Key case tests labor union and private property rights

ABC News’ Devin Dwyer reports on a case before the Supreme Court to deny labor unions access to California farms, which could have sweeping implications beyond agriculture.

ABC News Live Prime, Weekdays at 7EST & 9EST
WATCH the ABC News Live Stream Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_Ma8oQLmSM

SUBSCRIBE to ABC NEWS: https://bit.ly/2vZb6yP
Watch More on http://abcnews.go.com/
LIKE ABC News on FACEBOOK https://www.facebook.com/abcnews
FOLLOW ABC News on TWITTER: https://twitter.com/abc

source

Author: avnblogfeed

ANGELHOUSE © 2009 - 2022 | HOSTING BY PHILLYFINEST369 SERVER STATS| & THE IDIOTS ROBOT AND CONTROL INC. |(RSS FEED MODULE)| ALL YOUTUBE VIDEOS IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF GOOGLE INC. THE YOUTUBE CHANNELS AND BLOG FEEDS IS MANAGED BY THERE RIGHTFUL OWNERS (AVNBLOGFEED.COM)

17 thoughts on “Key case tests labor union and private property rights

  1. Unions should not be able to come onto private property and disrupt work. And comparing people waving flags and yelling and intimidating people to health code enforcers is ridiculous

  2. I read up on this case. It has more implications than you are reporting. It is about land rights as well. You as a property owner cannot stop anyone from pitching a tent on your property and staying there. This law affects private property and your rights.

  3. ORGANIZING MIGRANTS ? REALLY? How do illegal immigrants get protected under Labor laws? The whole system is ASS BACKWARDS -modern day slave farms also!

  4. Caesar Chavez must be rolling in his grave! Would that he, like Marley, could arise -in the chains that "conservatives" see as fitting attire for Hispanic and all other "workers" a.k.a. "peasants" – and confront the Court with the reality they ignore. The agrarian corporations MAY "own" the land but they do not -or should not- "own" their workers, and the fact that they want to exclude information on unionization, or any information, from those human beings says quite clearly that they intend to keep those men and women as ignorant of their rights as possible so that the bosses prosper at the expense of the "employees"!

  5. Illegal taking of property happens every day with the rent moratoriums in place. Chavez worked hard to establish farm labor unions. The union is just using the existing laws as written.

  6. Oh boy you guys are doing so good covering the Border crisis and then you go back to blaming it on white supremacist again Jesus ABC why can't you just be normal and practice unbiased journalism I beg of you

  7. Yep let's play the Race card
    I am ALL For Using Technology to do thea's JOB'S
    Invest in Technology& robotics etc =NO IMIGRENTS 🤦🤷

  8. I guarantee the "good pay" this big ag millionaire is touting is less than $15/hr… If I weren't so broke from growing up in a failed dystopian economy I would be willing to bet money on it.

  9. Why give so much air time for owner to explain but not a single interview with the worker whose identity can be protected. Not a fair reporting.

  10. ABCNews — VERY good reporting. Please treat more subjects with this grade of professionalism.
    Still missing : Modern streaming links to support for what is said on screen.
    Brinkley would have been proud.

  11. Leave the men alone, who are trying to earn money for their families! You say you care but you're full of crap, you got an agenda and hiding behind migrant rights! Rats go scatter, the light will be shined on you.

  12. Soooooo….. you went to the farm in which the farm employed migrants It really treated those migrants for what we been fed information very fairly. Farmer/company is pissed the union stormed in and halted a day worth of production. How come I feel like although the company is not bad I would check and see if any of the migrants complained or any former employees complained. There was something to trigger this, yes union is using a law from olden times which company is taking to the supreme court (which I would just settle of a large amount of money tbh and hire some security to be around the property). That way union can peacefully protest somewhere else around the property and not in the workplace.

    (Btw I say company not bad all jobs aren't perfect all unions aren't perfect either)

  13. Looking out, if this ruling is anti union, it could mean that any business owner who wants regulators out could do so, would that apply to other forms of government representation on private property? Police?

    Even further out, this would create pseudo fiefdoms for large farms where no one would really know what goes on in those workplaces. It’s almost feudalism.

    We should maintain and strengthen unions to protect anyone who works any job. If you work, you need a union. Even a desk job needs a union.

Comments are closed.