It was an illegal strike so I am pretty sure he is not being sarcastic. They had "civil service" clauses in their contract that made them "Federal employees" and Federal employees could not strike (not sure if that is true today).
Whether existing legislation recognizes certain types of strikes as legal or not is irrelevant. Civil disobedience has deep roots in American history. This is an analogue to that, given that their rights to strike have been struck. (pun intended)
Civil disobedience can be illegal.
Extend that to all employment. Nothing illegal about not being forced to work. A contract is not a prison sentence, or I should hope so.
I will grant you certain conditions apply to armed forces that wouldn't otherwise apply to civilian employment, as that does actively put other's lives at risk. This isn't a conversation about desertion of duty, merely protesting or quitting. Even then there are laws that protect conscientious objectors .
Wrong. A strike, by definition, as actually defined in federal law, can indeed be illegal. That includes armed forces and every federal employee.
Wrong. A strike, by definition, as actually defined in federal law, can indeed be illegal.
>It's an established form of protest which may or may not lead to firing.
Wrong. It's an established form of protest which may or may not result in criminal fillings because it is illegal federally for federal employees.
>Despite the results of the strike, the protest itself is not illegal, nor is walking out of a job.
Despite the results of the strike, the protest itself is illegal, as is walking out of federal jobs (in a strike).
You literally can't be any more wrong.