3 ms·

This is why the Taft-Hartley Act was a stroke of genius and a huge gift to the capital wielding class in that it took Secondary striking off the table for worke

• kazen44 4y ago
  what, secondary/solidarity striking is not allowed in the US? I wonder how long this is viable, especially considering the ever increasing inequality in most western societies.
  • nerdponx 4y ago
    It's worse than you think. Quoth Wikipedia: > Among the practices prohibited by the Taft–Hartley act are jurisdictional strikes, wildcat strikes, solidarity or political strikes, secondary boycotts, secondary and mass picketing, closed shops, and monetary donations by unions to federal political campaigns. The amendments also allowed states to enact right-to-work laws banning union shops. Enacted during the early stages of the Cold War, the law required union officers to sign non-communist affidavits with the government. Seems like it should be at least partly unconstitutional on first amendment grounds, but I don't know if it's ever been challenged.
    • salawat 4y ago
      It emerged out of backlash to some particularly roughly timed large profile strikes that happened during WWII, and with the Cold War blooming, and no one knowing if it'd ever go hot, Congress shoved that one through to "ensure the U.S. would never be held hostage by communist rabble rousers again." To be frank, it's a shining example of why every legislation needs a sunset date. One and done legislation is just a tyranny happening in slow motion without active efforts to measure and assure continuing assent to the status quo by the governed.