The Michigan union contract that required a school district to discriminiate against Christians and whites as now been amended so that it won’t discriminate against Christians.


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Partial victory: The Michigan union contract that required a school district to discriminiate against Christians and whites as now been amended so that it won’t discriminate against Christians.

I am not for favoring whites. I am against anything that considers ethnicity or religion as a factor for employment.

Share

5 comments

  • Cotour

    What is important here is that the people in charge, for what ever reason, consciously chose to write the requirements as they did, singling out Christians. That was not a mistake it was purposeful. IMO it was to test the outer limits of the envelope and it is a reflection of how and what they believe and what they intend to do if allowed the opportunity.

  • Pzatchok

    But was it voted on and ratified by a vote of the union?
    Was it also agreed upon by the school board and its lawyers?

    If not then changing it after the fact might not be enforceable legally. Even if it is against the law or other parts of the contract.

    A union member could still use the now missing language to file a suit for not hiring or promoting them because they didn’t apply the now missing clause. That was voted on and signed by the union members.

    Until the next contract vote and arbitration comes up I bet this was all just to keep the public quiet.

  • “A union member could still use the now missing language to file a suit for not hiring or promoting them because they didn’t apply the now missing clause. ”

    Actually no. A clause that is obviously illegal cannot be enforced. If a union member sued because they believed non-Christians were not being favored, the court would throw the suit out and probably rule that the clause is illegal and must be removed.

    Of course, this assumption on my part depends on judges who know how to read plain English in the law rather than political tracts written by activists, something that is becoming questionable.

  • Pzatchok

    You have to remember.

    Both sides had lawyers helping to write this contract out.

    Both sides finalized it and sent it for a vote.

    No one noticed.

    A judge is nothing more than a lawyer with a steady job.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *