Hacker News Reader

It's not scabbing. The contractors "striking" aren't employees. And it's not a strike as defined by the law.

This kind of pedantry reminds me of people who want to call prisoners "detainees" and who want to call torture "enhanced interrogation".

Setting aside the implication you are trying to make that following employment law equals to agreeing with torture, it's not the same at all.

There's a legal definition of a strike, union and employment vs contractor. Just like there's a legal definition for prisoners and torture.

You can't get the rights associated with an unionized strike (anti scab laws) without the consequences of being unionized (dues for instance).

You're a scab if you are undermining the strike. No legal pedantry will suddenly wash that away. This is just common sense.

A scab is just a union term for people who disagree with them. It’s like being called racist when complaining about crime.

It's a pejorative for someone undermining other people's struggle for a better life. Either way, it's a sad state of affairs when HN threads constantly get derailed by a dozen or two very prolific reactionaries like yourself. Always the same names.

A scab is a scab, regardless of what legal trickery the owning class has engaged in to make striking illegal

Reply on news.ycombinator.com