| Let's turn this on its head: The corporation has no inherent right to protection. It has no inherent right to exist as a legal entity. For most of human history they have not been a thing. They were created by society by law as a means to an end, and in doing so we gave corporations a bunch of rights that restrict our rights, by allowing corporations to e.g. continue to hold on to legal rights pasts the death of the person running it for example, and giving them special tax treatment. As such, these corporations exists at our leisure. It's up to us to set the terms, as If you don't like those terms you're free to not set up a corporation, and instead rely on e.g. doing business as a sole trader and see how much fun that is. The entitlement when people think that a corporation should be free to treat people however they like is astounding - society made them possible and created them, and we can shut them down if we deem they don't benefit society sufficiently. So when society says there is an expectation of privacy of communication at work: Tough. It's our right to determine the rules for what a corporation must accept in order to be allowed to exist. (and yes, we can go to far an mess up our economies in the process, so that we can do it does not mean that we always should do it, but in this case I fully agree with the court) |
are corporations the only entities which employ people in europe, besides the governments? can pierre not just rent a building and start employing some people himself? do these rules not effect pierre, in his capacity as an employer?