Financial liability

[Theinquisition]

I've brought this up in a few other threads, and I am just curious as to....

A. other posters opinions
B. Actual legal prescedence

So we have all heard about the protestors who have been blocking the freeways, holding up emergency personal, and making people late for work

My question is, if someone lost there job for being late due to those protestors, would the protestors be liable in civili court for financial damages. Being as that the protestors knowlingly and voluntarily blocked freeways I would hope that they would be.

What do you think MMOC-OT?

[Theinquisition]

I think the racist police officers that prompted the protesters to be present on the high way would be liable for any financial losses.

How?

Which officers?

Which event was linked directly to racism?

[Xanjori]

Surely the employer would never be able to fire someone due to that? I'd imagine you'd take the employer to court on grounds of unfair dismissal.

[Jayburner]

I would like to think we don't quite live in a douche-world yet and the bosses actually look at the news each morning.

[Kasierith]

I strongly doubt it for losing a job. There is precedent for civil disobedience with the potential for inconveniencing others in a variety of ways; even peaceful protests like MLK's had the potential for inconveniencing others. Any time a lawsuit involves someone expressing a constitutional right, you have to have a very strong case to get it done.

Now, ambulance carrying someone in need of urgent medical care being delayed and someone dying has a fairly strong case going for it.

[Theinquisition]

Surely the employer would never be able to fire someone due to that? I'd imagine you'd take the employer to court on grounds of unfair dismissal.

They can actually, many states employers can fire you for whatever reason they want as long as its not racial/gender/sexual based.

[Deleted]

I def think you should be able to take them to court if you lost your job because of it, or even lost a day worth of money. I think forcing other people to strike with you is the lowest of the lowest, it's counterproductive and it shows no respect towards others.

Sue their ass and give them a fine.

[the game]

So the very first reply to this thread turns it into an anti cop thread. Wonderful.


OP: I'm sure they can be held responsible. You can sue anybody for anything these days.

[Deleted]

Surely the employer would never be able to fire someone due to that? I'd imagine you'd take the employer to court on grounds of unfair dismissal.

What about a person who couldn't get to their work and lost a day worth of money...who is going to refund time/money loss.

[Kasierith]

Surely the employer would never be able to fire someone due to that? I'd imagine you'd take the employer to court on grounds of unfair dismissal.

Depending on the contract, an employer can dismiss someone for any reason that is not protected. It would be very hard to sue over.

[Theinquisition]

So the very first reply to this thread turns it into an anti cop thread. Wonderful.


OP: I'm sure they can be held responsible. You can sue anybody for anything these days.

thats what im thinking, given the crazy lawsuits that go on at any given time, im sure this would get through.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Lmfao

You think there should be a possibility of suing someone for invoking their constitutional rights?


Only if you can sue idiots for fraud especially morons that signed up and took an oath to protect those rights suggesting people should be sued for it.

[Deleted]

I would be more concerned if someone lost their life due to the actions of these "protesters"

I cannot for the life of me think of a reason why any sort of protest movement would actively advocate the disruption of the movement of emergency services, and if someone did loose their life due to the protesters then yes they should be found legally responsible and have to face charges, and if the court deemed it necessary pay the compensation.

As for the movement of other traffic, if drivers know that there is a disruption ahead, then surly they can find an alternative (albeit temporary) route. I also cannot see any reasonable employer firing a person for being late on a single occasion when it was out of their control, however once an on going disruption has been identified then it should be down to the drives to find alternative routes to ensure that they are not late.

[Kasierith]

thats what im thinking, given the crazy lawsuits that go on at any given time, im sure this would get through.

Just asked lawyer fiance. Her idle thoughts on the matter were basically that this would be a case that comes down to the rights between the groups. The protesters have a right to freedom of expression granted by the Constitution (keeping in mind that although a constitutional right is technically between the people and the government, it still holds a massive amount of sway in civil courts as well), while the workers have a vaguely defined right to financial security that isn't very protected or set in stone. In other words, while it is incorporated into general well being, there is no right to work. So the right to freedom of expression of the protesters trumps the theoretical right to work, and outside of extraneous circumstances a lawsuit would not go through.

[Rukentuts]

I would be more concerned if someone lost their life due to the actions of these "protesters"

Chris Christie demonstrated that not much happens.

[Theinquisition]

Lmfao

You think there should be a possibility of suing someone for invoking their constitutional rights?


Only if you can sue idiots for fraud especially morons that signed up and took an oath to protect those rights suggesting people should be sued for it.

I'm fine with protesting, when your protests intrude on my right to come and go as I please, Id be upset. Especially if I lost my job or a day of work from it.

[Runeshear]

I would hope so, if it could be proven all other routes to work were also affected by the protests.

[KievanAquinus]

thats what im thinking, given the crazy lawsuits that go on at any given time, im sure this would get through.

You're wrong.

I mean, I get it. You don't know anything about the law, but you really don't like these protesters, so why not just assume you could sue them for making you late and thus getting you fired. The fact you can't name any sort of case law to support this conclusion...that doesn't matter, right? Your gut tells you this has legs.

I can't believe this conversation is still ongoing. Is this the best you have? The protesters will make you late for work?

[cFortyfive]

Now that would be fun if I could sue everything that made me late for work. Sounds retarded enough I guess in the good old US it might even work.

[Theinquisition]

Just asked lawyer fiance. Her idle thoughts on the matter were basically that this would be a case that comes down to the rights between the groups. The protesters have a right to freedom of expression granted by the Constitution (keeping in mind that although a constitutional right is technically between the people and the government, it still holds a massive amount of sway in civil courts as well), while the workers have a vaguely defined right to financial security that isn't very protected or set in stone. In other words, while it is incorporated into general well being, there is no right to work. So the right to freedom of expression of the protesters trumps the theoretical right to work, and outside of extraneous circumstances a lawsuit would not go through.

Intresting, but if blocking a freeway is illegal, wouldn't that hold ground as well? I could understand if it was blocking a city street or a courthouse or something, but a major throughfare?