I’m still waiting for the answer based in the “people are gonna die!” argument. What duty of care do private citizens have to potential patients? Does it override their right-to-work?
FTR: If a SD lawyerdog wants to answer that great but it is more for the judge to answer in issuing the TSO. I would think that even a TSO has to justify why rights are being infringed and not just a “let’s punt this until later and F you and your rights until then.”
I’m guess Ascension probably isn’t holding this against the judge and is reserving their ire for ThedaCare.
Yes, they wanted the order to remain in place while the litigation played out and they would have been perfectly happy if that happened. But since the judge set the hearing for Monday, what would have theoretically been the problem with delaying the TRO until Monday when he could hear whatever evidence there was? The employees weren’t permitted to work at Ascension, but the order didn’t require them to work at ThedaCare - so to the extent that the irreparable harm was going to occur between Friday and Monday’s hearing , the order didn’t prevent any of it. If patients were going to die on Monday morning if the employees were working at Ascension starting on Monday, they would have died even if the employees were not working at Ascension on Monday as long as they weren’t working at ThedaCare. If the accrediting agency acted with a speed unknown in any bureaucracy I’ve encountered and pulled the accreditation before the hearing on Monday morning - they would have pulled it even with the TRO especially since the publicity made it implausible for ThedaCare to claim that these people still worked at ThedaCare.
Except potentially not getting paid for Monday. How did the Judge guaranty the employees wouldn’t lose a day of pay?
And that overall is the problem with this TRO. It was effectively a statement of screw the employees and their rights. I agree with Jimmy Chitwood in his analysis. It is not justified by arguing de minimis harm and “it was only one day”. The damage is that the Judge even considered ThedaCare’s request and didn’t say, “Yeah you can’t take away their right of uncontracted employees to change jobs. Get out of my courtroom.”
I was referring to the irreparable harm to ThedaCare that was supposedly the basis for requesting the TRO. You’re right about irreparable harm to the employees - and I can’t see how the judge could possibly guarantee that those employees didn’t lose a day’s pay. They weren’t even parties to the case as far as I can tell.
Why are you asking us? Have you read the full decision?
I thought Curt Flood settled this years ago. That first judge needs to go back to law school.
No. Read it again. Part of their claim was that their competitor used unfair business practices to steal employees. It was a false claim, but it was a claim that needed a half days consideration. I am not a judge, and I won’t second guess one.
I’m not asking you; I’m asking the poster who made the assertion.
How is that the employees’ problem? It’s between the companies. The employees did nothing wrong and shouldn’t have been affected.
Are the actual Pleadings available anywhere on line? I’ve seen quotations here and there, but would be interested in reading the TRO application.
A link to the memorandum in support of the request for the temporary injunction was posted earlier.
And now I have to plough through 350+ posts?!? I want to be spoon-fed, dammit! 
It was fairly recent, so, maybe only a hundred posts… 
If the company was actually violating some law by offering the job, they don’t get to keep violating the law because rescinding it effects some innocent third party. If they got busted selling stolen cars, they don’t get to finish any in-progress sales because the buyer “did nothing wrong and shouldn’t have been affected.”
Here’s a copy of the Complaint: DocumentCloud. It alleges one count of tortious interference. It doesn’t allege any facts that suggest interference versus a normal recruiting procedure, except that some of the employees seem to have used their ThedaCare work emails to negotiate with Ascension.
As an employment lawyer (albeit not one in Wisconsin), I’m not sure I agree with Jimmy, but I find it hard to believe ThedaCare demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits to justify the TRO. (I assume that is part of Wisconsin’s standard for temporary injunctions.)
Yep. And Theras argument turned out to be bogus, and was shot down in a day, remarkably fast. But the judge had to hear it.
I think if you can’t second-guess a judge because you aren’t a judge, you don’t have a basis for saying the judge was right, either. I’m happy to second-guess him, because I’ve seen the evidence, and I know what the standard for granting an injunction is. Courts just don’t go around granting injunctions because “who can say.” The default is that you don’t do anything until you have some actual basis on the record to do it.
The solution now is that ThedaCare gets hit hard with sanctions. I’d start with TC having to pay all of those employees their Ascension pay for Monday. I’d go further and say they have to pay the Ascension pay to the employees until they’re replaced. Betcha if that happened the God will miracle up some new TC employees quicker than they claimed in court.
Maybe a few contempt charges too.
Modnote: @Snowboarder_Bo & @DrDeth: The pair of you are generating all of the flags for this thread. Stop replying to each other in this thread and take it to the Pit. You may participate further but not with each other in this thread!
Consider this a pre-warning!