Date: February 21st, 2018 5:04 AM Author: Well-lubricated Crystalline Spot
All the “labor board lawyer” (a Trump appointee) found was that statements about differences in gender aren’t “protected concerted activity” within the meaning of a law mainly intended to permit employees to unionize.
It’s ridiculous how people are politicizing this correct outcome. If you disagree with the labor board here, then you are in agreement in principle with the Obama board, which issued decisions finding almost anything to be protected by the NLRA
Date: February 21st, 2018 5:21 AM Author: Well-lubricated Crystalline Spot
New GC has already announced his intention to roll back almost every shitlib policy the nlrb issued over the last 10 years.
Put this memo in a different context and assume it was going on about black lives matter and said some negative things about white people. Assume he was fired only for those statements. Should the memo be protected by a law that was passed primarily to facilitate and oversee relations between management and organized labor? The shitlib former GC of the nlrb probably would have said yes.