Comcast staffers join walkout over Trump's immigration crackdown Add Comcast to the ranks of companies whose workers have come out against President Trump's crackdown on Muslim immigrants. The cable giant on Thursday saw workers from multiple offices walking out to join protests over the President's travel restrictions on seven countries. Employees from Comcast offices in Philadelphia, …
"Nonsense. It just shows opinions, which are pretty much useless for that purpose."
and nearly all of the 'Howler Monkeys' (that sling downvotes the way actual monkeys sling poo) seem to be overwhelmingly of the "lefty anti-Trump" variety.
'fake survey results' indeed.
Probably willing to pay them as long as they are not doing anything productive. No need to worry about that with the ones who walked out today.
Reminds me of an old comic strip when it is announced that all nonessential personnel can go home early. The boss stands in the window saying something like "deciding who to lay off will be easy this year." Might have been an old dilbert strip.
"would Comcast have paid their workers had they walked out to SUPPORT the president? Or does "social justice" work in only one direction?" Comcast owns MSNBC, supplier of some of the most left-wing-biased "news" out there, are you at all surprised they're encouraging the myth of a "Muslim ban"?
...to express their discontent with Trump's Muslim ban. ...
Wait, Trump banned ALL Muslims from EVERYWHERE from entering the USA? Did I miss that?
They should try that walkout in any of the seven countries on the travel ban list.
Better yet, try a woman's rights march in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc.
"It certainly feels as if that is where the current administration wants to go."
you should try THINKING instead of *FEELING*. THAT way, you wouldn't be so easy to manipulate into ACTUALLY BELIEVING that kind of bullcrap!
[and I thought El Reg readers were INTELLIGENT enough to see the bullcrap for what it is. oh well]
Well, it's the president of the USA who apparently is of the opinion that any woman opposing him should go to jail. And many of his supporters believe that as well apparently.
But what is really sad is that your aspirations for the USA are so low that "not worse than Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE" seems to be success to you.
If these demonstrators had campaigned like this before the election, then maybe Trump wouldn't now be the President.
All these who are calling themselves "true" Americans for standing up to Trump are showing disrespect for their own constitution. Like it or not, Trump was democratically elected by the rules of the constitution they claim to hold so dear.
I also wonder how many of these Comcast employees may well have their jobs saved by Trump's plans for the H-1B Visa system? Will they be campaigning about fewer foreign nationals taking away American jobs? Probably not...
"All these who are calling themselves "true" Americans for standing up to Trump are showing disrespect for their own constitution. Like it or not, Trump was democratically elected by the rules of the constitution they claim to hold so dear."
That's an intriguing point of view. How do you feel about judges, including at least one "so called [federal] judge" (hah!) ruling that Trumps travel ban is unconstitutional? Surely you must be in favour of the constitution and against any politician attempting to usurp or weaken it?
@John Brown (no body)
And quite what does the legitimacy (or not) of Trump's travel ban have to do with the legitimacy of the election result? You are taking two completely different things and attempting to make them the same issue.
I made no comment on the travel ban itself, only on those who claim Trump isn't their President and seem to refuse to accept the election result as being valid. Like it or not, he was elected by the rules of the US constitution and acting like spoilt children who didn't get their own way will not change that.
"he was elected by the rules of the US constitution and acting like spoilt children who didn't get their own way will not change that."
And that was precisely the point I was replying to. A federal judge ruled the travel ban unconstitutional and Trump responded like a spoiled child with his derogatory comment of "a so-called judge". It's not the first or only example of Trumps childishly thin skin and I have no doubt it will not be his last. He's come from a background of being a CEO with autocratic tendencies and you can't do that as a President. There's a constitution to uphold and he's trying to ride roughshod over it. He can;t just fire everyone who disagrees with him. Some of them were elected under the rules of the constitution, just like he was and, like them, he is also bound by the constitution.
"Will they be campaigning about fewer foreign nationals taking away American jobs? Probably not.."
Did this make some logical sense to you? Because it reads to me that you feel that it is not acceptable to protest against a policy you think is unjust if it is the policy of someone who might have some other policies you don't consider unjust.
I know people who voted for Tony Blair himself (i.e. he was their MP) but still protested against his decision to go to war with Iraq. I don't think there's anything incompatible about that.
@ John H Woods
And yet another numpty who is completely missing the point (not to mention completely ignoring the bulk of my post). They knew what trump was like BEFORE he was elected, yet kept quiet. Now he has been elected and enacting the sort of policies he said he would, they are suddenly up in arms.
If they felt so stronly they should have campaigned against him as vigorously as this before he was elected, not after. But there is a difference between protesting and acting like a spoilt child who didn't get their own way.
AC, I'm not missing the point. I don't think he said that his Muslim ban would be an immediate, ill-thought, rushed through executive order which applied (after some shilly-shallying) to people who were already legally resident in the US.
You've only got a realistic choice of two presidential candidates. Just because you voted for one of them doesn't mean you have to support everything they do; it's entirely possible you thought they were the lesser of two evils. This seems clear to me, but perhaps I am, as you say, a numpty.
"There is a difference between "protesting and acting like a spoilt child" --- these people think they are protesting; you think they are acting like spoiled children. So, it appears the difference is just whether you agree with their protest or not.
Their protests are starting to turn violent, and their rhetoric has turned to the extremes. These same people are denying the very legitimacy of the President. This is not just protesting any more, it's approaching attempted insurrection.
And all for the sake of a known federal felon who also sold her office and influence to foreign governments for hundreds of millions in 'donations.' Damn straight I don't agree with them.
"This is not just protesting any more, it's approaching attempted insurrection."
Isn't that what the ritgh the arm bears is all about? And why do you think the people protesting are only doing it because they want Clinton in his place? You know that can't happen don't you? If Trump was outsed/impeached/whatever, then Pence takes over or a new Presidential election is called. Either way, Clinton is not to default beneficiary so you are making wild assumptions based on lack of understanding of your own constitution.
Their protests are starting to turn violent, and their rhetoric has turned to the extremes.
Your man has spoken of bringing in torture (despite the very clear evidence it has never worked worth a damn), has sexually assaulted women, has spoken of engaging in acts of aggression against other nations, and you complain that these people - who legitimately fear for the lives of their loved ones and themselves - have turned to violence and extreme rhetoric?
These same people are denying the very legitimacy of the President.
As any decent, intelligent person should. Shame the US had enough people lacking in intelligence that CMIC got "elected".
And all for the sake of a known federal felon who also sold her office and influence to foreign governments for hundreds of millions in 'donations.'
That would be the person cleared by what, 9 seperate investigations? The one who even Comey or whatever his name is has said didn't do anything illegal despite all the efforts he put in to have her charged? Despite how much the FBI et al hates people on the left and would dearly love the kudos of being able to arrest, charge, and see the conviction of such a high profile person - a career event that would see their great-great-great-great-great grandchildren set for life just from what these people could charge for the talk-circuit? That "known federal felon?
Would love for her to start taking some of you people to court, suing for libel/slander as appropriate. Only, the prez you love so much would do things like that but someone I doubt even Shrillarity would sink to those depths.. (Though there's some juicy but certainly false rumours that she could have you killed... We can live in hope something shuts people like you up - I'd prefer it if you got whacked with an intelligence stick but hey...)
[Before you accuse me of being a Shillary supporter, please check my posting history]
<quote>Their protests are starting to turn violent, and their rhetoric has turned to the extremes. </quote>
Dear Big John,
These 'targeted disruptions' may be the result of FBI dirty tricks.
It isn't the first time the FBI has stepped into that cesspool:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
Fatman, the Left needs no help from the FBI to become violent. Besides, it's so easy to riot when Democrats in Congress are providing cover by saying their violence is "excusable" due to the extreme provocation that is Donald Trump.
Funny, but from the outside it still looks like sore losers having a temper tantrum because they lost.
Fatman, the Left needs no help from the FBI to become violent.
You have a president who wants to bring torture back and you wish to complain about others perceived violence?
Who was it accusing others of being a troll not to many posts back?
for those outsde usa just sso you know comcast aka scum cast is acable tv and isp provider who is not doing its job properly and it is an understatement.
the real reason they are paying its employees to protest yes pay their employees to protests is because of one tiny thing the company did back in mid 90s. namely they took off with about 2.5 billion dollars for no work done.when internet was being expanded and build in usa FCC and few other agencies gave an incentive to major players to tune of few billion to start laying down fiber optic cables in order to acommodate future traffic and have highest speeds in the world. but hey companies took the money put down only 3 to 5 % of intended network and pocketed the rest while ripping customers off. trump said he wants money back that is why they do not like trump....this is the simplest way of saying what had happened here.
No, we feel personally insulted the way the losers are going scorched-earth on the President we picked. That stuff has no place in a democracy or a republic.
That's OK, you don't live in a democracy and I don't live in a republic.
And hey, just be glad. For voting for such a piece of scum, just be glad things are limited to putting you little pansies down. Your prez won't be so nice to you when it's your turn for him to feel like you have somehow wronged him in one of his deluded paranoid states.
In time, probably not long, you will see that he really is the vile thing the rest of the world (and most of the US!) wants gone, you will see that our concerns are legitimate, and you hopefully will not find out just how bad he can get. I hope for your sake that he gets removed from office before he can do much more damage to your nation.
Most of the US won't miss you much
Oh, I'd say that the vast majority of the US wouldn't miss you when you're gone, and you live there.
But then, unless you're a celebrity of some sort it's highly unlike that even between us there's as many as 10,000 people in the US who knows who we are under any name's we've posted or been known under. So you statement is quite true, quite logical, and applies to any non-celeb (and probably pretty much any celeb) the world over. Most of the US, and indeed most of the world won't miss us when we're gone. Why, there's probably entire countries where no one has heard either of our names!
That attempt to offend failed. Care to try again? :)
cry baby liberal filth..
ask any of these snowflakes which of their children is disposable because some illegal alien murdered their child...
just read an article on cbsnews which is all to common, yet the left leaning crowd refuses to acknowledge..
FIVE DUI's, ONE MANSLAUGHTER, DEPORTED TWICE, BACK IN A COLORADO JAIL YET AGAIN..
this is not an isolated incident or individual.. it's all to common..
Thanks to the left!!
FIVE DUI's, ONE MANSLAUGHTER, DEPORTED TWICE, BACK IN A COLORADO JAIL YET AGAIN..
I know what you mean. Back in 1979 or 1980 a close friend of mine was killed in a head-on crash. Johnny Foreigner had gotten a bit drunk one night, went driving and ended up in a head-on crash with my friend's family car. Johnny Foreigner had forgotten where he was.
Oh. Johnny Foreigner was a US citizen.
In 2007 a group was on a motorcycle tour of NZ. One of their number took of from a parking spot, forgot where he was, head-on into an oncoming car. No fatalities fortunately but still a lot of pain. A sober yank who forgot that he wasn't in yankeeville.
In IIRC 2005 or 2006 a congresscritter or senator or something like that (someone of fairly high rank in the US IIRC) went through a stop sign killing a motorcyclist somewhere in the US. Mr CG claimed that his diabetes had caused the sugar in his bloodstream to metabolize into alcohol and he should not be done for drunk driving due to that, and, well, he was a high-ranking civil servant and the lowly cops/court officials prosecuting him should be elsewhere.
The US has a pretty appalling rate of road deaths. Has been going on much longer than you've had any fears (reasonable or idiot-prez inspired) about "immigrants". And I'll bet your people have killed a lot more on foreign soil than foreigners have killed in your lands.
(and yes, I agree, people reading articles on cbs does occur all to often!)
Kiwi, your assertions are becoming tiresome. At risk of looking like a fool for talking to a fool, I will try anyway.
You point out how people die in car accidents with no illegals involved, and you believe this is a valid argument against people who don't like it when their loved ones are killed by those illegals. It isn't.
What it is, is highly offensive and insulting, especially to our intelligence. I've noticed that you do this on practically every post too. Have you no shame? Are you just a horrid little troll? I can't be sure, but it's starting to look that way.
You point out how people die in car accidents with no illegals involved, and you believe this is a valid argument against people who don't like it when their loved ones are killed by those illegals. It isn't.
I'm pretty sure the senator/whatever who was out driving drunk and killed a motorcyclist wasn't exactly acting like a law abiding citizen at the time. And what I was pointing out was a hell of a lot of people die on the roads at the hands of people acting illegally, including people in my country who die or are hurt at the hands of people from the US. The person pointing out how nasty the immigrants were because one of them has had a history fails to point out just how many people US citizens harm in like manner when acting illegally, in the US or elsewhere.
What it is, is highly offensive and insulting, especially to our intelligence.
Seriously? You want to complain about being upset when someone travels to a foreign land illegally and kills other people's loved ones? How about all the loved ones being hurt by the actions of youru beloved president? How about all the illegal actions of US citizens in other countries?
A hell of a lot of us (yes, I am included) have suffered from the actions of your government even without Trump's election. It is with good reason that the people of the US are the most hated and often most feared people in the world today.
As to stuff posted in "almost every post" , how about the misinformation you and your supporters so often post about others, eg all the constant allegations you make about Clinton committing crimes? Doesn't repeatedly saying things clearly and well known to not be true come under the term "troll"?
Ought to have a look at the Muslim countries take on equality and rights for women, how they treat foreigners from all walks of life and religions compared to us and the US BTW and thank themselves very, very fortunate. Bite the hand that feeds and you get what you get, suck it up cos, you probably deserve it!
DTI
Perhaps you should stop reading the crap propaganda drivel you've obviously inefested your brain with and actually travel to these other places and see just how wonderful, hospitable and tolerant some (not all!) of these people in other places really are?
Hmm, 3 downvotes and no rebuttal at the time of posting this. I guess those downvotes come from people who only want to get their rocks off over the "dem is nasty peoples!!!111!!111!!11!!111!!!!1!!11!1!!11!!1!!1" propaganda and who haven't ever taken the time to travel to or even slightly research (in unbiased sources, not faux (etc) news!) the countries in question, or the peoples therein.
I'd be willing to be good money that the countries in CMIC's shitlist have far lower violence/murder rates than the US, and of course while CMIC is wanting to bring in torture, the US leaders are talking of banning sexualities they don't agree with and so on the chump supporters certainly have no grounds to complain about another nation's human rights issues - not till they take care of the much worse problems at home.
Disagree? Refute! If any of what I said can be reasonable refuted I'll take back what I said.
Obama have carried out quite a bit of war against e.g. Syria. Nobody seemed to object. Civilians killed? No problem.
But when they started turning away Syrians at the border crossings, then suddenly people started objecting.
Could we focus more on the former problem, please? (That would probably help resolve the latter problem too)
Obama didn't start the war in Syria. That was part of the Arab Spring, which is generally laid at the door of Wikileaks - Trump's biggest backer.
Trump, in his first two weeks, has authorised military operations killing American citizens in Yemen, threatened to invade Mexico, and hung up the phone on the prime minister of Australia because the latter wasn't showing proper respect when hearing about the hyoooge crowds at his, Trump's, inauguration, which he totally should have been awed at because I'm sure the PM of Australia doesn't have anything more important to think about.
So I'm not holding my breath for him to bring about world peace.
veti, the primary cause of the rise of the IS and all the warfare in Syria was Obama and his urgent need to get us out of 'Bush's war.' So what did he do? Why he yanked our forces out of Iraq very prematurely, leaving a huge power void that that the Islamists filled very quickly. Everything else was just talk, but that was a real thing that led to the horrific deaths of hundreds of thousands.
So Obama might as well have started the war in Syria. A lot of people at the time predicted bad things would happen if he did what he did, and he did it anyway.
Everything else was just talk, but that was a real thing that led to the horrific deaths of hundreds of thousands.
How many innocent people died as a result of GW2 which was started by GB2 and the false claims about WMD that shrub and the brit prick promoted hmm?
Your sides hands aren't exactly free of the blood and suffering of innocents are they? No..
But hey, keep promoting your bullshit. Someone with a single-figure IQ might believe it.
These protests aren't about liberals, or fascists, or illegals, or whatever you want to call it. Tech companies have a LOT of H1B Visa and Green Card holders. Not only can they not visit Mom, Pop, and Grandma anymore, but the government has vowed to treat them like criminals despite all the hard work they put into the proper legal process. Imagine if the government suddenly declares that 5%, 10%, or maybe even 30% of your friends and coworkers are a terror threat to US citizens. It's a shocking load of bullshit from a powerful orange guy who looks like he's drawing on restaurant menus. Companies know this is highly disruptive to the workforce so they want their employees to vent emotions outside the office until the Judicial branch can bring back some sanity.
If these Muslims are such a threat, why isn't the country that supplied most of the 911 terrorists on the ban list? Is that because Micro Brain does PERSONAL business with them and doesn't want to lose "his" businesses that he has in Saudi? Bit hypocritical isn't it!
If they walk out of their jobs to 'protest' like that, they should be *FIRED*. Companies don't have that kind of money to waste, and passing the cost of it on to the customer isn't acceptable.
Hmm.. The morale and productivity boost, and related profitability improvements you're likely to get from your staff being able to do something they feel they strongly need to do, or the demoralisation, productivity STOP, and inability to provide your customers with the products and services they want when you fire the bulk of your staff.. Yes, I wonder which one is better.
How come you can be so intelligent in stuff about OS's but such an idiot when it comes to politics etc? Hurts my brain upvoting you in one thread because of something brilliant you've said and and downvoting you in another because of the stupidness that spewed forth from your mind!
I need to go out for a while I think.
In most cases, shareholders of publicly traded companies are free to DUMP the shares of any such company whenever they choose. It is all a matter of whether or not you will get what you want for the stock.
Thus, if you are not happy with the way a company is run/its social mores/CEO and other executive bonus arrangements, you are free to divest yourself of them.
Most C-suites in publicly traded companies never want ot see their stock price free fall, and a massive dumping of stock by disgruntled shareholders would tend to imply dissatisfaction on the part of the shareholders.
The cable giant stands to gain significantly from the Trump administration's business-friendly policies
You say that, but it's relative. If the economy tanks, then so will Comcast. They may gain on the swings, but that doesn't really help if they lose on the roundabouts.
Also, if I was a business leader with something to gain from Trump, I would still be worried: Even if I gain significantly from his policies, I'd be thinking long term and be really worried because in four years time† there's going to be a massive backlash. Trump's biggest legacy could be to make the Republicans virtually unelectable for the next decade or two.
(† or possibly sooner, at this rate)
If all the comcast workers do a walkout, does anyone notice? I think customer service satisfaction probably went up during those periods.
Perhaps we should do exit survey's on those same workers after they've turned over their job to an imported worker who is happy to work for half the rate.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
