repubs; NLRB expand rights of employers to control worker's private live's

[dajoki]

They'll be bowling alone at Guardsmark tonight. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) doesn't want the employees chatting it up off the job.

On June 7 the three Republican appointees on the five-member board that regulates employer-employee relations in the United States handed down a remarkable ruling that expands the rights of employers to muck around in their workers' lives when they're off the job. They upheld the legality of a regulation for uniformed employees at Guardsmark, a security guard company, that reads, "ou must NOT . . . fraternize on duty or off duty, date or become overly friendly with the client's employees or with co-employees."


The board majority held that the guards probably would interpret this to be a no-dating rule, pure and simple. In her dissent, member Wilma Liebman wrote that the rule plainly specifies both dating and fraternizing, a term that covers a range of activities that go well beyond (or fall well short of) dating. That certainly was the reason that a San Francisco security guard local of the Service Employees International Union brought the case to the NLRB in the first place: The rule as written could preclude any attempt by the guards to meet to form a union, or even to talk about work-related issues.

<<snip>>

But the NLRB ruling mentions none of the caveats that applied at Guardsmark; it is now a precedent that can be applied to a far wider range of workers in a far wider range of situations. Indeed, as the precedent for this ruling, the board cited an earlier decision upholding the right of a hotel to ban its employees from fraternizing with guests. That hardly seems a parallel set of circumstances -- closer to perpendicular, if you ask me -- and it sure doesn't inspire any confidence that the current board will seek to limit the impact of its Guardsmark ruling.WP 8/10/05 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/09/AR2005080901162.html?referrer=email

[AmandaRuth]

1. elections have consequences

and people get what they vote for.

[dajoki]

6. it's bad enough what...

they did to workers compensation laws, i wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. now they want to control worker's private lives. i thought the NLRB was supposed to to protect worker's rights.

[bushisanidiot]

2. Repukes: the party of big government and ZERO privacy rights

what idiots.. but the freeptards will kill eachother trying to get to the polls to vote them in again. "take away all of my rights.. PLEASE??!!!!!!"

[dajoki]

3. i can't wait till one of the...

ignorant assholes that voted for them gets fired for having a beer

[mrdmk]

4. I feel lucky that the Wifey and I were introduced by our dogs at the

dog park. Thank God for dogs.

[dajoki]

5. LOL

one way to get around them