- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 66,075
- Reaction score
- 47,021
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers[W:702:1041]
i am guessing their practices are primarily representing the employeri know a few labor lawyers that would disagree with that statement
if you are in the right - and you have good attorneys to display your company's innocence - then there is no reason to have your blood pressure elevatedwe live in a VERY litigious society....been sued so many times now, the paperwork no longer even raises my blood pressure
and i speculate that in each of those instances, had the employee not raised the grievance, there would have been no action by the company to settleHad to settle a couple....mostly sexual harassment from bad employees...happens when you have over 140 employees no matter how much training we do
absolutely. which party was negligentOne bad slip and fall on the premises...those types of things
only once for me, but have led litigation in a number of suits as the plaintiffBeen sued a number of times regarding employment
only because those employees were unable to prove their assertions. which is one of the things unions help employees to do. the collective group can accomplish much more than a single employeepeople claiming all sorts of things....not promoted.....not paid fairly.....unfair practices.....etc
lost exactly zero of these....settled none....
don't think i would agree with that. what prevents most potential litigation is that the employee is ignorant that they have a valid case. and in other instances, the employee is without the resources to engage in protracted litigation against a employer with deep pockets. another reason why a collective of employees can do what a solo employee cannoti think you will find in todays workplace, most employers are very aware of workers rights......
and they do everything in their power to make sure they are upheld......
depends on the employer. some hire so many lawyers, they would rather keep them working than settle. and others know they can out-spend the plaintiff, and run the clock in court. it's a viable strategy given their circumstances. they can run that clock on the union, too. which is why it is so important that the union have access to sufficient dues to afford to counter such a litigation strategynot doing so is just stupid business practice......and no one in business i know can afford to do business that way