Consequences:<p>Amazon must post national-scale notices, authored by the NLRB, that "joining a Union is Okay, and Amazon violated labor laws", effectively.
Feels like the right call to me.<p>Consider how big the power asymmetry is at a place like Amazon. You could be on H1B (and therefore will be forced to leave the country if you lose your job), they have the means and capability to record and evaluate everything you communicate. If they could they'd probably try to purchase data on you before hiring you to know whether you are pro-union. If they were secretly monitoring people's email for the word "union" and happening to lay them off there wouldn't be much to stop them.<p>In such a system I think the only way to make sure people feel safe unionizing is for the CEO to say "Unions are allowed, and nobody here will ever be punished for joining one. If anybody at this company holds somebody back from their choice to unionize then that person will be fired."
Discussed previously:<p><i>Amazon CEO Andy jassy broke federal labor law with anti-union remarks</i><p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40241774">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40241774</a> (3 days ago, 30 comments)
Can somebody give me the context or argument for why this isn't a straight up violation of free-speech? I came in all ready to side against Amazon, but the article is pretty barren on what led to the decision.
Who knows if these people realise how idiotic they appear when they pull the free speech thing as it should be something that allows them to live without any law