Posted on 09/28/2016 12:45:52 PM PDT by detective
Bullying and intimidation tactics -- that's what we've come to expect of Big Labor today.
Two weeks ago in Texas, a jury awarded $5.3 million in damages to Texas-based Professional Janitorial Services of Houston (PJS) after a local Service Employees International Union (SEIU) was found to have waged a campaign of misinformation and defamation against them.
SEIU Local 5 had been trying to unionize Houston's large janitorial companies through its "justice for janitors" campaign for years, and but for the Professional Janitorial Services (PJS), it was successful. PJS remained the final holdout -- causing Local 5 to resort to nefarious and even illegal behavior.
When Local 5 failed to win a union election at PJS, it began a coordinated attack of disparagement and harassment. Its goal was to "cost PJS money" and "cost PJS accounts," according to emails obtained during discovery.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Union intimidation goes back decades almost to their beginning.
From the article: “SEIU’s own manual advises union officials to “disobey laws which are used to enforce injustice against working people” and goes as far as to advise unions to threaten managers with accusations of racism or sexism.”
Right out of the Communist playbook actually. A.N.S.W.E.R., Saul Alynski, and so forth.
Our leadership to date has allowed I believe it was Justice Black’s ruling that went a long way off course when it comes to what is freedom of speech, and what is unlawful public disobedience of the law, thus rioting, and destruction of private, and public property to go unchallenged.
Let’s hope President Trump will address this disgraceful SCOTUS ruling by the CJ.
Don’t worry, people. That union’s members can get good paying positions with Obama’s BLM thugs.
It goes to the beginning. If a union did not present a threat of violence and sabotage towards any company that dared to hire replacement workers, than a strike would just be a mass resignation.
The court acknowledged that using threats and force to obtain property is wrongful. However, the court reasoned that it is considered "wrongful" only when the perpetrator has no "legitimate claim" to it. Since federal law empowers unions with the right to strike, the use of violence to secure higher pay and benefits was not extortion. The case was dismissed. Such violent acts can, however, be punishable under normal state or federal laws.
I read about the Ford strike back in the 30’s ... then the Pullman strike as well. Unions had their reasons back then but when management saw the writing on the wall they treated their employees better starting with Henry Ford. Now they’re just a management system themselves and all they have is threats not only to companies but to individual employees as well. I hate the term ‘workers’ since it’s so communistic sounding.
Thanks for posting!
Can they still do that in America?
” Since federal law empowers unions with the right to strike, the use of violence to secure higher pay and benefits was not extortion.”
That’s interesting as hell. Using the court’s “logic,” then using the Declaration of Independence to shoot or hang judges to secure liberty is not violence or prohibited.
Union thugs bump!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.