...

However, I believe that treating people like that is a good way to transform a big corporation into a very small one.

[hobbit709]

17. The big ones get bigger, they don't care how they treat the workers.

The only thing that counts to them is stockholder dividends.

You are treated as a replaceable cog in the machine

[SDuderstadt]

25. That's kind of a broad...

overgeneralization, doncha think?

[hobbit709]

30. Not in my personal experience

or that of a lot of people I know.

[SDuderstadt]

34. That's anecdotal...

dude.

[hobbit709]

39. Whoop de fucking doo.

It's all anecdotal unless it makes the 6 o'clock news.

There's currently a thread about teachers getting that done to them.

[SDuderstadt]

41. "It's all anecdotal unless it makes the 6 o'clock news"

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the definition of the word "anecdotal".

[hobbit709]

44. i don't pretend to act like the Queen of Hearts.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hobbit709]

46. not just yours.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

49. LOL!

I spent about 3 1/2 hours at a DFA meeting last night. I'm pretty sure the Kennedy family is just fine with my liberal credentials.

P.S. I worked in EMK's campaign.

[SDuderstadt]

48. LOL!

Of course, there cannot be any substantive criticism of half-baked ideas, which is par for the course in this case.

Faux "ignore" is such a hoot.

[SDuderstadt]

50. ??? n/t

[Name removed]

71. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alphafemale]

20. If there's any kind of sensitive information involved it's pretty common.

I mean as to credit card info on customers things like that.

I thought the phrase "getting the box" was pretty common.

[csziggy]

72. DU thread about teachers being treated this way

Teacher are escorted out by security or police after being fired. Not allowed to talk to friends.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1200932&mesg_id=1200932

During the dot com bust, I remember stories about personnel being treated this way. Or the ultimate insult - they showed up for work to find piles of boxes outside the door. A security guard hands them their pink slip, then locates the box that holds the personal possessions that had been at their desk or in their office, so "untrustworthy" they were not even allowed into the building to say goodbye to their former co-workers.

[rustydog]

5. Some people say....I'm just saying

:shrug:

[rustydog]

10. Let me play Devil's advocate for a minute:

since this post does not mention specifics and deals with generalities and unknown businesses who use armed guards to remove/escort out terminated employees.

where i come from, any employee terminated is formally advised by human resources they are not welcome back to the facility to visit now ex-coworkers (disrupts business) unless they have legitimate business there, they are not welcome. They are given a time-limit to "clear out their desk" and leave so as not to disrupt work.

If there is a threat or fear of WPV (work-place violence)security may be called to stand by during the termination process and escort the person to their locker-workstation and witness the collection of their property then escort them off site.

We recently had a mass layoff of a dozens of staff, no one was escorted out by armed guards, police or whatever.

Each termination is different and different companies have their own policies regarding terminated employees and how to remove them from the work site with the least disruption of business. this is not something the Democratic, Republican, Green party or any party for that matter to butt into.

[ecstatic]

6. Warming up to your idea. It would be a nice contrast with Mitt "You're Fired" Romney

it would be even better if some of Mitt's past firees could come forward and promote the cause. "Betrayed Hard Working Workers For Truth." Such a law would never pass, but it would resonate with a lot of people.

[SDuderstadt]

8. Maybe you could explain precisely how...

you think this might work. I'm betting you can't.

Wouldn't a better aim of overall economic improvement with a clear focus on job creation and retention make much more sense than figuring out how to fire people better?

[WinkyDink]

9. Not that it isn't an issue, but it is not a BIG issue, all things considered.

[Ken Burch]

32. I didn't say it was more important than everything else.

Just that it's something we should deal with along with the rest of our objectives.

[SDuderstadt]

37. Here's an idea...

why don't we tackle the most important problems first?

[Blue-Jay]

12. What precisely should Democrats do about the way people get shitcanned?

Seriously.

[alcibiades_mystery]

13. The GOP response writes itself: "Instead of focusing on getting you jobs,

the Democrats in Congress are trying to tell business owners how to fire you."

This is a dumb idea.

[Ken Burch]

19. Not really. The less people are traumatized on their way out the door

the sooner they'll be able to get themselves together and begin the search to get another job.

Oh, and Republicans aren't focusing on getting people jobs, either. Their focusing on helping the rich kick people out of jobs and KEEP them out of jobs...while encouraging others to taunt people just for not having jobs. We SHOULD be nailing them for that.

But I doubt you care about that.

[alcibiades_mystery]

53. Yeesh

"But I doubt you care about that."

Ay yay yay.

[slackmaster]

82. A company that routinely traumatizes laid-off workers will find it hard to hire new people some day

Word gets around.

[Ken Burch]

86. None of them care. They are glad to see headcount reduced by any means necessary

As long as the dividends are delivered to the shareholders, these guys are perfectly happy to turn people into economic human sacrifices.

Democrats are supposed to fight for the dignity and humanity of all.

[SDuderstadt]

94. "None of them care"

That is absolute nonsense.

[slackmaster]

97. There's another side to the headcount issue that you are not considering

When a company is trying to expand, such as when it has landed a large contract, it needs to HIRE people. Maybe you aren't old enough to remember working in the boom phase of a cycle.

Democrats are supposed to fight for the dignity and humanity of all.

I do - mostly in how people are treated by governments. Employers have to follow laws, but beyond that it's a matter of style, professionalism, and manners.

I wouldn't work for a company that mistreats its employees. I would (and have) quit a job because of poor treatment.

[Ken Burch]

104. You're also assuming that everyone has the luxury of being choosy about who they work for.

As a techno-elitist, you can't relate to what the search for work is like for most people.

[slackmaster]

106. Name-calling and special pleadings are poor substitutes for presenting a reasoned position

I've worked very hard for a very long time, developed a skill set that is in demand, supported by hard-won interpersonal skills and work habits. I wasn't born with any special privilege, in fact I have handicaps that I have fought to overcome all my life. I've recovered from being dead broke at age 40 due to a divorce.

Ken, in the same thread you've accused me of being both subservient and an elitist. You're not making any sense.

[Ken Burch]

109. OK, perhaps I got a personal with you.

I apologize for that. It was in response to the dismissive tone you took about this practice. While I disagree with that tone, I could have responded differently. Apologies for that.

[Ken Burch]

24. We can say "Democrats fight for the dignity of working people"

This is part of fighting for the idea (an idea we SHOULD be fighting for) that everyone has the basic right to be treated with dignity and respect.

And no one who objects to people having the right to separate with dignity is going to agree with the Democratic message on anything else...or at least not on anything that matters.

[RebelOne]

15. I don't think all large corporations are like that.

When I was laid off my job in 2010 because the company was downsizing, I was allowed to stay until the end of the day to clear out my office. Since I had been there for 14 years, I had a lot of stuff and could not get everything out in one swoop. The only thing I did not like was that while I was being told that I would no longer be working there, my computer was locked so I had no access. But I was able to come back the next day and get everything else from my office. And the IT person helped me retrieve any personal files from the computer.

This is a very large media corporation, and they always treated their employees fairly. I also received 6 months severance pay. I am not going to tell the name of the corporation, but the owner was John Edwards' financial manager during the presidential election.

[Ken Burch]

16. You were treated humanely, then. The way they handled it with you

is the way it should be done with everyone.

[RebelOne]

23. Right, everyone should have a Democratic boss.n/t

[etherealtruth]

18. Unfortunately, I don't think this can be legislated

Those in leadership roles can condemn the practice publicly .... the media (I know this is laughable) can publicize employers that engage in this.

Its a despicable practice

[PeaceNikki]

22. "shame", "dignity" and "trauma" are totally relative.

And there is frankly no way to remove it all when you are let go.

[Ken Burch]

26. No...but it can at least be minimized.

There's no reason for the "fifteen minutes to get your stuff" rule, or for former employees being barred from ever coming back to the workplace. They're former employees, not Nazi war criminals.

[PeaceNikki]

33. Never reason for security? Ever?

I beg to differ. I've seen people freak the fuck out and I've watched people try to sabotage or hurt the company and/or their former co-workers on the way out. What can start dignified can get ugly quick. It's an emotional and traumatic experience in every case to varying degrees.

[SDuderstadt]

38. I suspect you are wasting your breath..

in this instance.

[Ken Burch]

40. You can have somebody watching in the room in case something happens

But you don't need to have a standing policy of immediately treating the victim like a serial killer. At least see whether they'll leave quietly first.

[SDuderstadt]

43. "standing policy of immediately treating the victim like a serial killer"

This OP will soon "jump the shark".

[slackmaster]

77. There is no room for Emos in an IT shop

Security is extremely important when data or online systems can be destroyed quickly and easily.

[Ken Burch]

87. Security can be enforced without a perp-walk with guards in front of the other employees

People have a right to be treated with dignity and to have their humanity respected.

Unless somebody actually has a gun or something, nobody needs to be marched out the door like they're a criminal. And removal from the workplace never has to happen during work hours.

[slackmaster]

102. You're making a very big deal out of what seems to me a very small issue

But I am enjoying the hyperbole.

[Lance_Boyle]

98. Richmond disagrees.

[SDuderstadt]

31. Not only that, but...

the OP has zero idea how this "legislation" would even be enforced, assuming it would even be enacted.

It's also treating the symptoms, rather than looking at the root causes of why it occurs to begin with.

[DainBramaged]

27. In NJ the employer can be sued.if an employee is fired aggressively

My owners ALWAYS fire people at 4:30 on Fridays AFTER the 1st shift has left so there are as few people around as possible. And they never speak of the dismissed employees again since they were sued for defamation by a former employee who was literally escorted out by the police and their stuff thrown out the door in a box, and lost.

[Ken Burch]

28. You are lucky.

It wouldn't surprise me to see Christie try to repeal that law.

[Abq_Sarah]

29. People who are doing the firing

And the people who've been fired need to exercise restraint and dignity.

[Ken Burch]

36. Well you can't really demand as much from the people who've BEEN fired

After all, they're the ones who have just become victims-and usually, for little or no reason.

[Abq_Sarah]

51. yeah, you can

Being fired isn't an excuse for having a melt down or complete hissy fit.

[Ken Burch]

52. It's one of the most devastating things that can happen to a person

And, so long as you don't harm anyone, you're entitled to your emotions at such a moment.

[Fla_Democrat]

54. Well, if that's the case....

why not just craft legislation that mandates that people can never be fired? I mean, they are the victims, and usually there is little or no cause...

Oh, I know, how about setting up a board that has to review every termination? That way, every cause can be vetted, and people can be sure that no one is victimized. :think:
















:spray: :rofl: :rofl: :spray: Sorry, I tried to keep a straight face, but couldn't.


:smoke:

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ken Burch]

70. Why is regulating the way people are treated in separating from their jobs

any different from passing the wage-and-hour laws, or regulating working conditions, or prohibiting discrimination in the workplace based on race, gender, creed or sexual orientation?

[slackmaster]

83. It's never an easy thing to do, and few people are very good at it.

The process is often poorly planned, awkward, and poorly executed.

[Ken Burch]

88. Then we need to set up programs to train people in how to do it humanely

It's not that difficult, especially in the case of downsizing, where the removed employee is nothing but an innocent victim of managerial arrogance and shareholder greed.

[slackmaster]

99. Who's going to pay for those programs, Ken?

What are your projected costs, benefits, and objectives?

Let's see the plan.

[Baby Bear]

35. No

There are more urgent causes to fight for than this one.

The way firings are conducted is a reflection of the character of the manager(s) and the relationship between management and workers. As long as the workers get the compensation they earned, let it slide.

Not everything that is undesirable should be illegal.

[BlueIris]

42. I'm all for dignity, (not that many have much at all) but employers have a right to self-protection.

And I don't think the Dems, not eager to piss off "business," (read: moneyed corporatists and those who fellate them) have anything to gain politically by taking such measures.

[saras]

55. Yep - do it by REDUCING CORPORATE POWER IN GENERAL

Ultimately, the people and their relationships are more important than the company and its profits. As a progressive, that's my goal, and I'm not stopping until I get there.

[SDuderstadt]

56. False dilemma....

There is no reason why people and their relationships cannot be preserved while the company still makes a profit.

[Ken Burch]

61. Good for you. You believe in a society with humanity and dignity.

Some people here don't, apparently.

[SDuderstadt]

63. Dumb strawman argument...

Not one person here believes that.

[slackmaster]

84. I have just as much power in my work relationship as my employer does

I have the power to quit if I don't like the pay or how I'm being treated. I have walked out of two "perfectly good" jobs in the last 15 years due to inadequate pay. Both moves turned out very well for me, and left my former employers sitting with their thumbs up their asses wondering how to replace me.

[Ken Burch]

89. That's still not equal power with your boss by any means, and most people

will never even have the partial power that you have.

The workplace, for many, is not unlike living under a medieval liege lord.

Democrats should be fighting to change that.

We should never accept any human being just being dismissed as "deadwood".

[slackmaster]

100. Some employees actually are deadwood and need to be dismissed

It happens all the time. People who perform poorly on the job hurt their co-workers as well as their employer.

[Xithras]

57. Last time I was fired without warning....

...my former manager took me out to lunch at a restaraunt across the street, and informed me over a sandwich. While we were in there, two employees were packing my office into boxes. When we walked back into the building, I was handed my boxes and wasn't allowed past the lobby.

I was fired as part of a budget reduction. Nothing more.

[Ken Burch]

62. Jesus...I hope it was a good sandwich, at least.

And you've helped make my point. Thanks for the post.

Some people here do NOT get it.

Fighting for the right of everyone to be treated with dignity and respect is what we are SUPPOSED to be about. It's part of dealing with the root economic issues.

[Xithras]

74. At least I got the sandwich.

I was a project supervisor and they shut our entire project group down. The seven cuberats who worked under me didn't even get a sandwich. They were simply escorted to the front door without warning while I was across the street eating my sandwich, listening to my division VP talk about "declining budgets" and the need to "streamline operations". My stuff was packed and waiting for me. They were escorted out by security and were told to return the next morning for any personal items in their cubes.

On the upside, we were given an $250 "cooperation bonus" for leaving without making a scene.

Ironically, the company's excuse for doing this was "worker morale". They thought it would be better to quietly cut people loose, than to give them notice and let pinkslipped people hang around a while. There was never any discussion about layoffs...people just "vanished". You'd see someone in the morning, and walk by their office in the afternoon just to find it empty and stripped of everything except the basic office furniture. Personally, I found it creepy. And yes, it really pissed me off when it finally happened to me.

[slackmaster]

81. That was pretty smooth and gracious

I've never gotten a meal during a layoff. I have gone to work to find my accounts all locked out, and a note instructing me to go to Room 101.

[Ken Burch]

90. And they should never have done that to you.

It should have been at the end of the day, and you should have been allowed as much time as you needed to collect yourself, gather your OWN belongings, and leave the building with at least some semblance of dignity.

Nobody, other than actual workplace criminals, ever deserves a perpwalk or a frogmarch.

[slackmaster]

96. There's absolutely nothing wrong with cutting off a bank employee's access to computer systems

During a layoff.

[Ken Burch]

103. that can be done without putting said employee through public humiliation

if it's just about making the shareholders richer, than they shouldn't do anything harsh to the employee at all during the dismissal process. They should be apologetic and do everything they can to cushion the blow.

[slackmaster]

107. I agree with everything in your reply

I just don't agree that government should have much say in the details of the dismissal process. That seems to be our main disagreement here.

[slackmaster]

58. Wat?

:crazy:

As a highly trusted employee with access to and responsibility for the most privileged information my employer owns, I fully expect to be frog-marched out of the building with great fanfare in the unlikely event that they decide to terminate me.

Please, it's not appropriate for our party to meddle in the internal affairs of private businesses. A company that mistreats its employees will get a bad reputation, and people won't want to work there.

[Ken Burch]

60. You "fully expect to be frog-marched out of the building with great fanfare in the unlikely event"

that they can you?

Please tell me you're kidding.

Why would you think they have the right to do that?

And, in case you hadn't noticed, we meddle in the internal affairs of private businesses all the time. Do the words "Civil Rights Act of 1964" mean anything to you?

[SDuderstadt]

65. What you are proposing is nothing like the...

Civil Rights Act of 1964.

What a false comparison.

[slackmaster]

76. I have such complete access to sensitive systems, the only responsible way to fire me would be that

I'd be escorted out by two guys who are bigger than I. Our databases may contain YOUR personal credit history, Social Security number, address, phone numbers, etc., so the accountability of the company's managers goes way beyond its owners.

And, in case you hadn't noticed, we meddle in the internal affairs of private businesses all the time. Do the words "Civil Rights Act of 1964" mean anything to you?

Discrimination in hiring and promotion is not the issue here. Not even close.

[Ken Burch]

91. It's disturbing that you accept their right to dehumanize you and treat you as a criminal

And why is dealing with this issue any different than anti-discrimination statutes? Why shouldn't we fight for a society in which everyone's dignity and humanity are protected, even in situations like this?

If they made sure you didn't have any weaponry when you came IN to work(as most businesses do)there's no reason for any harsh measures when they escort you out...especially if you're an innocent victim of downsizing.

The power of the boss to destroy people on the way out the door is not THAT freaking sacred. It's not as if the economy depends on management having the right to traumatize.

[Ken Burch]

124. Small devil's advocate point:

It's possible an employee could have already made copies of confidential and/or sensitive files and have them at home, giving that employee the chance to gain vengeance by selling the files to some other person or entity, thus gaining both financial reward and vengeance.

The use of muscle could actually provoke valueable employees to prepare such schemes in advance-thus making the "only responsible way" to remove an employee that you outline above utterly useless in security terms.

Something to consider.

[Starry Messenger]

66. Geeze, this thread.

OUR LABOR IS NOT A RIGHT FOR EMPLOYERS. Their profit comes from our labors. The social convention of submitting meekly to being frogmarched out of a place of work is a failure of the workers to assert their power. Without labor, business is dead in the fucking water.

[Ken Burch]

67. Some people are just too comfortable with the idea of being subservient

OR too afraid of offending "Marse".

We're turning into a country of economic house slaves.

You wouldn't think the idea of protecting human dignity would be THAT threatening to Democrats.

[lonestarnot]

68. Sad that.

Very true though as that is all most have known and are comfortable in their shackles. :shrug:

[slackmaster]

79. I don't feel subservient in my position.

My employer and I have an arrangement, a contract. I give them labor, they give me money. That's all there is too it. As human beings we are all equal.

[Ken Burch]

85. All right...but what is your opinion of what I'm talking about in the OP?

Would you agree that there needs to be some protection of the dignity and humanity of people as they are being removed from the workplace? Isn't it time to stop treating people who are losing their jobs(for whatever reason)as if they were suddenly criminals?

Isn't it enough simply to take their jobs away?

[slackmaster]

95. I think your OP is lame. Companies that routinely mistreat people will suffer natural consequences.

People avoid working for companies that have bad reputations.

[Ken Burch]

105. Only a tiny handful of people get to choose who they work for.

Most of us have to take whatever we get. Your situation is freakishly unusual in that regard.

[Ken Burch]

93. Your position is a little too close to the old Anatole France quote

"The law in its majesty makes no distinction between rich and poor; both are forbidden to sleep under the bridges of Paris."

Really, we should be working for a workplace culture without bosses. The "medieval fiefdom" model of work really isn't needed any more. Work would get done just fine without hierarchy and without those above imposing their will on those below.

[SDuderstadt]

80. "If you disagree with me...

the only possible reason can be that you are just too comfortable being subservient or you are too afraid of offending'Marse' ".

LOL!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

115. The more I hear about what's happening in workplaces, both

corporate and academic, the gladder I am to be self-employed.

[slackmaster]

78. I see it a little differently

An employment arrangement is a contract. By mutual agreement, I spend time and brainpower doing my job in exchange for money.

If my employer isn't happy with my work, they have the right to fire me. If security is an issue (and it always is in the kind of work I do), it's reasonable for the employer to cut off my access and physically eject me from the building without notice.

If I'm unhappy with the pay or working conditions, I have the right to quit (and I have done so as recently as the summer of 2009.)

[Ken Burch]

92. You're far too accepting of management's right to be petty tyrants.

All they should really have the right to ask of people is that they do their work competently. IF people are removed at least through downsizing(in which case the removed person is a totally innocent victim)the removal should always be done with an apologetic tone and without muscle. It's enough to have security people somewhere unobtrusive in the room, and the person should be given the chance to leave with dignity first.

And it's just petty to forbid them to come back and say goodbye to their co-workers. How hard is it to check people for weapons at the door?

[slackmaster]

101. Everyone has the right to act like a petty tyrant, including you and me

I've found that I get along better with people if I don't act that way.

And it's just petty to forbid them to come back and say goodbye to their co-workers. How hard is it to check people for weapons at the door?

In my line of work, it's about security - Physical safety of remaining workers, and the safety of sensitive financial data such as the millions of credit reports I'm responsible for safeguarding.

What are you suggesting, frisking people at the door so they can walk around and say their goodbyes? That's silly.

[Ken Burch]

69. And I shouldn't have to say this, but I will

I'm NOT saying this is more important than fighting for a full-employment economy or social and economic justice for all. It's just a natural component part OF those things. There's no conflict. Nothing Democrats support hinges on letting bosses have the absolute right to be total bastards in the way the fire or simply downsize people. OK?

[jberryhill]

73. And a law requiring muggers to say "please" would be good

Because when you are going to be the victim of a crime, there's no reason why it should be unpleasant.

[Ken Burch]

75. I'm not calling for corporations that downsize to be let off the hook FOR downsizing

There's no conflict between what I'm talking about here and a fight to stop corporations from throwing people to the wolves in the first place.

[Vinee]

108. I saw a guy get fired and then he proceeded to beat the living shit out of the guy that fired him.

He was bleeding all over the place, his grill was all fucked up, and he didn't return to work for over a week. the terminated employee went to jail but I think if he had a better lawyer he could have swung temp. insanity because he sure looked crazy.

[Ken Burch]

110. You could have security people standing unobtrusively in the back of the room

prepared to intervene if something like that happened or appeared to be about to happen. The issue I was raising was the practice of pre-emptively treating anybody who's been removed from their job as if they're a violent criminal, whether or not they've displayed any reaction of that nature at all.

Such treatment, when added to the loss of work in and of itself, has likely caused people to descend into substance abuse or even commit suicide.

[HipChick]

111. In my line of work, people are not even allowed to clean out their desks, they are escorted out the

door right away...personal items are fed-ex to them

[kentuck]

112. Why is this topic getting so many "unrecs"??

Seems like a good democratic idea, to me. Why should people be treated like criminals?

[Harmony Blue]

114. Because most people are not willing to fight back

Reality is the country has been pulled to the right so much that it is an accepted norm. From my view, this is terrible. If you are told to leave within an hour, you should do it freely as a citizen of the United States of America. You may not be an employee of that company anymore, but you still are a citizen of the U.S. Yes it is private property, but a fair warning to leave is more than enough.

[Ken Burch]

120. And why do so many "liberals" see the power of the almighty boss as something that can never

be questioned or challenged?

It's as if they're afraid our entire system will collapse if it's expected to acknowledge the humanity of displaced workers...and, perhaps, of workers in general.

Too many think it's enough to simply repeat the fatuous phrase of a former "Democratic" president, when he said "I feel your pain"...and expected the non-wealthy majority to settle for his simply SAYING that.

[supernova]

113. Ken, I applaud your sensitivity

on this issue.

I would love it if Dems did take up a cause like this. It would be a step in a positive direction, instead of the reactive defence role ("we're less bad") the Dems have played since Carter. Someone mentioned Huey Long today on another thread. This would be a Huey Long thing to do.

I would love to see some research on the topic of method of lay off and work place violence. I've been laid off three times. I'm not a violent person by any means, but the last time, I could definitely see why someone would go that way if they were already going over the edge.

As for those who are poo pooing the idea of running on a platform with this idea, I'll just say, Losing your job this way can be as stressful as the death of a close family member. It is like death, if you've never experienced it, you don't know what you are talking about.

[Ken Burch]

119. Thank you for that post

Another point is that the way a person is separated from her or his job will have a direct affect on the chances that person has for finding future employment.

If you're crushed on the way out the door, you're much more likely to just give up, and not just on the question of finding a new job...on life itself.

We should stand for the idea that nobody is just "expendable" and that people should not be reduced to collateral damage in the economic wars.

[Ken Burch]

121. self-delete.

dupe post.

[Ken Burch]

122. In another sense, I think those who are dismissing this are kind of saying

that we should act as if "the winners" in the economy are the only people we should care about as a party. The only justification for taking the side of the "winners" against the "losers" is that the "winners" can write bigger campaign checks. If that means we have a party that stands for nothing, as it did in the Nineties, then so be it, according to this view. A full DNC bank account is all that matters.

In the Nineties, we saw the hollow nothingness this lead our party to. We became the party of, by, and for the CEO's...the party of luxury boxes at the conventions...the party of multi-million dollar bigwig fundraising nights...the party that left the workers and the poor to rot.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

116. It's not a major issue, but it is an issue

and it's a shame that so many people have Stockholm syndrome about their former employers.

[supernova]

117. This thread is perfect proof

why the corporatist mindset is so heavily entrenched in the Dem party. People don't even question that employers have a "right" to trample all over their humanity.

:-(

I sometimes think about you and your own business Lydia. I would love to do the same for myself.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

118. Well, it isn't easy to be self-employed, and I've been on the economic edge

a couple of times, but it's one of the best decisions I ever made.

You need a product or service that someone is willing to pay for, start-up money, a willingness to take risks, a bit of aggressiveness in finding customers, and quality that will keep them.

[B Calm]

123. They walked out our plant manager the other day. LOL

[Hamlette]

125. armed guards? How often does that happen?

I don't see this as the place to plant the flag. There are some reasons for doing it swiftly. There are about a trillion things I'd put above this on the list, like assess to health care and food and housing.