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

World News

31540 readers
410 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 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
[–] WorldWideLem@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If the company you're representing would prefer you didn't, then sure.

Let's use another example, if someone was a big supporter of fascism and was wearing a hat or mask that said, "save fascists", would you prefer the store couldn't prevent them from wearing that?

How bad would the phrase have to get to change your mind?

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

I'd say the difference comes down to choice. You choose to be a fascist. You choose to be a trump supporter. You don't choose to be black. You don't chose to be an infant.

Examples. If you wore a SPLC clothing article, I think the employer would be allowed to object, but if you wore clothing showing support for women, or indigenous people, then they should abide it.