Union violence and legal impunity

by Walter Olson on February 6, 2013

Philadelphia: “Union Workers *Probably* Torched a Quaker Meetinghouse Over Christmas” [John Ross; Steve Volk, Philadelphia Magazine] The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has compiled a report [PDF] on ways in which state laws exempt unions and their members from otherwise applicable criminal laws [Sean Higgins, Washington Examiner ("Union organizing exempted from stalking laws in four states"), Nathan Benefield/Commonwealth Foundation] Columnist Fred Wszolek says the sponsors of “Freedom from Workplace Bullies Week” might need to cast their net a bit wider. And see
August 1999 post in this space (unions have secured for themselves immunities from civil liability far more extensive than most businesses dream of); Grover Norquist/Patrick Gleason, Reuters (exemptions from anti-stalking laws).

{ 1 trackback }

Labor and employment roundup - Overlawyered
02.28.13 at 12:15 am


1 Ed 02.06.13 at 11:41 am

Was this a Quaker meetinghouse as in church? If so, wouldn’t this be a hate crime? Where’s the DOJ? They certainly were involved when someone was burning Black Churches? Never mind — I know the answer.

2 Jim Collins 02.06.13 at 11:54 am

Let’s not forget Judges and District Attorneys covering for them either. In 1989 my car was firebombed during a labor dispute. GMAC was paid off by my employer, the two guys, who did it were arrested, but the DA and the Judge didn’t want to get involved in a labor dispute in an election year, so the charges were dropped.

3 Vern Dennis 02.07.13 at 5:28 am

Did you ever notice that most of the union thuggery takes place in Democratic strongholds ? I think we have the Democrats next election slogan – “Home of Union Thugs, Ambulance Chasers and People Who Think The World Owes Them A Living”

4 Frank 02.07.13 at 10:35 am

Gee ed, I’d like to hear the answer.

5 Chris Hoey 02.07.13 at 2:39 pm

In the late 80’s,in a case of blatant criminal trespass on the sales floor of a Woolworth store in Flint, MI, the local police refused to act to eject them, claiming the union thugs had a right to invade the premises as it was open to the public. It took local counsel threatening the DA with mandamus to get them to act. My experience has been a discernible reluctance on the part of the so called “peacekeepers,” to act to protect property from union violence, particularly among those officers who are themselves members of the union.

Comments on this entry are closed.