Disney CEO asks employees to chip in to pay copyright lobbyists

Post by gherkin0 » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 11:07 PM UTC

tssva wrote: post #7

This is very common. I have been solicited to contribute to PACs at multiple employers. At each employer everyone has understood the career consequences of not contributing. No threat was needed. The law should really require some sort of firewall where corporate management can not know who has or hasn't contributed.

Post by qbrass » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 11:16 PM UTC

cbhl wrote: post #11

martin-adams wrote: post #8

Wow, the concept of a PAC is something I never even knew existed. I don't think I get it. Isn't an employer supposed to be a source of money for the employee, not the the other way around. Hypothetically, if Disney have 180K employees, and each did contribute $1000 a year, that comes to $180 million a year. Now, if the company made around $5bn profit a year, $180m is a mere 3.6% of their profits - why is such a move…

It looks bad if a politician accepts a $1000 donation from Disney, but less bad if the politician accepts 1000 $1 donations from 1000 of Disney's employees. I believe this is the premise under which PACs operate. What I find odd is that PACs only seem to accept contributions from a company's employees. Like, why can't just anyone contribute to the Apple PAC, or the Google PAC, the way that they can contribute to the…

Post by snowwrestler » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 11:38 PM UTC

cbhl wrote: post #11

martin-adams wrote: post #8

Wow, the concept of a PAC is something I never even knew existed. I don't think I get it. Isn't an employer supposed to be a source of money for the employee, not the the other way around. Hypothetically, if Disney have 180K employees, and each did contribute $1000 a year, that comes to $180 million a year. Now, if the company made around $5bn profit a year, $180m is a mere 3.6% of their profits - why is such a move…

It looks bad if a politician accepts a $1000 donation from Disney, but less bad if the politician accepts 1000 $1 donations from 1000 of Disney's employees. I believe this is the premise under which PACs operate. What I find odd is that PACs only seem to accept contributions from a company's employees. Like, why can't just anyone contribute to the Apple PAC, or the Google PAC, the way that they can contribute to the…

Post by harry8 » Fri, Feb 26, 2016, 12:09 AM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #15

tssva wrote: post #7

This is very common. I have been solicited to contribute to PACs at multiple employers. At each employer everyone has understood the career consequences of not contributing. No threat was needed. The law should really require some sort of firewall where corporate management can not know who has or hasn't contributed.

I have worked at some very politically charged places, where I was solicited for PAC donations, and declined. It had no effect on my career. And it makes no sense that employers would even want to retaliate. All PACs want from employees is money, and individual donors are limited to $5,000/year. Anyone who can afford to donate $5,000, would probably cost more than $5,000 to replace, in recruiting, training, and lost…

Post by snowwrestler » Fri, Feb 26, 2016, 2:10 AM UTC

brianwawok wrote: post #3

So working in finance I got a letter like this. It included helpful donation levels like: * Normal salary employee: $100 a year * Mid level pointy hair boss: $1000 a year * Double level pointy hair boss: $10,000 a year I can't remember exact numbers but was that ballpark.. what they asked for the normal guy making 100k was small, what they wanted form the double pointy boss making 300k was a lot more. Either way, Sup…