Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers
This union also tells people the names of their officers and where and when they can be found
E-MAIL PAGE
Obviously, they want union members to intimidate their officers
This is a really poor comparison.
These are names and locations of people listed as "officers" of the union, an inherently positive designation
The scab list are names and locations of people listed as "scabs" to the union, an inherently negative designation
Naturally one can assume there's a different reasonable expectation as to how people will react or use such information.
One would not suggest that the reason a news paper would publish a list of known sex offenders in a neighborhood and why a news paper would publish a list of high school graduates must be for the exact same reason, or that the expectation is for the readers to use the information in the exact same way...so why are you trying to act like the reason for, and the expected reaction to, this information must be exactly the same?
Similarly, was there any indication from the union that one should use that information to exert pressure upon the officers? Because the story preports that there was such a directive put forward regarding the scab list:
"The following individuals are NON-dues paying workers. They have chosen to STOP paying Union Dues and still reap the rewards of your negotiated benefits,” the Tennessee “Scab Report” said. “If you work near one of these people listed please explain the importance of Solidarity and the power of collective bargaining.”
Now, one could easily debate whether or not such pressure is "harassment"...but a reasonable argument could be made that it is as it's reasonable to suggest it would be "the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group" as it's reasonable to suggest that a person not wanting to be part of a union would find pressure to engage in "solidarity" with the union as "unwanted".
So it's just entirely unreasonable to attempt to equally compare the information on the SCAB page to the information on the EMAIL US page as it relates to suggesting that the purposes, and the expected or likely responses, to said information.
I think it would be incorrect to say posting the names on the SCAB page is inherently intimidating. However the claim in the story...that it makes intimidation and harassment EASIER...is absolutely accurate. And given the further encouragement by the union to continue to pressure people on the importance of the union, it's absolutely reasonable to say it at the very least is promoting harassment on the part of the union IF that pressure is unwanted.