239
US supreme court sides with Starbucks in union case over fired employees
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
239 points (99.2% liked)
Work Reform
9856 readers
212 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This would not have happened if the non-voting bOtH pArTiEs ArE tHe SaMe LoL aMiRiTe idiots had bothered to vote in 2016, allowing republicans to stage a executive and legislative right-wing coup of the supreme court.
But here we are. And their ostrich head-in-the-sand response to this ruling and their passively complicit role in it will most likely and idiotically be, once again, yOu SeE? bOtH pArTiEs ArE tHe SaMe LoL aMiRiTe
"I voted once ten years ago, and I didn't get my pony overnight. bOtH pArTiEs ArE tHe SaMe LoL aMiRiTe"
Now thanks to these lazy, mediocre "muh purity" reprobates cutting off their noses to spite ALL our faces, things are now sliding faster toward a "yee-haw!" banana republic from within.
Bruh, there's a right wing majority on the bench because Obama in an unprecedented move, gave his Supreme Court pick to Trump.
This is... not true. Orrin Hatch said if Obama nominated someone like Merrick Garland, the Republican Senate would approve it. Obama nominated him, then the Republican Senate said "psych."
The checks and balances were broken by the Republican Senate because they decided "advice and consent" could be abused to mean "wait until there's a Republican president."
The public decided the solution to this was selecting a Republican president and keeping a Republican Senate. It's a perfect plan for Republicans, because people on the left just blame Democrats so that the same pattern can happen again next time.
Agree entirely except the part about the people keeping a Republican Senate. The Senate is rigged. 1 person from Wyoming should not have the same power as 65 from California. The entire point of the Senate is to rig things against what most people want if it goes against what small states want.
"According to James Madison, "The use of the Senate is to consist in proceeding with more coolness, with more system, and with more wisdom, than the popular branch.""
By far the popular vote is not for the GOP and hasn't been since 2004. The Senate makes sure that doesn't matter. Gerrymandering the house does the rest.
Similar to the Senate issue, the last time a Republican won both the popular vote and the electoral vote was again 2004. The electoral college is the same problem compounded. The people haven't picked a Republican president in 20 years.