Ohio miners turn on Obama.

Something the Dog Said wrote: So it turns out that the Ohio minors were required to be at the Romney "rally" and lost their wages for doing so.

The Pepper Pike company that owns the Century Mine told workers that attending the Aug. 14 Romney event would be both mandatory and unpaid, a top company official said Monday morning in a West Virginia radio interview.

A group of employees who feared they'd be fired if they didn't attend the campaign rally in Beallsville, Ohio, complained about it to WWVA radio station talk show host David Blomquist. Blomquist discussed their beefs on the air Monday with Murray Energy Chief Financial Officer Rob Moore.
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf ... _mitt.html
Nice, typical Republican shenigans

From the same article - you must have overlooked it.

"Rob Moore made it abundantly clear that no employees were forced to attend the Romney event. All participation was, and always has been, completely voluntary."

"Mandatory" meetings are a part of any large corporate enterprise. One that I can think of off the top of my head are the "mandatory" meetings where health insurance coverage is explained. Would the miners have felt intimidated and fearful of losing their jobs if they decided not to attend that one as well?

Raees wrote: Whatcha bet this becomes a campaign commercial implying all those miners showed up voluntarily?

They did show up voluntarily Raees - that's the whole point. The company made it abundantly clear that attendance was voluntary. There were employees who decided not to attend and there were no penalties associated with not attending. The company felt that it was in the miner's best interest to hear what the man had to say, just as the company generally feels it is in the employee's best interest to attend the meeting in which the health insurance coverage is explained and says that attendance at one of the sessions in which this is done is mandatory for all employees. Why collectivists insist on fabricating things out of whole cloth escapes me, it truly does.

I bet they really appreciated losing a half day's pay for the "honor" of hearing Rmoney.

When GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney visited an Ohio coal mine this month to promote jobs in the coal industry, workers who appeared with him at the rally lost pay because their mine was shut down.

The Pepper Pike company that owns the Century Mine told workers that attending the Aug. 14 Romney event would be both mandatory and unpaid, a top company official said Monday morning in a West Virginia radio interview.

A group of employees who feared they'd be fired if they didn't attend the campaign rally in Beallsville, Ohio, complained about it to WWVA radio station talk show host David Blomquist. Blomquist discussed their beefs on the air Monday with Murray Energy Chief Financial Officer Rob Moore.

Moore told Blomquist that managers "communicated to our workforce that the attendance at the Romney event was mandatory, but no one was forced to attend." He said the company did not penalize no-shows.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf ... _mitt.html

Ah, the old "It's mandatory but you aren't being forced to attend" ploy. rofllol

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: So it turns out that the Ohio minors were required to be at the Romney "rally" and lost their wages for doing so.

The Pepper Pike company that owns the Century Mine told workers that attending the Aug. 14 Romney event would be both mandatory and unpaid, a top company official said Monday morning in a West Virginia radio interview.

A group of employees who feared they'd be fired if they didn't attend the campaign rally in Beallsville, Ohio, complained about it to WWVA radio station talk show host David Blomquist. Blomquist discussed their beefs on the air Monday with Murray Energy Chief Financial Officer Rob Moore.
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf ... _mitt.html
Nice, typical Republican shenigans

From the same article - you must have overlooked it.

"Rob Moore made it abundantly clear that no employees were forced to attend the Romney event. All participation was, and always has been, completely voluntary."

"Mandatory" meetings are a part of any large corporate enterprise. One that I can think of off the top of my head are the "mandatory" meetings where health insurance coverage is explained. Would the miners have felt intimidated and fearful of losing their jobs if they decided not to attend that one as well?

So after the fact, management claims that mandatory participation was completely voluntary. Hmm, must mean that if you don't attend a political rally on behalf of your employer, your employment is voluntarily terminated. Since when did mandatory mean completely voluntary. You guys are such tools.

Since when is such a rigid definition applied to "mandatory" meetings outside of attempting to forward a theory one wishes to establish? Have you never heard of "mandatory" meetings in which attendance was voluntary Dog? You must be the only one I am aware of who is unfamiliar with such things.

Have you never heard of "mandatory" meetings in which attendance was voluntary?

Wow, it's 1994 speak.

I am also unfamiliar with something that is mandatory being voluntary.

Mandatory: Required by law or rules

Voluntary: Done, given, or acting of one's own free will

(And most of us know that if this were Obama saying that, you'd be first in line to argue why the two terms contradict each other.)

Raees wrote: I bet they really appreciated losing a half day's pay for the "honor" of hearing Rmoney (sic).

I'm sure the folks at the GM plants share that same sentiment when Obama comes a knocking, but federal election laws prohibit companies from paying their employees to attend political events, so not much can be done about it. If they'd given them the rest of the day off with pay and some of the employees attended the event, the "progressives" would be attempting to establish the theory that Romney and the mining company violated federal election laws and paid people to attend the event. The means, after all, are irrelevant when following the Alinsky model, only the desired end is important.

Raees wrote:

Have you never heard of "mandatory" meetings in which attendance was voluntary?

Wow, it's 1994 speak.

I am also unfamiliar with something that is mandatory being voluntary.

Mandatory: Required by law or rules

Voluntary: Done, given, or acting of one's own free will

(And most of us know that if this were Obama saying that, you'd be first in line to argue why the two terms contradict each other.)

Perchance did you mean 1984? That aside, that you have never heard of such a thing only tells me that you are spending too much time in the echo chamber swallowing things to later regurgitate. The example I've cited, a "mandatory" meeting to hear the representative of the health insurance company tell the employees about the changes to their policies, or meetings to tell the employees about the different plans available to choose from, are commonplace. If you don't go to the "mandatory" meeting, there are no repercussions for failure to attend.

I don't know where you've worked but mandatory attendance means mandatory attendance where I've worked. It's a mandatory meeting. They mandate you be there. There are repercussions for not attending.

Let me ask you this, if a company drug test is mandatory, can you skip it because you claim it's voluntary?

You have to really (not) admire the contortions that the conservative tools go through to justify their actions.