this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2023
793 points (95.5% liked)

World News

32323 readers
630 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Amazon.com’s Whole Foods Market doesn’t want to be forced to let workers wear “Black Lives Matter” masks and is pointing to the recent US Supreme Court ruling permitting a business owner to refuse services to same-sex couples to get federal regulators to back off.

National Labor Relations Board prosecutors have accused the grocer of stifling worker rights by banning staff from wearing BLM masks or pins on the job. The company countered in a filing that its own rights are being violated if it’s forced to allow BLM slogans to be worn with Whole Foods uniforms.

Amazon is the most prominent company to use the high court’s June ruling that a Christian web designer was free to refuse to design sites for gay weddings, saying the case “provides a clear roadmap” to throw out the NLRB’s complaint.

The dispute is one of several in which labor board officials are considering what counts as legally-protected, work-related communication and activism on the job.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (13 children)

Free speech is literally a reference to the first amendment. There is no "right" to free speech outside of the first amendment.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Wow, that Oracle really was hot shit then, she must have seen the future and shared the 1st amendment with the people of Athens in the 6th century BC.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

🤣Blake be like "Who is the freest speecher of all?"And Blake's Oracle be like, "Whole Foods is the freest peach of all."

Just so you know... it's not really that big of a leap to bring up the US first amendment when talking about a US company reacting to a US law with US action. Maybe you don't need to jump to ancient Athens?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I know it’s not a big leap, honestly it’s perfectly reasonable to assume. If the guy had just said “oh yeah, I had assumed he was talking about the first amendment because this is a US legal case” I’d have been like “yeah, fair enough” but he kept being a pedantic ass about it and trying to make out that I was somehow fucking stupid for thinking that the guy was talking about the broad concept of freedom of expression rather than the 1st amendment, lol

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)