Economy

Tesla would have to hire a worker and have Mask remove the “threatening” tweets of employees. The outcome of the legal battle with the Auto Syndicate

  1. Homepage >guardian
  2. News >guardian
  3. world News >guardian


The social networking site Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn


Tesla repeatedly violated US labor law, including the dismissal of a union activist. This is what was decided yesterday National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) After Tesla appealed against a 2019 ruling by an administrative judge in a years-long legal battle between the company and United Auto Workers Union (UAW). The decision also requires the automaker to remove Elon Musk Threatening Tweet from 2018.

But the verdict is a little lighter than it was in 2019: Musk won’t have to read an employee’s notice

The ruling, passed by two Republican and Democratic members of the NLRB, says the world’s number-one electric vehicle sales giant should offer to reinstate the dismissed employee, and that Tesla violated the law by imposing retaliation against another union activist. “Union supporters are questioned and employees are restricted to speaking to reporters. Tesla will also need to post a notice in its nationwide factories addressing“ illegal tweet. ”This decision represents a The change from the rule of 2019, In which Musk or anyone on the job board must read a notice stating that Tesla has broken the law. Posting a written notice sends a much weaker signal to employees than a superior manager reading it out loud. Benjamin Sacks, professor of labor law at Harvard University, points out that “when executives have to read the notice to employees, it shows to workers that the boss is not the only authority in the world, and that the law is a higher authority than his boss.”
Tesla has denied wrongdoing and said Musk’s tweet is protected under the First Amendment to ensure freedom of expression. NLRB judgments can be appealed to federal court.

READ  Open fiber, in Syracuse + 120% requests for fiber lines

The infringing Tweet

Musk’s 2018 tweet stated, “Nothing is preventing the Tesla team at our auto plant from taking a union vote. They can do it if they want to. But why pay union dues and give up stock options for nothing?” In the sentence it is indicated that iThe letter “unlawfully threatened” Tesla employees by saying “they will lose their stock options if they choose to consort” To represent them.

US labor law allows companies to make negative predictions about union consequences, but prevents them from threatening to penalize employees for doing so.

Thelma Binder

"Explorer. Devoted travel specialist. Web expert. Organizer. Social media geek. Coffee enthusiast. Extreme troublemaker. Food trailblazer. Total bacon buff."

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button
Close
Close