> The National Labor Relations Act provides protection to employees who wish to join or form a union and those who engage in union activity. The act also protects employees who engage in a concerted activity.
That's the law you should be looking for. Check it out. It has some provisions about distributing union literature in break rooms and stuff. Pretty interesting.
So are we arguing about the security officer or the person that was disturbing material?
"In Spence’s case, the NLRB has made a finding of merit to the charges, and has indicated that it plans to issue a formal complaint. A finding of merit is not an official decision, but a crucial step in an ongoing proceeding. Amazon will now have the opportunity to settle. If Amazon does not agree to do so, then the NLRB will schedule a hearing before an administrative law judge."
From the article the NLRB appears following the letter of the law. I'm not a big fan of labor laws, but they are the law so it's good know that everybody is getting a fair chance. Violations happen and there are penalties.
"An NLRB investigation found that Amazon illegally prohibited Connor Spence, a Staten Island employee involved in union organizing, from distributing pro-union literature in a break room on May 16—and then confiscated the literature—also in violation of U.S. labor law, according to evidence provided by the NLRB to the union’s attorney. "
As far as I can see, Connor Spence wasn't terminated. He filed a complaint via the NLRB. Good for him, we should always have a healthy distrust of corporation and governments.
Were there could be confusion, was my explanation of AT-WILL employment regarding some other comment about Harry Potter be discussed at the work place. Had Spence been fired for spreading union material then yes it probably would have been a violation of labor laws.
Although I have been restless down voted and trolled and trashed. The real crux of the issue and the article might be here, with who told the security officer to do what and when.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28055091
> Had Spence been fired for spreading union material then yes it probably would have been a violation of labor laws.
Nope, still wrong. It's a violation to prohibit, it doesn't need to lead to any retaliation to be a violation [1]. Hence the complaint.
If the security officer, even if a contractor acts as an agent of Amazon, it's on Amazon. Even because they didn't train the officer about the NLRA (or they did? who knows? it's on the agency to investigate). That's why when you do some corporate mandated training, you need to acknowledge and sign that you completely understood whatever was in there. To cover the company's ass.
?