Subscribe to Breaking NewsRuby-Sachs: A response to Shimmin, Cinemark
The post by Shimmin makes an excellent point about when to hold corporations accountable through boycotts and pickets. I believe that some of the boycotts proposed by our community are ill-founded. Including those that target Home Depot for have a human rights manager that donated to the Yes on 8 campaign. We do not want corporations hiring and firing individuals based on their political beliefs, no matter how awful we find them to be.
Still, there is a point where the proponent of discrimination is so central to the operation of the company it is as if the company as a whole did not support equal rights. This may be true of a CFO or key spokesperson who believes LGBT people are second class citizens. It is true of a CEO who works to deny LGBT individuals their rights.
The CEO of Cinemark theatres is sufficiently central to the Cinemark’s operation that his support of Prop 8 constitutes Cinemark’s support of Prop 8. If they don’t want to be aligned with a political movement, then they should tell the individuals charged with representing the company to stop involving themselves in politics.
The boycott is not the thing. BUT, the protests at the theatres and the publicity about the boycott is the thing.
Blogger Mike Rogers went directly at SubWay corporate over a $2,500 donation by a franchisee. Within 72 hours, Subway had agreed to change their non discrimination policy and told the franchisee to retract the donation. Keep beating the drums folks
Cinemark is just pushing back. Push harder and louder!
Someone commented earlier that there were far larger donors. We’ll get the ones we can and make others think twice if this thing ends up having to go up for a vote again.
In the meantime does anyone know anything about Comarco? It is a publicly traded CA technology company (ticker CMRO)whose stock is up but still under $1.00
CEO Winston Hickman donated $25,000 to yes on 8. Any ideas on how we can ruin his day?
I just finished reading an article in the Bay Area Reporter about a gay movie group Movie Bears that are going to boycott Cinemark. But what I found interesting was the following information given by Mr. Meredith referring to the CEO as an “EMPLOYEE” also not the use of sexual PREFERENCE not ORENTATION the following is from the B.A.R interview:
In a telephone interview with the B.A.R. , James Meredith, Cinemark’s vice president of marketing, indicated he was aware of the boycott.
“We’ve gotten a few calls. I think the main thing is that Cinemark did not make a contribution to either side. Beyond that I would say that Cinemark would be reluctant to discuss with our employees activities outside of the work environment, especially regarding political, social, and religious activities. Those are their personal issues.”
Meredith later provided the B.A.R . with a written statement that, in part, emphasized Stock’s donation was a “personal action,” separate from his role as the company’s chairman.
“It would be inappropriate to influence our employees’ position on personal issues outside the work environment, especially on political, social, or religious activities. As an equal opportunity employer, we do not discriminate based on race, creed, religion or sexual preference. Any individual act or contribution is just that, individual acts of personal expression and do not reflect company positions or policy. Cinemark did not make any financial contribution to either side on the Proposition 8 vote in California nor does Cinemark have an opinion on this issue,” the statement read.
Also check this out:
While the LGBT community may be angry with Stock, Cinemark’s shareholders, to whom Stock answers, might not be. According to the November 10 issue of the Dallas Business Journal, Cinemark’s third quarter profits exceeded expectations by 2 cents per share, with revenues up 1 percent from the previous quarter, hitting $476.2 million dollars. The company attributed the increased revenue to increased ticket prices and a 5.4 percent increase in concession sales.
Alternet, one of the blogs covering the boycott, stated Stock is a Utah-based Mormon who earned nearly $7.5 million last year, making his annual tithe to the church approximately $790,000.
Now here’s my question to you Emma:
Why is a CEO like Mr. Stock who is making $7.5 MILLION DOLLARS a YEAR from CINEMARK & indirectly US the Gay Community, Mr Stock is already TITHING $790,000 DOLLARS to the MORMON CHURCH which is publicly donating money to promote the pass of prop. 8? AND,
Mr. Stock HAD to know the MORMON CHURCH was already donating to pass prop. 8 but he still gave an additional $9,999.00 he earned as CEO of CINEMARK why?
WHY did Mr. Shimmin write his article?
WHY did Mr. Meredith do his interview?
Now, who’s the employees here and who’s the BOSS?
WHY are we going to BOYCOTT CINEMARK theaters?
By not spending OUR money at CINEMARK WE THE GAY MOVIE GOING CUSTOMERS ARE THE BOSS!
I’ve become bored with the word boycott. Instead I refer to myself as a “Preference Shopper”. I simply prefer to spend my money at stores/companies/events that don’t discriminate or promote discrimination against gay people.
By donating money to a political campaign in California (and probably elsewhere), you are associating your employer with that donation, and that information is public. That an HR (was that “human rights” or “human resources”?) manager would donate to something called “eliminate right” for a group of employees and potential hires is very troubling. I think that is as legitimate a target as I could imagine. It’s different from, say, a line worker who simply tells his buddies in the bar that he’s against gay marriage. He’s not in charge of other people, or responsible for the tone of the work environment in the company. People should expect that campaigning to take away someone else’s rights is going to probably result in them not buying your stuff, causing you to be fired or go out of business as a natural result. Now if you think this isn’t fair, let’s compare. Without ENDA and with DADT, gay people in much of the country are subject to firing just for being who they are, much less talking about it or funding anything.
Emma, we can not win with your placate-our-enemies attitude!
The Home Depot HR manager must be fired! This person is in a position to make hiring decisions (and firing too) and has made it clear, publicly, that he/she is unable to see gays as equal to straights. If I was his/her manager I would be very concerned about the ability to carry out our goals fairly. If people are in jobs that require equality mindedness they should not be allowed to support bigotry.
This is not just a political opinion! If we let them win that point, we lose, everyone is entitled to their political opinion. This is a civil rights issue, and by being on the wrong side, you give up your right to do certain things including work for a publicly traded company with a non-discrimination policy or operating in a state that outlaws discrimination
We cannot let them take this argument down to the level of just a political issue, as if “reasonable people could disagree”. We must form this issue as right vs. wrong and opinion is irrelevant.
That is how we will win in the courts, in CA and beyond.
Your placating stance is extremely misguided and makes me wonder if you cut your teeth at HRC.
May be the best answer any of us can give Mr Shimmin is to be found in the article, posted right here in 365GAY!
“Gay marriage supporter receives death threat”
See?!? THIS is what we’ve endured since the beginning of time; and the time to unite is now.