maybe i'm missing some context or should listen to what scott actually said, but he said something about how he thought striking workers should be fired, as reagan famously did with traffic controllers, right?
so that's not a threat to fire the striking autoworkers, because scott isn't an automaker. he doesn't currently have the ability to fire anyone, he's just laying out his views, which strikes me as an appropriate thing for a person running for the presidency to do. maybe he should be asked to clarify whether he means firing federal workers if some went on strike or if he's offering advice to the automakers or whatever but i don't see any way it can be credibly viewed as a threat to the autoworkers currently on strike.
Tim Scott is an employer.
Here is the relevant info:
“The complaint was filed against Scott in his capacity as a representative for Tim Scott for America. In addition to being a senator representing the state of South Carolina, Scott is running for president, making him an employer as well. The premise of the complaint is that Scott’s comments could be construed as a direct threat against his campaign staffers, whose right to strike is enshrined in federal law.
Scott’s comments appear to violate those laws, said Benjamin Sachs, a professor of labor law at Harvard University. “A statement as direct as ‘if you strike, you’re fired’ is textbook unfair labor practice language because workers can’t be fired for striking,” Sachs told The Intercept. “If a reasonable employee could interpret the statement as ‘if I strike, I’m fired,’ then it is without a doubt an unfair labor practice violation.”
