[kenned3]

Non-American here.

Any "lawyer" around as the laws seem very unclear.

In the case of Whole Foods vs BLM shirts, the courts ruled in favour of the "uniform" and banned the BLM shirts:

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/whole-foods-win-sho...

"The June 28 decision by the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals further restricts employees’ ability to change their working conditions at a time when U.S. workplaces have become a locus of divisive cultural battles and disagreements over some Americans’ basic rights."

In this "similar" case the ruling is drastically different?

Both attempt to "ban"clothing due to "dress code" rules?

[acomjean]

Tesla factory employees aren't interfacing with the public, so employers have more say. I'm not sure the actual laws involved but I know certain employers have certain appearance rules. If they don't have any rules, you can't ban x and not y.

[kenned3]

Thanks!!

[ben_w]

Neither a lawyer nor American, my total knowledge in this area is recently listening to the podcast The Bayesian Conspiracy (168 – Unions Are Governments) which states that American unions are only allowed to act with regards to the relations between the workers and their employers and cannot engage more broadly in other political issues.

I don’t know American life, but I kinda assumed BLM was about the police and not workplace health and safety, and therefore it would be “other political issues”.

[mlindner]

That's in places where a Union exists. No Union exists at Tesla.

[puffoflogic]

The difference between the rulings is, the one you mentioned is from an actual court whereas the one in TFA is by the NLRB which is a racket (government sanctioned and funded, but most rackets are).

[0x445442]

I'm assuming the Pro-Union T-Shirts are referring to an attempt to unionize or an existing union in Tesla. I'm sure there are other distinctions.