“You know just as well as I do that the workers striking is not on the company.”

You keep reframing this to match your view. PostNord workers are not on strike. They are refusing to deliver mail to one recipient, but continuing to deliver mail to everyone else. That’s not a strike - there is a fundamental difference between a union striking against its employer and employees continuing to work normally except for one recipient of its services.

As an aside, its interesting how quickly you went to the ad-hominem attacks. I mean right away, in your first post. Why is that?

The fact that PostNord operates as a “for profit company” is irrelevant. It is a state-owned and state controlled company - there are only two owners, and one of them is the Swedish Government.

The Tesla lawsuit is completely legitimate - the state-owned company is refusing to deliver license plates. PostNord - as the company - is responsible for its employees failing to carry out their duties, and doing so in a discriminatory way.

“Are you also saying the striking Tesla workers are representing Tesla?” The correct analogy would be if Tesla employees selectively disabled the cars of people it didn’t like, say if PostNord or the US Postal Service had an all-Tesla mail fleet. Tesla would be held responsible for that - as they should be.

Pro-union/Anti-Tesla commenters have invented/made-up/imagined a distinction between the actions of employees and the responsibility of the company.

The postal workers work for a state-owned company - therefore it’s the state-owned company that is refusing to deliver the plates. This idea that the workers don’t represent the company is nonsensical.

If the government-controlled mail service can refuse to deliver mail to non-unionized employers, then there is no equal protection under the law.

“The last has no part of the protection. The protection comes from the agreement between workers and the employers.”

I think you said it better, except if the employers don’t agree, then there will be no peace. The employers don’t have a choice because the unions will make sure there is no peace unless the employers meet the union’s demands.

That’s not a system - it’s a protection racket - “That’s a nice shop you have there, be a shame if anything were to happen to it.”

There’s no rule that says Tesla can’t operate with a non-unionized work force. What you are describing is a mob-run protection racket whereby the unions agree not to strike so long as a privately-owned company cedes decision making power to the union.

More importantly, you are describing unwritten rules imposed not by the government but by the mobs of union enforcers who believe they are entitled to co-ownership over businesses just because they are employed there.

“Tesla is free to operate outside this system…” you mean, they can try but they won’t enjoy equal protection under the law, and the government unions will attack them relentlessly. If you don’t want to work there, then don’t work there - but you aren’t entitled to work there AND demand Tesla recognize your union.

Unions have too much power and take no responsibility for their actions; Unions are effectively demanding squatters rights.

No. The US has not popular vote at the federal level, and the popular vote has no meaning within our Constitution. The majority is decided in the electoral college, not the popular vote.

“Hell yeah we are we if they want to come here they better play with our rules”. Does Sweden require companies to have unionized workers? Those machinists agreed to work at Tesla knowing there was no union, accepted the job, and then decided to unionize.

So - you would be ok with the mail service refusing to deliver mail to Mosques?

“Also discrimination lol. Its a company not a person”

Companies are owned and run by people. So, again, a Mosque is a building, not a person, so it would be ok - under your rules - for the postal service to refuse delivery to the Mosque.

The postal service - which is government owned - is refusing to provide service to a company unless that company unionizes its workforce - and people are cheering for it. The government is not supposed to endorse or allow this kind of discrimination.

The US is not a pure Democracy, never has been, but referring to it as an “undemocratic country” is just an ignorant slur. “Where a minority can elect a president” - that’s a common misconception among the ignorant. The individual states are sovereign in the US, the individual states select their choice for president based on a majority of votes within the state. It’s precisely that mechanism that protects the US from experiencing Tyranny of the majority the same way Europe does.

Right - because Tesla is a big company, and more importantly, one that we don’t like, the rules no longer apply and it’s ok to employ the mob to force them to do what we want.

Proving yet again why government monopolies are bad ideas, and why public employee unions are an even worse idea. This is mob-imposed bullying, and that’s all it is. Tyranny of the majority in the flesh.

Another post by a leftist worried that they their virtue signaling might not be worth the full score. You like the car, but want to make sure you don’t get misidentified by the rest of the herd.

“As labor costs rise” - labor costs didn’t rise by themselves - organized labor held companies hostage demanding absurd pay and benefit increases.