Saturday, June 3, 2023

Supreme Court rules 8-1 against unions' claimed right to destroy employer property during strikes, with just one justice (Biden's choice) not getting the memo


The other eight are obviously racist. Let's ask the "View" ladies, shall we?.

 Monica Showalter; American Thinker  "Someone who doesn't know what a woman is wouldn't be expected to know much about strike law, either.

"That brings us to Supreme Court justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who served as the lonely dissenter on a cut-and-dried case regarding sneaky union tactics that destroyed company property during a strike.

"Even the other liberals on the Court went along with the majority, 8-1, in the ruling.  But not she.". . .

"What Jackson misses here is that strikes for companies are the deprivation of company labor, not company property.  If workers walk off the job, they had better turn the lights out and the machinery off and leave the fridges on.  They had better not get the cement mixers started and leave them running for ruin because now they'll face a few consequences of their own.  All they have to do is go on strike, taking "reasonable precautions" not to spoil work or property left unfinished.  They can't wreck the place on the way out and call that their "protected behavior" and rely on the political hacks at the National Labor Relations Board to cover for them.

"It goes to show that Jackson is a creature of union interests, not an impartial justice.  One wonders how she'd rule in cases like Antifa burning courthouses in its strike "duties" or Black Lives Matters rioters looting shops in their strike "duties," too.  Would she defend those characters with the same logic?  Don't hold your breath that she wouldn't.". . .

No comments: