Mighty Leader Trump Is Right: As Workers, We Don't Deserve Rights And Must Serve Our Elite Wealthy Masters

[Buzzsaw Checkerling]

Lucky for most of us, we who bow to Trump survive on social
security or welfare and, like Trump have always been afraid of
hard work.

I can't wait until China will look like a defender of workers
rights compared to 19th century-like TrumpAmerica! The American
slave class has replaced the middle class and you are all getting
what you deserve!


The Supreme Court Just Made It A Lot Harder For You To Sue Your
Employer
A new ruling allows employers to force workers into class-action
waivers. As one justice put it, the case cuts to "the entire heart
of the New Deal."
By Dave Jamieson

Employers who stiff their workers or discriminate against them
just got a big lift from the Supreme Court, which issued a major
ruling Monday making it easier for companies to avoid employee
lawsuits.

The 5-4 ruling upheld employers’ use of class-action waivers in
arbitration agreements. By signing these controversial provisions,
workers give up their right to band together and sue in court for
back pay or damages, and are instead forced to take their disputes
to arbitrators individually.

Arbitration agreements have become a common way for employers to
stifle lawsuits that could lead to large plaintiff classes and big
payouts. Workers backed by employee groups and labor unions
challenged their employers’ use of these agreements, claiming they
ran afoul of the National Labor Relations Act, or NLRA, which
guarantees workers the right to join forces in “mutual aid and
protection.”

The employer-friendly conservative majority on the court decided
against the workers. They ruled that collective bargaining law
does not supersede federal law that established the arbitration
process, therefore making the class-action waivers in employment
contracts legitimate.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the opinion for the conservative
majority, saying Congress did not write the NLRA to “displace”
federal arbitration law.

“The policy may be debatable but the law is clear: Congress has
instructed that arbitration agreements like those before us must
be enforced as written,” Gorsuch wrote.

The high court has previously ruled that companies can force
consumers into arbitration agreements with class-action waivers,
which are tucked into the fine print when you buy a plane ticket
or sign up for a cell phone. The latest ruling effectively
sanctions the use of these waivers in the workplace, a practice
that has grown increasingly common over the last two decades.

The Supreme Court ruling will have long-lasting implications for
workers. Class-action lawsuits are often the most powerful way for
employees to secure back pay when their minimum wage or overtime
rights have been violated or to secure damages when their bosses
run afoul of discrimination laws.

It’s harder to pursue these cases as a single worker than as part
of a group, which is why employers prefer arbitration. Lawyers can
be reluctant to file individual complaints in which the judgments
or settlements will be small and not worth their time. Many
workers are also hesitant to file their lawsuits as individuals,
fearing their employers will ostracize or retaliate against them.

In a strong dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called the
decision of the majority “egregiously wrong.” She argued that the
rights under the NLRA include the right to pursue litigation
collectively, and that an employer-dictated waiver would violate
it.

“Employees’ rights to band together to meet their employers’
superior strength would be worth precious little if employers
could condition employment on workers signing away those rights,”
Ginsburg wrote.

“There is strength in numbers,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said
during oral arguments of the case last year. “We have to protect
the individual worker from being in a situation where he can’t
protect his rights.”

During oral arguments last year, Justice Stephen Breyer said the
case could undermine “the entire heart of the New Deal” by
weakening collective action by workers.

According to a report last year from the Economic Policy
Institute, an estimated 25 million workers ? just under one-
quarter of non-union employees in the private sector ? give up
their right to join class-action lawsuits as a condition of
employment. The report anticipated that waivers would become an
“even more widespread practice” in the event the Supreme Court
sanctioned them.

Class-action lawsuits are often the most powerful way for
employees to secure back pay when their minimum wage or overtime
rights have been violated or to secure damages when their bosses
run afoul of discrimination laws.
The Supreme Court case, National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy
Oil USA, Inc., consolidated three separate cases involving
different employers: the software company Epic Systems, the
accounting and consulting firm Ernst & Young, and the oil company
and gas station chain Murphy Oil.

A former Murphy Oil employee, Sheila Hobson, claimed that when she
worked at one of the company’s retail stores, she and her
colleagues were required to do off-the-clock work they weren’t
compensated for. They got together to sue the company for back
pay. But when they consulted a lawyer, they learned they couldn’t
take Murphy Oil to court as a group because they had already
agreed to arbitration when they accepted their jobs.

The National Labor Relations Board, the independent agency that
enforces collective bargaining law, argued that the forced
arbitration clause interfered with Hobson’s right to join together
with other employees to improve their working conditions. The
Obama White House agreed, filing a brief with the Supreme Court in
support of Hobson.

But that was under former President Barack Obama. After President
Donald Trump was inaugurated, his administration took the
extremely rare step of reversing a previous administration’s
position on a sitting case before the court. Last June, Trump’s
acting solicitor general filed a new brief in support of the
employers in the case.