Omaha Steve's Labor Group

Pacifist Patriot

(24,903 posts)

26. Important distinction needs to be made though. The ruling was not about suing employees FOR striking

Sun Jun 4, 2023, 08:15 AM

Jun 2023

The ruling allowed the company to sue the union for the destruction of company property. In this particular case, that is what happened. The strike was timed to make the product useless and potentially damage the trucks. If the drivers had finished active deliveries and then gone on strike, this would never have been a case at all.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Anyone notice the supremes ruling 8-1 yesterday on companies can sue striking workers. [View all] Duncanpup Jun 2023 OP

Like the chickens voting for multigraincracker Jun 2023 #1

Exactly Multigraincracker. Duncanpup Jun 2023 #2

thing is, 8-1, it wasn't just the Repuke votes on the court. 3Hotdogs Jun 2023 #3

see my reply below. mopinko Jun 2023 #5

i read the about ruling and it's a bit complicated. mopinko Jun 2023 #4

This encourages malicious suits by companies against unions. SunSeeker Jun 2023 #10

well, it is a bit fuzzy. mopinko Jun 2023 #17

Are you saying "the mob" caused the destruction to the cement trucks? SunSeeker Jun 2023 #46

no. i'm saying violence and breaking shit is not good for the union movement. mopinko Jun 2023 #55

This isn't the 1970s. Unions, what's left of them, are pretty by the book now. SunSeeker Jun 2023 #59

because a lower court had ruled that stopdiggin Jun 2023 #43

Deliberate destruction is already illegal. Why was this ruling necessary? nt SunSeeker Jun 2023 #45

because a lower court stopdiggin Jun 2023 #57

Just like Citizens United there was not advance news reports in advance. Delmette2.0 Jun 2023 #6

good point about this being on radar. A hush docket. Evolve Dammit Jun 2023 #22

Amen to that Joinfortmill Jun 2023 #7

I was complaining about this the other day in a thread. Bluethroughu Jun 2023 #8

Exactly. Justice Brown-Jackson was the only one who saw reality. SunSeeker Jun 2023 #11

I think like most people not knowledgeable in construction, Bluethroughu Jun 2023 #14

do we know that? mopinko Jun 2023 #18

The Union is not going to sabotage equipment they are going to need to make a pay check Bluethroughu Jun 2023 #24

according to the ruling, they had to construct bunkers to take the load. mopinko Jun 2023 #37

They sell and use those bunkers, and when they dump hot loads Bluethroughu Jun 2023 #38

Exactly. This basically allows SLAPP suits against unions. SunSeeker Jun 2023 #48

...pleased that today's decision... doesn't change labor law and leaves the right to strike intact. MayReasonRule Jun 2023 #40

SEIU needs to get a backbone. Telling us "it could have been worse" is pitiful. SunSeeker Jun 2023 #51

Might That Be An Outlier? Or Is It Part And Parcel Of Their Pattern And Practice? MayReasonRule Jun 2023 #56

I agree. nt SunSeeker Jun 2023 #47

She is the voice of reason on this Court mountain grammy Jun 2023 #25

This message was self-deleted by its author Joinfortmill Jun 2023 #9

People just don't get how the "middle class" doesn't exist without collective bargaining. jaxexpat Jun 2023 #12

This exactly! Bluethroughu Jun 2023 #15

I worked in union shops for 35 years. I am a solid liberal Democratic voter The Jungle 1 Jun 2023 #13

The management team had plenty of time to unload the trucks. Bluethroughu Jun 2023 #16

Site management did unload the trucks. The Jungle 1 Jun 2023 #19

Piss on Coathanger Barrett; she's dead wrong, as is this ruling. Hermit-The-Prog Jun 2023 #34

Labor Leaders Are Relieved This Doesn't Change Labor Law And Leaves The Right To Strike Intact MayReasonRule Jun 2023 #41

They didn't abandon fully loaded trucks without telling anyone. Glacier knew they were on strike. SunSeeker Jun 2023 #49

This is a complicated issue and we won part of it. The Jungle 1 Jun 2023 #28

imho, the union movement lost a lot of steam mopinko Jun 2023 #39

You're On Point. Thank You For Your Voice Of Reason! MayReasonRule Jun 2023 #42

Here's the actual ruling OnlinePoker Jun 2023 #20

thanks. that's helpful. mopinko Jun 2023 #31

This isn't about the strike, it's about the vandalism localroger Jun 2023 #21

I should have seen your reply first. I pointed out the same thing. Pacifist Patriot Jun 2023 #27

The acceptance of unions lies in management's respect for its power. jaxexpat Jun 2023 #32

Vandalism is already illegal. Why did Glacier need this ruling? nt SunSeeker Jun 2023 #50

My granddaughters range from 16 to 22 mountain grammy Jun 2023 #23

I'm on the side of the Union! Bluethroughu Jun 2023 #30

I'm CWA retired and proud Deuxcents Jun 2023 #54

Important distinction needs to be made though. The ruling was not about suing employees FOR striking Pacifist Patriot Jun 2023 #26

if they'd announced the strike, they'd have been fine. mopinko Jun 2023 #35

You do not know these people. Please stop defaming these workers. SunSeeker Jun 2023 #53

The company knew the union was going to strike, they Bluethroughu Jun 2023 #36

questioning this stopdiggin Jun 2023 #44

SCOTUS should not be making a ruling based on disputed facts. SunSeeker Jun 2023 #52

disputed on THIS site stopdiggin Jun 2023 #58

do u know how much 16 truck of concrete cost? mopinko Jun 2023 #60

yep. this was a big ol' giant FU stopdiggin Jun 2023 #61

Jesus H 3auld6phart Jun 2023 #29

And they use Christian dogma as science Farmer-Rick Jun 2023 #33