<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Labor roundup	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/04/labor-roundup-13/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/04/labor-roundup-13/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2019 16:11:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: SPO		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/04/labor-roundup-13/comment-page-1/#comment-353932</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SPO]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2019 16:11:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=72926#comment-353932</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Regarding the Boston permitting authorities---the legal opinion is actually quite interesting.  It goes on a long discussion of &quot;wrongful&quot; and what it means.  I found that a little unfortunate.  The idea that government officials can impose non-authorized (and illegal) conditions on permits simply because they want to support unionism and have it debatable as to whether that is &quot;wrongful&quot; is remarkable.

And one concept that should be abolished from our thinking (well, maybe not that far) is this idea that supposed good motives on the part of government officials when they act lawlessly is somehow mitigating.  It&#039;s not.  It&#039;s a species of arrogance.  If there are X conditions for permits, then adding Y and Z due to some official&#039;s idea of how the world ought to work is every bit as lawless as doing so for venal purposes, and actually, in some ways, worse.  If the motives are venal, they can just be paid off, and everyone goes on.  

If it is true that these two coerced the hiring of union employees, the punishment here should be very harsh--on the order of a decade or even more.  There should be zero tolerance in our society for this sort of do-gooder thuggery.  .]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the Boston permitting authorities&#8212;the legal opinion is actually quite interesting.  It goes on a long discussion of &#8220;wrongful&#8221; and what it means.  I found that a little unfortunate.  The idea that government officials can impose non-authorized (and illegal) conditions on permits simply because they want to support unionism and have it debatable as to whether that is &#8220;wrongful&#8221; is remarkable.</p>
<p>And one concept that should be abolished from our thinking (well, maybe not that far) is this idea that supposed good motives on the part of government officials when they act lawlessly is somehow mitigating.  It&#8217;s not.  It&#8217;s a species of arrogance.  If there are X conditions for permits, then adding Y and Z due to some official&#8217;s idea of how the world ought to work is every bit as lawless as doing so for venal purposes, and actually, in some ways, worse.  If the motives are venal, they can just be paid off, and everyone goes on.  </p>
<p>If it is true that these two coerced the hiring of union employees, the punishment here should be very harsh&#8211;on the order of a decade or even more.  There should be zero tolerance in our society for this sort of do-gooder thuggery.  .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
