Do Wisconsin Union Threats Break The Law?

From CIR and Floyd Reports:




Do Wisconsin Union Threats Break the Law?





Posted on April 8, 2011 by Kevin "Coach" Collins















by Kevin “Coach” Collins



Wisconsin’s union thugs are at it again — but this time, targeted businesses may have a way of fighting back. Organized labor in Governor Walker’s state is threatening to boycott businesses deemed less than “supportive.” Looking at the conduct of the union thugs in Wisconsin suggests the possibility of fighting back against unions’ boycott by filing lawsuits claiming tortious interference.



Unbridled Savagery



Since Wisconsin’s Republican-controlled government set out to dismantle their feeding trough, the state’s civil service unions have responded with unbridled savagery attacking everyone they see as a threat. Even business owners who dare to be other than “supportive” of their claims on the state’s treasury are marked as enemies.



Union thugs have smashed windows in the State Capitol building, scrawled graffiti on the building’s beautiful marble walls, and made death threats to Republican lawmakers including Governor Scott Walker.



They are fearsome and quite willing to commit violence to get their way: union threats in Wisconsin are nothing to laugh at.



Since they can not pull up stakes and run, business owners are being “asked” to place signs in their shop windows announcing support for the union extortion of Wisconsin’s middle class.



Those who have dared to say “No” have been threatened with boycotts of their businesses. Business owners who refuse the signs are receiving a letter from a Field Representative of Wisconsin AFSCME Council 24 warning that failure to post the sign will lead to a union boycott of their establishments. Remember these people are mean and deadly serious.



While it may be true that boycotts are often empty threats, boycotts by these thugs can eventually destroy targeted businesses. A layman’s review of this situation suggests this may provide grounds for a business owner to file a tortious interference lawsuit to recover any lost income pursuant to a boycott.



Tortious Interference Elements:



Tortious interference of economic advantage can be established with the presence of five elements:





1) an economic relationship between [the plaintiff and some third person] containing the probability of future economic benefit to the [plaintiff];



2) knowledge by the defendant of the existence of the relationship;



3) intentional acts on the part of the defendant designed to disrupt the relationship;



4) actual disruption of the relationship ;and



5) damages to the plaintiff proximately caused by the acts of the defendant. (Buckaloo v. Johnson (1975) 14 Cal. 3d 815,827).



Fighting fire with fire can give America an edge in this war unions are conducting against us.



To contact your Congressional Representative use this link:



http://www.contactingthecongress.org/



To read more about this issue use these links:



http://messageboards.aol.com/aol/en_us/articles.php?boardId=38496&articleId=18615235&func=6&filterHidden=true&filterUnhidden=false&filterRead=false



http://www.lectlaw.com/def/i084.htm



This article originally appeared on CoachIsRight.com and is reprinted with permission.