I understand. It’s just that a lot of people have the erroneous impression of what right to work actually means which is why I brought it up. Personally, I’ve got mixed feelings about right to work. You’re right, that it’s a tool to bust unions. But on the other hand, people shouldn’t be compelled to join an organization just to be employed. Despite working for management, I think unions are a good thing overall. But that doesn’t mean every union is good.
It’s certainly not the pay.
Chicago Teachers Union salaries grew 75% faster than average Chicagoans’ pay | Illinois Policy
But that’s probably best for another thread, so I’m out.
I agree, and generally it is true that if Ultravires Inc. is about to go out of business because ASL_v2.0 Inc. poached my best employees, then that is just tough noogies for me.
But what if it can be shown, literally, that people will die if that happens? Health care, despite the protestations that we have a free market, is a quasi-government entity anyways with a myriad of rules and laws governing it. Further, we are in the middle of a pandemic.
I can imagine some form of equitable, very temporary relief to stop people from dying, but I would expect it to be resolved very quickly with ThedaCare being hammered with costs and making the employees whole while allowing a graudual/accelerated transition for them to get their asses in gear or turn it over to someone who can provide employees at a market wage.
Further, I overlooked the part where the judge set a hearing for Monday. Yes, I think ThedaCare knows the shitstorm that they are about to enter and if they continue with the “poor me” on Monday, they may find themselves bankrupt at the end of it with another company soon in its place.
Perhaps someone more familiar with legal records searches could start here and find the actual text of the motion. The phrase “Prohibited business activity” and the attachment of a publication from the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice stand out to me.
https://wcca.wicourts.gov/caseDetail.html?caseNo=2022CV000068&countyNo=44&index=0
HERE is a definition of Prohibited Business Activity
Also, note that the defendant (Ascension) filed the publication from the FTC and DOJ.
Ah! Excellent. The section @Moriarty quoted suggests section 134.01 might be the relevant statute:
134.01 Injury to business; restraint of will. Any 2 or more persons who shall combine, associate, agree, mutually undertake or concert together for the purpose of willfully or maliciously injuring another in his or her reputation, trade, business or profession by any means whatever, or for the purpose of maliciously compelling another to do or perform any act against his or her will, or preventing or hindering another from doing or performing any lawful act shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail not more than one year or by fine not exceeding $500.
Ironically, unless ThedaCare has a really good basis for levying that accusation (if that is indeed what they claimed in order to get a temporary injunction), one might argue that is precisely the sort of conduct they are engaging in by preventing these employees from changing jobs to go work for Ascension. Of course IANAL…
Yeah, that’s pretty much where I’m at too. Not that I think it should be this way, but in a “you reap what you sow” sort of way.
As for people who have pondered over the implications for patients and potential violations of their rights… unfortunately, in this country, I don’t believe there is an established right to healthcare. I mean, other countries recognize that as a basic human right. But the US? Alas, our Constitution says more about how to count slaves (“other persons”) than it does about access to healthcare.
Have any of the workers filed a lawsuit against ThedaCare for restraint of trade yet?
If I was one of them, I would have by now.
This is where I am. I really don’t see Thedacare surviving this in their current form or with current leadership intact.
Future potential employer, which means that they can’t start work there. So you are not contradicting me.
Slavery? How does one equate this to slavery instead of the “legal” issue that it is. Don’t be so overdramatic on this one with these comments.
Who is saying this?
What legal issue? It’s an “at-will” state, employees are free to quit a job whenever they please, employers are free to fire employees when they please(other than protected groups).
The employer is demanding the government prevent employees from leaving until the employer allows it.
Not much different(in principle) than the old days of hunting down runaway slaves and returning them to their masters.
Well, they are only preventing the employees from working in their professional capacity at the nearby competitor. They aren’t chaining them, or even offending them from working for Uber.
I was outraged at first, but seeing that the judge has expedited the case and will hear it on Monday, (immediately after the “don’t take the other job” order) I’m waiting until after that to decide if i should be outraged.
That’s not how I’ve seen it work. I live in a rural area. When I cut my hand, I went to a local hospital and got the laceration sutured by a real doctor using first world drugs and equipment.
When I needed cardiac angiography and angioplasty, I traveled 90 minutes to a hospital offering those procedures.
I saw more apparently “poor and downtrodden” people at the big-city hospital than at the local, rurally located hospital.
Whatever the arguments in this case, it’s stretching matters to portray ThedaCare as a poor little community hospital struggling to retain employees at a stressful time, only to have them poached by a Giant Hospital Corporation.
ThedaCare operates 7 hospitals, has close to 3500 employees and annual revenues of around $1 billion. For a non-profit its expenses seem rather high (there are four executives making over $1 million a year).The pandemic doesn’t seem to have hurt it too badly.
“…ThedaCare’s leading inpatient market position with about 56% market share in a competitive market with the presence of two large multi-state systems, Ascension Health (AA+/Stable) and Advocate Aurora Health (AA/Stable) about 30% and 9% market share, respectively. The (ThedaCare) system’s market position is enhanced by a large and expansive outpatient clinic network, which makes up about 75% of system revenues.”
From FitchRatings:
“ThedaCare has managed well through the pandemic, receiving a total of about $83 million in relief funding with $27.7 million remaining to be recognized in fiscal 2021.”
I don’t envy the judge now having to decide whether short-term inconvenience and potential suboptimal health outcomes for a subgroup of patients requiring emergent transfers are enough to justify keeping those employees in their present jobs. Bottom line: I still think this is more about ThedaCare trying to preserve its reputation and market share.
I have to agree that the cries of “what about the 13th Amendment?!?!” and “end-stage capitalism, man!” are enormously overblown based on fact in evidence. A judge put a very temporary halt to Ascension hiring these employees in light of a charge of tortious interference and a claim that there would be significant negative health consequences. Given that the judge expedited a hearing for Monday morning, their onboarding may be delayed by just one day.
I also think it’s ludicrous to suppose the ThedaHealth will just pull this maneuver if their employees try to go to any other employer. This is a bullet they can only fire once – any subsequent attempt to make the same argument would demonstrate their bad faith and get quickly shut down by the courts.
It certainly is, if your employer happens to be the bank that holds your mortgage, and the foreclosure is contingent on you continuing to work there.
Slaveholders in the old Confederacy had all sorts of arguments as to why things just wouldn’t work economically without slavery. There is always some sort of bean-counting argument behind theft of labor. That’s why the public rationale is always about counting of beans and never what it really is, the belief that management is entitled to dictate all the terms of the labor agreement for its own convenience.
Health equity is something that needs to be handled legislatively at the systemic level, not by bullying healthcare professionals to keep them from seeking better working conditions.
The very strongest steelman I could offer here is maybe there’s some kind of exceptional clause for preventing the mobility of essential workers in some kind of disaster. I would grant it’s worth maybe a day or two of having a judge and legal counsel thumb through the lawbooks to determine if any such statute can be applied. But it really doesn’t sound like that’s what’s going on, given that the only public rationale we’ve heard is plaintiff bleating “they’re poaching our employees and we didn’t even counteroffer and this is so haaaaaaard on us.”
Hmmm. Could the judge order the employer to swap wage rates of the executive team with the workers they are seeking to involuntarily retain? What, you say? That would be unilaterally changing the terms of employment of the executives? Can’t have that.
My brother’s employer is using all kinds of legal tactics to force $13/hour workers to keep working under their contract, because it would hurt vital infrastructure if they quit. But the execs gave pocketed more in additional bonuses in the last two years directly as a result of COVID than it would take to give every employee a $2 raise for a year, even for two years.
Yes, about 30 people have taken home more in bonuses than 2,000 employees earn in total.
Capitalists always want to play both sides of the street, nothing new there. I mean if you insist on being free to fire without notice then you don’t get notice from employees leaving. How can it be otherwise? And isn’t the danger lowered at one facility, because disgruntled workers are forced to stay, but then raised at the other facility because new hires have been unexpectedly delayed? And the original employer had a month and didn’t act, then refuses to match the offer they were leaving for? Like, how do they have a leg to stand on? And what if those positions get filled while the court plays it’s games? Do the employees have cause to then sue the original employer? Seems like they would.
What a hot freaking mess, I can’t believe any court would wade into it.