File this one under "The stuff everyone should know in dealing with cops." While not related to employment law or Minnesota, I think this is a story that needs to be told.
A federal court recently decided the case of a couple who were arrested for flipping a cop the bird. While the criminal case was thrown out for procedural reasons, the couple sued the officer for stopping their vehicle without reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. The court held that the "ancient gesture of insult is not the basis for a reasonable suspicion of a traffic violation or impending criminal activity." Therefore, the stop was unreasonable.
The best part of this story is how the court completely threw this cop under the bus for trying to sell one whopper of a lie. The cop tried to explain that he pulled the couple over because he thought they were simply trying to flag him down for help. The court rejected this line of BS out of hand stating that the "nearly universal recognition that this gesture is an insult deprives such an interpretation of reasonableness."
That is about as big of a smackdown as you can receive from a federal judge.
Showing posts with label constitutional amendments. Show all posts
Showing posts with label constitutional amendments. Show all posts
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Monday, March 19, 2012
Minnesota's Proposed Right To Work Law: What The Heck Is This Thing?
You may have heard that the Minnesota legislature is considering passing a law or having us vote on a constitutional amendment making Minnesota a Right To Work (RTW) state. RTW laws essentially allow people to opt out of joining a union at their workplace and paying dues. Currently, workers in Minnesota can opt out of being a union member if their workplace is unionized. However, they are typically required to pay the union a "fair share" of the dues, i.e. a percentage of the dues they would pay if they were full union members. The thought is that because these non-union members get some of the benefits the union provides (such as the pay and benefits negotiated by the union) they should have to provide some compensation to the union for obtaining those benefits for the employee. RTW would allow employees to opt out of the union and not pay the union anything, including a fair share.
Like many other issues, this one is highly political. On one hand, you have Republicans and the Chamber of Commerce arguing RTW will decrease unemployment and increase wages. On the other, you have Democrats and labor unions arguing the law will not decrease unemployment and will lower wages.
I found a couple of articles that I think lay out the positions and facts on RTW. You can read them here and here. But do your own research so if you are asked to vote on this measure, you are making an informed decision.
Like many other issues, this one is highly political. On one hand, you have Republicans and the Chamber of Commerce arguing RTW will decrease unemployment and increase wages. On the other, you have Democrats and labor unions arguing the law will not decrease unemployment and will lower wages.
I found a couple of articles that I think lay out the positions and facts on RTW. You can read them here and here. But do your own research so if you are asked to vote on this measure, you are making an informed decision.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)