Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j8rd0sn wrote

[deleted]

−28

CaptainObvious t1_j8rgbyd wrote

That doesn't allow the employer to illegally fire someone in retaliation for unionizing. See the several people Amazon was forced to rehire and pay legal fees to in New York over the last few years.

19

strangr_legnd_martyr t1_j8rh84e wrote

New York State law does not supersede the federal National Labor Relations Act, which protects the rights of workers to establish a union from interference or coercion by an employer.

Firing people for trying to form a union is federally illegal under the NLRA.

13

jambrown13977931 t1_j8tibt0 wrote

Unless they were fired because their job requirements aren’t needed any more. The article said “several of the employees” who were terminated were participating in unionizing discussions, this would imply others who were fired weren’t. This implies it’s not retaliation or intimidation, but downsizing of a department that is no longer necessary for Tesla’s business model.

0

Tiny-Peenor t1_j9201lk wrote

Surely a business would not lie!

1

jambrown13977931 t1_j925s5e wrote

Surely employees in obsolete jobs wouldn’t create frivolous lawsuits. A company shouldn’t retain employees in a department that is no longer a part of their business model. It really sucks for impacted employees, I get that, I really do, but to do otherwise could drag down the employment of everyone else in the company

0

Tiny-Peenor t1_j92anm9 wrote

Yeah they often tell employees they’re going to be laid off a day before they actually do it. I have some seaside property to sell you in Kansas

1

Cbomb101 t1_j8rihxj wrote

Sounds like a shit state. In Australia we have rights and arnt slaves like that.

9