The title of this post is courtesy of Harris Freeman (Western New England) who brings to my attention the current situation in Chicago concerning the developments at Republic Windows:
Harris writes:
Members of the UE Local have started a sit-down strike after the employer shut down on a 3-day notice, violating the WARN Act, after Bank of America cancelled the business’s line of credit.
Union members are rotating in thirty-person shifts to staff the sit-down. Here is the URL for one of a series of articles in the Chicago Tribune on the sit-down.
The NYT also did an article on the strike.
Harris asks some good questions including: are we going to see some new — and old — tactics by workers who are seeking to defend their unions and livelihoods in response to the rapidly unfolding economic crisis?
He also points out that maybe the news of this sit-down will lead to some interesting exam questions.
Cross posted at Workplace Prof Blog.
“I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night …”
Seriously, it looks like the company broke the law but we may have an example here of the Doctrine of the Blood and the Turnip. It’s not clear to me what the strike can accomplish, other than to try to create political pressure for a bailout.
I am interested in the ire directed at Bank of America. What if they picketed BOA? I can’t recall much about the law of collective bargaining, but wouldn’t that be a reverse secondary boycott? But, because it is reverse, I wouldn’t think that labor law would have any applicability.
Apparently a sit-in protest can accomplish a whole lot when its coupled by pressure from national, state, and local officials, including the President-Elect of the United States.