tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7186797.post1874951607577861685..comments2023-12-29T05:24:43.830-06:00Comments on Kay Brooks: Kudos to HCAKay Brookshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06073075957511329333noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7186797.post-90322449466297085902009-11-07T15:45:43.828-06:002009-11-07T15:45:43.828-06:00So if the SEIU doesn't dispute the protocols.....So if the SEIU doesn't dispute the protocols...why the fuss? Why not agree that the health and safety of the employees AND the public demand the common sense step of masking instead of throwing their weight around and putting folks at risk because HCA didn't say "SEIU may I?"<br /><br />It's just a mask. It's not their first born.Kay Brookshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06073075957511329333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7186797.post-6619371029908330132009-11-07T14:21:40.701-06:002009-11-07T14:21:40.701-06:00From the way the story reads, it sounds like the r...From the way the story reads, it sounds like the real dispute isn't over the protocols themselves but over the way in which they were implemented. The SEIU is arguing that a policy like that constitutes a "new condition of employment" and that their contract with HCA prevents the company from just making such conditions up without consulting the union.<br /><br />I'm no expert on contract law, but what about that claim, precisely, do you have a problem with? Even if you oppose labor unions, the SEIU, at present, has a legally binding agreement with HCA. If HCA's actions violated that agreement, then they've opened themselves up to a lawsuit. That's not anyone throwing their weight around. It's one party to a contract expecting the pact they made to be honored by the other.<br /><br />Are you saying we should only extend the rule of law, the guarantee of contracts, and the protection of the courts to groups you happen to approve of, or what?N.S. Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00594978546540226304noreply@blogger.com