• sunzu@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    112
    ·
    4 months ago

    Have the courts ever addressed the conflict between “employment at will” and this?

    On side, we get rid of you when and how we please…

    But you can’t go get another job because “slave master has property interest in you”

    It seems like “master” mentality is still very strong within elites.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      4 months ago

      Judges aren’t interested in being consistent, it’s just about oppressing you and upholding capital.

      • sunzu@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yes it does appear to be that way. Even when Congress does a good thing, it gets stalled or shut down.

        Can’t rely on elected officials to deliver proper laws, executive appears to be useless and judges will stop any progress.

        How many generations of this now 2 or 3?

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          4 months ago

          How many generations of this now 2 or 3?

          It’s been continuous since colonial times. It’s an unbroken thread from “indentured servitude” and “slavery,” to “sharecropping” and “vagrancy”/“convict leasing,” to “non-compete agreements” and prison labor being managed by prisons directly (instead of having inmates leased out).

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              To be fair, I wasn’t entirely happy with my comment either. There was something missing, and I just figured out what it was.

              Along with “sharecropping” I should’ve mentioned “sweatshops,” and along with “non-compete agreements” I should’ve mentioned anti-union laws like “right-to-work” and “at-will employment.”