Hacker News Reader

Comment by toomuchtodo | Hacker News Reader

Can you provide a citation demonstrating evidence of this assertion (it is a very general statement)? You might be referring to the Taft-Hartley act [1], which there are ways around. The NLRB also has a great resource on the topic [2]. It is true there are situations where you cannot strike, which labor organization needs to be mindful of.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft%E2%80%93Hartley_Act

[2] https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-right...

View on HN

It’s the sympathy strike [1], part of the action which is illegal in many other countries, but not in Sweden.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_action

Are these actually sympathy strikes though? It reads as refusal to provide services to a particular company, not the workers fully striking.

Edit: Yes! The terms also used are "sympathy boycotts", which this clearly is.

Ye I thought sympathy strikes are a general strike somewhere else unrelated, to put social peer pressure on the leaders of company target of the actual strikes.

To pick one of the examples above, could the USPS legally help out the strike by selectively rejecting packages going to/from Tesla addresses? My guess would be it would need to be a bottom up organization breaking company rules, probably isolated to some regions. Then again unions and striking was illegal during robber baron times too, but not necessarily immoral.

Indeed, there is nuance between outright illegal and bending the rules or taking actions that are effectively a strike without outright striking. Determine the desired outcome, seek a legal opinion from counsel, and build your strategy backwards from that. Perhaps you don't strike, but slow down, call out, whatever. "Are we on strike or we just collectively having an off day?"

In this specific example, if people like Elon can break the law without repercussions, it seems disingenuous to fault workers attempting to do the same (depending on where the actions fall between bending and breaking any specific law) to protect their rights, compensation, and working arrangements considering they're where they actual value comes from. Tesla is afraid of the precedent of labor having a role in their management and operations decisions (because Elon demands operating from a position of power against all), but they are fighting a losing battle (Sean Fein and the UAW in the US [1], incredibly high support of unions in the under 30 cohort in the US [2] [3] [4], etc).

> And among those on the frontlines are the nation's youngest workers leading the renewed push for labour unions. Gen Z is, according to the Center for American Progress, "the most pro-union generation alive today".

> "I think there's a growing understanding that if you have a job, you need a union," says Jaz Brisack. The now-26-year-old was one of the earliest leaders of union efforts at Starbucks in Buffalo, New York, in 2021.

[1] https://www.thestreet.com/electric-vehicles/uaw-president-sh...

[2] https://www.americanprogress.org/press/release-gen-z-is-the-...

[3] https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20230831-the-gen-zers-l...

[4] https://www.npr.org/2023/04/11/1169314853/union-rutgers-stri...

Additional citation: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/uaw-pu... ("UAW to 'pull out all stops' organizing nonunion automakers")

In the past UPS teamsters have refused to cross picket lines to make deliveries.

That is an active stance of UPS. They wont cross picket lines to deliver.

Apparently their sotesre even has "Strike" listed as a reason for non delivery, option N:

https://twitter.com/RyanElward/status/1448819231567405056

Reply on news.ycombinator.com