3 ms·
If this is illegal, the law is wrong. This has become the case in enough places that the law is losing relevance in our lives.
by wayoutthere 5y ago
If this is illegal, the law is wrong. This has become the case in enough places that the law is losing relevance in our lives.
- josephcsible 5y agoWhy do you think it should be legal to sabotage your employer's systems in response to a labor dispute?
- wayoutthere 5y agoBecause they are sabotaging labor’s ability to negotiate fairly. Turnabout is fair game.
- josephcsible 5y agoIf you try to buy a car, but you and the seller fail to reach a deal, is it okay for you to let the air out of their tires, since they sabotaged your ability to negotiate fairly?
- wayoutthere 5y agoBuying a certain car at a certain price isn’t a requirement to feeding your family. Making enough money to buy food is.
- gruez 5y ago>Buying a certain car at a certain price isn’t a requirement to feeding your family It isn't? In many parts of the US a car is needed to hold a job, or to even get to the grocery store (which might be miles away). Moreover, grocery stores do provide the means to "feed your family". Does that mean looting/vandalizing them is fair game after failing to "negotiate" with them?
- wayoutthere 5y agoLet’s play word games, that’s really productive.
- gruez 5y agoI fail to see how my comment is "play[ing] word games".
- saas_sam 5y agoWorking a specific job at a specific price isn't a requirement for feeding your family either. Neither is living in a specific location for a specific rent price, for that matter. The idea that you are entitled to whatever job you want to work at a price that you think is fair is just as absurd as insisting you are entitled to a specific car at a specific price. If you have somehow gotten yourself into a position where you are supporting a family based on knowing how to do one thing that you can only do for one company, sorry but you either massive screwed up your life (unlikely) or you are afraid to step outside your comfort zone and work elsewhere (likely).
- MeinBlutIstBlau 5y agoWhy is it somehow less fair than a company required to keep overpaid general laborers?
- slothtrop 5y agoAnti-union laws would be, but firing everyone isn't tantamount to that. Future applicants still have the ability to organize.
- fennecfoxen 5y agoWhy is the law wrong? By what principle does a group of striking employees have some intrinsic God-given right (or right conferred by some other source of truth, outside the law) to sabotage the company that they are protesting? Is the company their property, that they have veto power over hiring? Is the labor force their property? If there is some property-like interest that grants these rights, then under what circumstances would that interest became their property rather than the original worker's? Is it strictly first come, first serve? Is there a vesting period during which this right accrues? Are the striking employees as a group to be considered a form of government, that they may regulate hiring and firing? What elevates this right or interest over other cherished principles, such as free association? Or do the strikers simply wish to subjugate such principles to serve their own self-interest? I believe that you propose mob rule. It is no surprise, then, that you are in conflict with a nation ruled by laws, rather than by mobs and strongmen.