Soldato
- Joined
- 10 May 2004
- Posts
- 13,103
- Location
- Sunny Stafford
Thanks Mynight, although I normally just say Ltd for a limited co.
Are PLCs allowed to push Politcal views onto their employees?
- Thread starter ColdAsIce
- Start date
Do you work for them?
What uniform direction was this?
They didn't specify hence the confusion
. They were the giant rolls placed flat against the wall with only one outlet. I wasn't 100% clear if I was supposed to modify them to feed from the other side .Kinda pales in comparison to one call I had "Do you have any alcohol on the premises?" "Shockingly yes we do. No idea where this came from" "are you being funny with me?" "Erm no?"
never quite got my head around that call.I'd say this is a little bit further but still don't see a problem with it as such. Though I'd guess they will lose customers because if this,
I've not been for years in any of their pubs (if Wetherspoons) but now I'm even less likely to go.
They are not the same thing.
Ltd is short for private limited company which are usually owned by private individuals and have fewer capital/disclosure/reporting requirements.
Plcs, short for pubic limited company, can offer shares to the public, are often listed on a stock exchange and are generally more accountable to the public. Big multinationals are often registered as Plcs whereas smally private businesses will usually be incorporated as Ltds.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 May 2004
- Posts
- 13,103
- Location
- Sunny Stafford
Thanks Weringo. I stand corrected 
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 3,933
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
What I find disgusting is companies trying to make up an employees mind for them. Putting out beer mats, is well putting out beer mats. If they are Newcastle Brown Ale ones it isn't forcing you to drink it, but emails can get a whole office gossip going on.
Not sure I see that there's a whole lot of difference tbh.
Would it be acceptable if the company gave out coasters for coffee mugs instead?
Staffs job is to put out beer mats.
If a staff member doesnt like carlsberg should they have the right to refuse to put out calsberg advertising mats?
Not sure I see that there's a whole lot of difference tbh.
Would it be acceptable if the company gave out coasters for coffee mugs instead?
Theyre not giving them to the employees they're the mats that they have out anyway
Most company's have coasters and mugs lying around for anyone to use.
So point still stands: would that be acceptable?
Last edited:
Sure, bit of a weird comparison though its a pub it needs coasters reguarly put out.
Theyre targeting the customers not the staff
Well they have staff too!
I just couldn't see the logic in saying it's ok to do attempt to influence people in one scenario but not another.
Cistomers choose to go there staff don't i suppsoe.the coasters are for customers but that poster was talking about emails direct to staff which is using the company communications to directly influence staff
No one forces you to work anywhere in particular though. I do see your point but I think they are similar enough that if one is acceptable, the other should be.
One company targets customers using beer mats to influence decisions
Another uses emails to target staff to influence decisions.
They're both using a position of power as an establishment to influence people.
Both businesses have their own views on how the vote will affect them and are trying to influence the people they have power over to take their side.