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.

  • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    🤣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?

    • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      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