793

Whole Foods argues it can ban BLM masks because the Supreme Court let a Christian business owner refuse same-sex couples (fortune.com)

submitted 1 year ago by Grayox@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

475 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Amazon.com’s Whole Foods Market doesn’t want to be forced to let workers wear “Black Lives Matter” masks and is pointing to the recent US Supreme Court ruling permitting a business owner to refuse services to same-sex couples to get federal regulators to back off.

National Labor Relations Board prosecutors have accused the grocer of stifling worker rights by banning staff from wearing BLM masks or pins on the job. The company countered in a filing that its own rights are being violated if it’s forced to allow BLM slogans to be worn with Whole Foods uniforms.

Amazon is the most prominent company to use the high court’s June ruling that a Christian web designer was free to refuse to design sites for gay weddings, saying the case “provides a clear roadmap” to throw out the NLRB’s complaint.

The dispute is one of several in which labor board officials are considering what counts as legally-protected, work-related communication and activism on the job.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] grayman@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

It seems to me like WF is trying to avoid a bud light situation. Employees wearing BLM stuff will certainly put off a lot of people in many areas. So it's about not alienating a big portion of their customers, which would be a significant hit to sales.

Anyway, I find it odd to some extent that a business was not allowed, possibly, to limit what employees wear, especially if they interact with customers. A key tenant of sales and customer service is to make the person feel respected and to take an interest (fake if nothing else) in the customer.

[-] stalfoss@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

It’s sad that a significant portion of their customers don’t believe black lives matter and that as usual money is more important than that to corporations

[-] Pixel@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago

No, you are conflating the organization with the phrase. Probably why they picked that name. People oppose the org and their Marxist agenda, not so much (I hope) black people.

[-] grayman@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Leader embezzles millions and people are still clamoring to support that garbage organization. They definitely picked a great name to scam people with.

[-] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

I can easily see this being a safety issue. You don't usually want employees wearing stuff that could anger other employees or customers, no matter the reason.