Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Human Rights Law
“They Outlawed Solidarity!”, Richard Blum
“They Outlawed Solidarity!”, Richard Blum
Seattle University Law Review
In attacking § 8(b)(4)(ii)(B)’s ban on secondary labor picketing in support of a consumer boycott as a violation of the First Amendment, critics have repeatedly condemned the Supreme Court’s reliance on a supposed distinction between “pure speech” and “speech plus conduct,” such as a picket. The Court’s invocation of an “unlawful objectives” doctrine to defend banning speech contrary to public policy has also been repeatedly criticized. After all, picketing has been recognized as protected expressive activity and it is entirely lawful for consumers to choose to boycott the target of a picket. However, commentators have not sought to argue that …
The Paradox Of The Right To Contract: Noncompete Agreements As Thirteenth Amendment Violations, Ayesha Bell Hardaway
The Paradox Of The Right To Contract: Noncompete Agreements As Thirteenth Amendment Violations, Ayesha Bell Hardaway
Seattle University Law Review
Employers in a variety of fields are increasingly imposing noncompete agreements on their workers as a condition of the workers’ at-will employment. These employees are working at or near minimum wage, in positions that require little or no advanced technical skills. Major news sources have highlighted this issue while covering recent employment litigation between Jimmy Johns and a pair of its former employees. In this litigation, two plaintiffs filed suit in federal court seeking injunctive relief and declaratory judgment invalidating the noncompete and confidentiality agreements that they signed with the sandwich maker. Granting defendant’s motion to dismiss, the Illinois District …
The Last Legally Beaten Servant In America: From Compulsion To Coercion In The American Workplace, Lea Vandervelde
The Last Legally Beaten Servant In America: From Compulsion To Coercion In The American Workplace, Lea Vandervelde
Seattle University Law Review
Historically, the law of master-servant allowed corporal punishment. Today it seems strange to contemplate that intentionally inflicted violence was ever an acceptable method of compelling workers to labor in America. Strange as it seems, the practice of striking servants to discipline them was considered a legitimate, implicit part of the relationship between masters and servants. Servants, as well as slaves, could be subjected to cuffings and even severe beatings as means of “correction” and compulsion to labor. Menial servants, apprentices, and domestic servants could be beaten with hands, fists, straps, sticks, and sometimes whips, all in the name of correction …