![]() "I think it will make the decision to go out on strike much harder."įor now, noted Altchek, the decision raises far more questions than it answers, such as what kinds of property damage companies can now claim against unions. That's inherently a confusing thing they have to do," she added. "It's creating a further responsibility for workers to mitigate the impact of the action they're deciding to take. "In contemplating whether to go out on strike or not, that's another risk factor that union members have to weigh," Block told CBS MoneyWatch. The latest decision is likely to chill employee activism because it could make workers financially liable for damages to their employer if they stop work, according to Sharon Block, executive director of the Labor & Worklife Program at Harvard Law School. AFSCME, the court ruled in 2018 that public-sector unions may not make nonmembers pay for the cost of collective bargaining. In 2021, the court rolled back union organizers' ability to meet with farm workers at their worksite during off hours. ![]() The Glacier decision is the latest in a series of measures taken by the conservative-leaning Supreme Court that weaken existing labor protections. "The litigation risk for unions is certainly heightened," he said. ![]() The decision now offers a pathway for employers to potentially sue unions - or workers personally - if they allege the employees deliberately damaged company property during an action, said Dan Altchek, an employer-site lawyer at the firm Saul Ewing. They are employees whose collective and peaceful decision to withhold their labor is protected by the NLRA even if economic injury results," she wrote. ![]() "Workers are not indentured servants, bound to continue laboring until any planned work stoppage would be as painless as possible for their master. In a lone dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the decision would "erode the right to strike" and undermine the National Labor Relations Board's oversight of workplace law. "In so doing, they not only destroyed the concrete but also put Glacier's trucks in harm's way."įour other justices joined Barrett's decision three others filed or joined concurring opinions. Then, they waited to walk off the job until the concrete was mixed and poured in the trucks," she wrote. "y reporting for duty and pretending as if they would deliver the concrete, the drivers prompted the creation of the perishable product. Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said the lower court was wrong in dismissing the suit and that the Glacier workers' actions were not protected. The question for the high court was how should the case proceed. But the Supreme Court in October of 2022 took up Glacier's appeal. The lawsuit was initially dismissed, with the state court saying that it should be decided by the National Labor Relations Board.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |