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 thread.
View all comments
33 points

Why does anybody think it’s a good idea to wear political statements into work? Just do your job.

Imagine if you ran a business and one of your customer-facing employees showed up in a MAGA hat. You’d probably want them to leave it at home right?

permalink
report
reply
28 points

You think equal rights and fair treatment for all is “politics”?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

They aren’t banning masks that say “equal rights and fair treatment for ALL” , they are banning BLM masks, BLM is a political movement/organization.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

No BLM is a statement that black lives matter. That’s completely different from saying, for instance, blue lives matter. One is a race that people are born into and the other is a job. It’s not political, it’s a cry for help.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ya it’s a political movement that wants cops to stop killing black people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Unfortunately it is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Being neutral about racism is effectively being racist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

So telling someone not to wear a pin is now racist?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Summer people think MAGA is patriotic. Personally I wouldn’t want someone wearing that either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Either employees should be allowed to wear personal accessories to express themselves, or they should not. How do you define what is and is not political?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Also, this article’s vague, but “no slogans, logos, or advertising except for Whole Foods branding” is Whole Foods’s official dress code. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/whole-foods-black-lives-matter-mask.aspx

The plaintiffs were told they had to remove their Black Lives Matter face masks because they violated the dress code, but the workers refused and were sent home. After being sent home several times, they were fired for violating the company’s attendance policy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The problem with all of these things is always unequal enforcement. For example if the store allowed an employee to wear a thin blue line mask, and fired another employee for a BLM mask

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Up to the business. If they don’t want political statements or and statement made at work, I can understand it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

That just means that employers can push their own political agendas and suppress alternatives.

“Employees may not wear pins of a political nature, such as expressing support for Joe Biden. Wearing a pin expressing support for Donald Trump is acceptable because that is not political.”

Like I said, it either has to be all or nothing - allow self expression or do not. Allowing self expression only if the company agrees with the expression is essentially compelled speech.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Agreed, if I ran a grocery store chain I’d just have the employees wear uniforms with no personal expression.

At the end of the day it’s the business’s right to set whatever policy they want though. If the government decides employees have a constitutionally protected right to wear whatever they want to wear to work, we’re gonna see a lot of crazy bullshit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

If the government decides employees have a constitutionally protected right to wear whatever they want to wear to work, we’re gonna see a lot of crazy bullshit

Would it be a bad thing? I think with some sensible exceptions it would be a very good thing to permit free expression as the default.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

So, we can ban crosses? I’m obviously going a bit far, but both somewhat touch on the way people believe rights should be secured, and both involve human rights (one to free expression of religion, another to life and fr33dom from unfair treatment in general). Both make statements to others that others may find uncomfortable, depending on their beliefs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

…yes? Why shouldn’t a business have the right to ban their employees from wearing a cross? Go work somewhere else if wearing a cross is that important to you…

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The point is the the USA the complaint would never have been made about the cross.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I mean, I agree, to an extent. As someone else pointed out, the cross banning would never work out in the US, and that shows the difference in how both things are treated here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I just want to say that restricting someone’s right to wear a cross to work is hella illegal in Canada.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

so we can ban crosses

When there’s comments here bringing up the first amendment and apparently forgetting that it includes that whole thing about not having a national religion, which is exactly what’s happened/continuing to happen with christianity. It’s just a little bit different than “black lives matter,” which is just…a fact?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Except BLM and LGBTQ isn’t political. It’s Civil Rights. This isn’t Dem vs GOP, it’s ethical vs unethical treatment of humanity. Unfortunately certain individuals in the US portray this as political, but that’s so they can use it as leverage for their goals. You wouldn’t say “stop beating a slave and set him free” because your political affiliation says so, you say it because you see a human being suffer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Except BLM and LGBTQ isn’t political. It’s Civil Rights.

I’m sorry but you just sound naive. These are not mutually exclusive. Civil rights are part of politics. All you’re arguing is that you think the politics you like should be allowed in the work place, and the politics you don’t like should not. That’s the hottest take in the entire post.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

is lemmy being brigaded? seriously, what the fuck is this. “just do your job” is never an adequate response to worker complaints

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yeah, I’m seeing this kind of trash on a lot of posts when lemmy was not even close to this bad just a month ago. It’s fucking gross.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Redditors ruin everything they touch

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

It is odd. I’m a Wilsonian Neocon with the caveat that I understand not everyone can always get what they want, but Lemmy’s usually “I hate the US so much that I support Russia” not anti-union shit. I suppose the GOP just made the UAW strike into a political talking point so the bot account goons are trying to steer conversations against unions even when the community never wanted it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Ah the old, “an influx of normal opinions not in my extremist progressive echo chamber is brigading”

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Because workers are more important than the businesses they work for, obviously.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Imagine if you ran a business and one of your customer-facing employees showed up in a MAGA hat. You’d probably want them to leave it at home right?

I think it’s good when people support good things and bad when people support bad things. Amorally applying the rules for their own sake is actually not a virtue; the rules should be oriented to promote good outcomes and discourage bad outcomes. Otherwise, what’s the point?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Who decides what’s good or bad?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

We all do. We already do this throughout society. Individually we make choices on what is good or bad, and collectively those choices add up and are expressed either in law or social contract.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I actually had to talk to the boss and tell him that this manager’s motherfucking confederate flag hat made me uncomfortable, like he was a floor manager who wore the stars and bars every day, in a western state that didn’t exist during the civil war… and they didn’t say anything to him until a customer complained. He wore that shit for like a month. The good ol boy’s club is unreal

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

That’s where the constant disclaimers to the effect of ‘the views expressed do not nessecarily reflect the position of the company blah blah blah’ whenever someone speaks who isnt the principal executive of the organization. The problem being though it doesn’t go both ways, when one of the high leaders speaks it’s portrayed as ‘our company believes’ which then at least somewhat implies the employees of said company are in agreement. Individual expression is just leveling the field by letting the employees say 'the views of the company do not reflect my own.

It’s less common for any smart business to make highly charged statements unless they happen to be sure the majority will support them for it, but not unknown. I’ve seen a couple small ones around here that went as far as to plaster Q slogans all over their signs. From a business perspective they just alienated a major portion of their potential customers without anyone setting foot in the door.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I would agree with you, but this is pretty blatant far-right bias and with the genocidal turn that camp has taken, it’s vitally important to take sides.

Otherwise, I agree with you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Lol “genocidal turn”

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Why does anyone think whether black people matter or not is political?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Because BLM is a political movement

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

And what are the politics of the movement?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-19 points

But if I can’t wear my rainbow onesie to work it’s literally genocide.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Lol apparently people here don’t see sarcasm.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

I think there’s a difference between not seeing sarcasm and not finding it amusing (particularly in certain circumstances).

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

Everyone knows they’re being sarcastic, but we also live in a world where it’s a crime punishable by death to be LGBTQ+, where mentioning the topic in public is a crime and there are US politicians who have literally called for genocide against LGBTQ+ people, so it’s just a shitty thing to say.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

We do. We just don’t like you two very much.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

News from around the world!

Rules:

  • Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc

  • No NSFW content

  • No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Community stats

  • 5.7K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 118K

    Comments