2 ms·
Your interpretation doesn't hold. All it's saying is that you have to not be affiliated with a union, then a wildcat strike is legal ("no illegality involved").
by wootland 4y ago
Your interpretation doesn't hold. All it's saying is that you have to not be affiliated with a union, then a wildcat strike is legal ("no illegality involved").
- kevviiinn 4y agoIt isn't an "interpretation" The wikipedia page literally says that you must end your relationship with the union due to inadequate representation
- wootland 4y agoIt says that because you can't be in a union and do a wild cat strike. Not in a union? You're free to. You're misreading it. I'd encourage you talk to a lawyer if you have any doubts.
- kevviiinn 4y agoBecause this is what an attorney told you or you're relying on your own interpretation of the plain English text? It's pretty clear, words mean things and I encourage you to look up the definition of words like "request" and "end" and "association" If there isn't a union then it wouldn't be considered a wildcat strike at all, therefore there must be a union at that workplace for it to be considered a wildcat strike and the person must be unassociated with that union due to inadequate representation for it to be a protected wildcat strike https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Wildcat+Strike https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Wildcat+Strik...