Texas Farm Bureau and Mississippi Dept. of Public Safety Ban Employees From Wearing Nikes

a reply to: howtonhawky

You should read the thread, but what about shoes falls under "Freedom of Speech", that is that wouldnt be "silencing" them as political schwag in the workplace?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I think there are laws that cover such.

If a company wants to ban certain name brands then those companies have always provided uniforms or a dress code that eliminates branding.

it was bad enough when people started leaving handicapped women on the side of the road over a bumper sticker on her car and having messages on their answering machine informing clients that if they voted for trump they would no longer have their heating fuel delivered to them. both of which occurred long before poor little sarah was refused service by the way!!
but are you sure yous want to give your employers this kind of power??? I mean ya it might boost the economy a little and help retail out some when all those people end up having to go out and replace their shoes with a different brand but it's gonna get really annoying when your kids come home from school with a list of items that are no longer allowed at the school and you have to run out and find another brand of crayons because crayola for some reason is seen as being too political, oh, ya, and that back pack has to go, and you might as well go out and buy your kid a whole new wardrobe because suddenly the brands your kids are wearing are no longer acceptable.
and I just can't wait till they decide your apple cell phone, starbucks coffee, and on and on starts!! or when they say that the car you are driving will no longer be allowed in their parking lot!
and remember us liberals can be tad bit crazier than you conservatives... you just might find that you have to have, oh my, a hybrid car if you want to park in their parking garage!

Racist new balance?

So the mrs.sipi dot has no problems with new balance?

a reply to: howtonhawky

Do list the brands that nearly the entire side of the shoe is a logo, a logo that has recently thrust itself into the public sphere as a divisive political symbol.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Weak sauce!

If logos are a problem then just make a dress code that eliminates the problems without specifically calling out any view points or individual companies.

That is the way it has been dealt with in the past and has been successful.

a reply to: howtonhawky

First Amendment 2018 Edition:

I have the right to wear what ever the hell I want to my job, and be disruptive with my divisive politics at work, and irritate the customers. Yea.

a reply to: seeker1963

I would ask how a pair of shoes does that...

Last I heard, shoes may stink from sweaty feet, but they don't speak. Anyone who judges anything based on footwear is someone whose opinion matters not in the slightest--or shouldn't, anyway.

Campaign buttons, or things of this nature? Sure. Private business and all that. Their rules. They're certainly allowed to ban shoes as they choose, but c'mon, this is just getting downright silly.

On a personal note: Nikes are at best of middling quality, and certainly not worth the money they charge for their top end products. I am, apparently, in the minority concerning this opinion.

a reply to: seeker1963

I would hope so. To do otherwise would be hypocritical.

Yes, they do still exist.

I guess the two political sides are nothing more than common gangs now.

"You wearing the wrong colors bruh...."

I am a nightmare walkin', psychopath talkin'
King of my jungle, just a gangster stalkin'
Livin' life like a firecracker, quick is my fuse
Vendettas of death back; the colors I choose
Red or Blue, Dems or Republican, it just don't matter
Sucka dive for your life when my shotgun scatters
The political gangs of the USA will never die - just multiply

Colors, colors, colors,
Colors, colors, colors,
Colors, colors, colors,
Colors, colors

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: howtonhawky

First Amendment 2018 Edition:

I have the right to wear what ever the hell I want to my job, and be disruptive with my divisive politics at work, and irritate the customers. Yea.

Nope if your employer has guidelines that are not brand specific but rather attempts to portray a image.

The thing with government is that by design they take away your rights.

originally posted by: howtonhawky
Racist new balance?

So the mrs.sipi dot has no problems with new balance?

Racist this, racist that....yawn. Where’s your thread about FUBU?

a reply to: howtonhawky

You cant be this thick.

1. Nike shoes tend to each be a banner ad, most so in industry.

2. Companies can choose to thrust their company image into representing a political 'whatever'.

3. If they do there may be consequences, both to their sales, and their existing customers.

4. Workplaces can prohibit apparel they deem may be disruptive or offend their customers.

5. Workplaces can alter their dress codes as they see fit.

6. People start protesting a controversial brand (such as burning their shoes), therefore the shoes become centered in divisive politics and partisan outage...

Therefore workplaces can prohibit Nike's 'banner ad' apparel, as they've made themselves The Official Shoe of SJW.

This may be hard for some to grasp but: not having punks represent them is good business (meaning having punks represent them is bad business).

Good night.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

so... everyone who wears nike shoes are punks now??
at least two of my sons wear nike shoes...
guess what, out of the four of us, there are two for trump, two not really liking the guy. as you probably know, I don't like the guy which means that hey, there is a trump supporter with nike shoes. and quite frankly... he doesn't have the money to buy another pair of shoes, I neither do I...
so, how about umm... quit acting like we are all rich and able to just run out and buy whatever because some of yous have gone batty and are finding a million and one things to gripe about and place some kind of important political meaning to.

a reply to: dawnstar

If your sons insist on wearing symbols of white power, or black power, or etc along those lines, to work as their work clothes, especially if they would throw social media tempur tantrums if their bosses tell them its been decided the political schwag is inappropriate, then yes they are punks.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
and who gets to decide just what is a symbol, which companies should be attacked next?
ya, I can see it now, your gonna need a wardrobe that is "appropriate" for the conservatives along with one that is "appropriate" for the liberals just to make sure that you fit in with your next workplace.........
should do wonders for our economy!!!

should some poor dpw worker lose his job raking leaves in the city parks because the jacket he happened to find at the second hand store happens to have a logo on it that you connect to NFL players who happen to not honor the flag the way you think they should??? really???

first off, to be having this discussion, to want to allow a city gov't the power to tell that poor worker that his jacket isn't acceptable simply because of a small logo on it.. kind of flies in the face of what the flag stands for. just like trump trying to pressure the NFL to force those players to be more respectful or fire them flies in the face of what the flag stands for.
second of all, I really think that most sane people don't have political viewpoints as a prime concern when they buy their clothing..

a reply to: dawnstar

Nike drew the line in the sand; not the other way around. Now they must see how the real majority feels. They picked the wrong side. The Anti-American side. We won’t go out and loot and pillage, we won’t scream for dead cops. We will simply hurt their bottom line and watch how quickly their values change.

a reply to: dawnstar

If somebody wears a rival sports teams schwag to work, say at a sports bar, theres a good chance they'll be made to take it off.

And none of you would care.

Nike decides to make itself the corporate face of the NFL's SJW Movement and people go out of their minds when employers decide they dont want to risk of the what-is-now political schwag irritating their customers.

I cant even make this stuff up.

I don't know the labour laws in the USA but in Canada Farm workers, construction labourers and others in the trades are required to wear CSA approved safety boots. Does Nike make safety sneakers?

a reply to: Beartracker16

I was in the printing industry for awhile. after one or our employees got hurt when a screen fell on her practically bare foot they considered not allowing flip flops at work. which was something I supported but well, many seemed outraged about, including the one that was hurt. so nope, wear your flip flops..

it depends on the companies down here. after my husband crushed his toes at work, he would not wear steel toed shoes. the doctor who took care of him told him just how lucky he was that he wasn't wearing them because then, he wouldn't have any toes left!
but these are safety issues and have nothing to do with political viewpoints, so since the companies are the ones that end up paying the workmen's comp and having to report every accident no matter how small to the dept of labor..
I fully recognize that they have an interest in ensuring that their employees are dresses with safety in mind.