Consitutional rights verses company policy.

[Technosoul]

It is sort of a strange mixture. We got two masters - or two bosses.

Sometimes a consitutional right is in conflict with the rules of a business because of the difference between private and public areas.

Sometimes it is not. For example a private business cannot violate your consitutional right not to be discriminated agenst because of your race.

But a private business can have a company policy to forbid you from your consitutional right of free speech.

How and where do they draw the lines between which consitutional rights also apply to a private company and not just to the public spaces?

[Arawn-ap-Hywel]

Quote by: Technosoul It is sort of a strange mixture. We got two masters - or two bosses. Sometimes a consitutional right is in conflict with the rules of a business because of the difference between private and public areas. Sometimes it is not. For example a private business cannot violate your consitutional right not to be discriminated agenst because of your race. But a private business can have a company policy to forbid you from your consitutional right of free speech. How and where do they draw the lines between which consitutional rights also apply to a private company and not just to the public spaces?

Seems strange that an advanced Western Nation would allow company law to overide Country Law.

Failure by EU citizens to uphold any state laws or regulations because of Company Policy is no excuse and such an individual would be held accountable and prosecuted along with the company for whom they worked

[Domino]

For the most part, laws are upheld. To give a specific example of company policy overriding a constitutional right, your employer can demand that you not discuss certain things. Of course, you may still discuss whatever you please, but your employer can choose to fire you without giving reason. The employee has, essentially, waivered his right to free speech in favor of his employer's judgment.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Domino For the most part, laws are upheld. To give a specific example of company policy overriding a constitutional right, your employer can demand that you not discuss certain things.

This is true. If you are really interested, I just found a rather dramatic story related to this subject:

CSR Asia - Corporate Social Responsibility in Asia Over a hundred Indian workers at a shipyard in a small American town on the Gulf of Mexico lodged a dramatic protest against inhuman living and working conditions on Thursday, singing “We Shall Overcome”, and tossing their hard hats in the air. The workers, hired from India in 2006 to tide over a labour shortage in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina that killed over 1,800 on the Gulf coast in August 2005, said they were made to live “like pigs in a cage” in a “work camp” run by their employer, marine fabrication company Signal International, in Pascagoula, Mississippi.

Grandpa h.

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Technosoul Sometimes a consitutional right is in conflict with the rules of a business because of the difference between private and public areas.

There is no conflict. The Constitution was made to limit the power of government. It has nothing to do with an individual's (or a "corporate individual's") actions.

Sometimes it is not. For example a private business cannot violate your consitutional right not to be discriminated agenst because of your race.

Incidentally, a private business most certainly can discriminate against you because of your race.

But a private business can have a company policy to forbid you from your consitutional right of free speech.

No, it can't, because your "Constitutional right of free speech" is that the government cannot restrict your freedom of speech.

An illustration: Let's say we have a country with 4 citizens in it. Bob, Joe, Dan, and Matt. They elect Joe to be their leader. Joe makes a law: Bob may not punch Dan in the face. Matt punches Dan in the face. Did Matt break a law? No, he didn't. While Dan will almost certainly complain, the law applied to Bob's actions, not Matt's.

How and where do they draw the lines between which consitutional rights also apply to a private company and not just to the public spaces?

As stated before, no "Constitutional rights" also apply to private companies.

Quote by: Arawn-ap-Hywel Seems strange that an advanced Western Nation would allow company law to overide Country Law.

We don't. Your understanding of our law is flawed. If a company restricts their employees' right to speak out against them, they're not overriding "country law" since it does not apply to them in that case. However, companies cannot violate laws that apply to them, for example a company cannot make a policy that says dumping toxic chemicals into a river is allowed, because it violates the EPA.

Failure by EU citizens to uphold any state laws or regulations because of Company Policy is no excuse and such an individual would be held accountable and prosecuted along with the company for whom they worked

Same here.

[Muckraker]

Quote by: grandpa This is true. If you are really interested, I just found a rather dramatic story related to this subject: Grandpa h.

Now THAT was an interesting read.

A US-based company brings in workers from India and pays them $13 a day to help rebuild after Katrina and live under horrible conditions in 24-person dormitories. Then they threaten to deport and ultimately fire the person responsible for arranging the protest.

In addition, they each had to pay a hefty "recruiting fee" to gain access to the country, which left most of them in immense debt in India, and were assured they would each get a green card.

Any guesses on how much money the US government paid Signal International for this outsourced work? I'm guessing more than $13/day per person.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Muckraker Now THAT was an interesting read. A US-based company brings in workers from India and pays them $13 a day to help rebuild after Katrina and live under horrible conditions in 24-person dormitories.

I thought it was interesting, too.

Grandpa h.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: grandpa This is true. If you are really interested, I just found a rather dramatic story related to this subject: Grandpa h.

I am surprised such a story is not in the mainstream news such as on CNN. I never did hear of such a thing before you posted that story.

Apparently with governmental approval.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: tivodan1116 There is no conflict. The Constitution was made to limit the power of government. It has nothing to do with an individual's (or a "corporate individual's") actions. Incidentally, a private business most certainly can discriminate against you because of your race. No, it can't, because your "Constitutional right of free speech" is that the government cannot restrict your freedom of speech. An illustration: Let's say we have a country with 4 citizens in it. Bob, Joe, Dan, and Matt. They elect Joe to be their leader. Joe makes a law: Bob may not punch Dan in the face. Matt punches Dan in the face. Did Matt break a law? No, he didn't. While Dan will almost certainly complain, the law applied to Bob's actions, not Matt's. As stated before, no "Constitutional rights" also apply to private companies. We don't. Your understanding of our law is flawed. If a company restricts their employees' right to speak out against them, they're not overriding "country law" since it does not apply to them in that case. However, companies cannot violate laws that apply to them, for example a company cannot make a policy that says dumping toxic chemicals into a river is allowed, because it violates the EPA. Same here.

Sounds like you are a Ron Paul supporter. He won 3rd place in the Mississippi primary on the Republican ticket yesterday.

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Technosoul Sounds like you are a Ron Paul supporter. He won 3rd place in the Mississippi primary on the Republican ticket yesterday.

Because I understand the Constitution and you apparently do not?

Incidentally, I am not.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Technosoul It is sort of a strange mixture. We got two masters - or two bosses. Sometimes a consitutional right is in conflict with the rules of a business because of the difference between private and public areas.

There is no such thing as "constitutional right" because it is not the purpose of the Constitution to enumerate citizens' rights. The Constitution's purpose is to enumerate the limited powers of the federal government.

Sometimes it is not. For example a private business cannot violate your consitutional right not to be discriminated agenst because of your race.

There is no "constitutional right" not to be discriminated against because of race. While the 14th amendment does guarantee equal protection of the laws, it doesn't prohibit discrimination by individual citizens or corporate entities. There are laws (such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964) that prohibit discrimination but these laws are not the Constitution.

But a private business can have a company policy to forbid you from your consitutional right of free speech.

There is no "constitutional right" to free speech. The first amendment merely prohibits Congress from passing laws that infringe on free speech.

How and where do they draw the lines between which consitutional rights also apply to a private company and not just to the public spaces?

There is no such thing as "constitutional rights." The powers enumerated in the Constitution do not apply to corporations, they only apply to the federal government (though the 14th amendment has been wrongly interpreted to apply those limitations to state and local governments as well).

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Chancellor There is no such thing as "constitutional right" because it is not the purpose of the Constitution to enumerate citizens' rights. The Constitution's purpose is to enumerate the limited powers of the federal government. There is no "constitutional right" not to be discriminated against because of race. While the 14th amendment does guarantee equal protection of the laws, it doesn't prohibit discrimination by individual citizens or corporate entities. There are laws (such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964) that prohibit discrimination but these laws are not the Constitution. There is no "constitutional right" to free speech. The first amendment merely prohibits Congress from passing laws that infringe on free speech. There is no such thing as "constitutional rights." The powers enumerated in the Constitution do not apply to corporations, they only apply to the federal government (though the 14th amendment has been wrongly interpreted to apply those limitations to state and local governments as well).

The right to bear arms. So can I take my gun to work with me in case I must defend my self a from supervisor or in case a waco person comes in and wants to shoot everyone?

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Technosoul The right to bear arms. So can I take my gun to work with me in case I must defend my self a from supervisor or in case a waco person comes in and wants to shoot everyone?

The purpose of the second amendment was to put limits on the federal government, not to enumerate the right of citizens to bear arms.

And what the hell do you have against people from Waco?

[Cephus]

Quote by: Technosoul But a private business can have a company policy to forbid you from your consitutional right of free speech.

That's because your right to free speech has never been all-encompassing, you have never had the right to say whatever you want, whenever you want, without consequences. Your company can't stop you for saying whatever you want, but it sure the hell can hold you accountable for what you say.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Technosoul I am surprised such a story is not in the mainstream news such as on CNN. I never did hear of such a thing before you posted that story.

I'm not very surprised. CNN is primarily interested in bashing immigrants.

Here's a similar article, this time about Mexican migrants:
Slave labour that shames America - Americas, World - Independent.co.uk

Three Florida fruit-pickers, held captive and brutalised by their employer for more than a year, finally broke free of their bonds by punching their way through the ventilator hatch of the van in which they were imprisoned. Once outside, they dashed for freedom. When they found sanctuary one recent Sunday morning, all bore the marks of heavy beatings to the head and body. One of the pickers had a nasty, untreated knife wound on his arm. Police would learn later that another man had his hands chained behind his back every night to prevent him escaping, leaving his wrists swollen. ....conditions in the state's fruit-picking industry range from straightforward exploitation to forced labour. Tens of thousands of men, women and children – excluded from the protection of America's employment laws and banned from unionising – work their fingers to the bone for rates of pay which have hardly budged in 30 years.

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Cephus That's because your right to free speech has never been all-encompassing, you have never had the right to say whatever you want, whenever you want, without consequences. Your company can't stop you for saying whatever you want, but it sure the hell can hold you accountable for what you say.

Nothing is without consequences, but the question here is whether speech should be regulated generally. I don't think it should be, and I'm rather against gag rules and such.

Grandpa h.

[Cephus]

Quote by: grandpa Nothing is without consequences, but the question here is whether speech should be regulated generally. I don't think it should be, and I'm rather against gag rules and such.

But in reality, it's pretty damn hard to regulate speech, isn't it? Unless someone has their hand over your mouth, you can say just about anything you want. You can shout company secrets from the top of the building all you want, you're just going to find yourself in a heap of trouble at the end of the day.

When people are talking about freedom of speech, most often they are talking about freedom from consequences.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Chancellor The purpose of the second amendment was to put limits on the federal government, not to enumerate the right of citizens to bear arms. And what the hell do you have against people from Waco?

Waco is short for Wack-o. Aka - nut.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Cephus But in reality, it's pretty damn hard to regulate speech, isn't it? Unless someone has their hand over your mouth, you can say just about anything you want. You can shout company secrets from the top of the building all you want, you're just going to find yourself in a heap of trouble at the end of the day. When people are talking about freedom of speech, most often they are talking about freedom from consequences.

Needless to say industrial secrets are confidential and those who know them are expected to be trustworthy. If you tell a dirty joke a girl can shout sexual harrasment and the boss will tell you "that is not allowed by or company policy". If you said that outside no one can outlaw you from so doing, unless you live in Pasadena California.

[Technosoul]

I had to sign a paper stating I would waver my legal right to take a break or a lunch break.... standard company policy where I worked. I had to agree to mandatory overtime if so ordered.