[rtpg]

so rights only exist until it becomes slightly inconvenient to people? There's a pretty easy slippery slope argument there. Are train drivers allowed to strike? Can the NYT publish articles revealing how terribly a company is run?

Protesters are encouraged to coordinate with city officials so that people won't be "too inconvenienced", but last I checked it isn't a constitutional requirement.

[dubfan]

Yeah, being late to my job because my bus can't get through a protest and getting fired as a result is just a slight inconvenience.

[rtpg]

The fact that being late one day can get you fired speaks to the state of labor rights in the US.

Think of all of the things that could make you late. Protests, sure, but a broken down car, a car accident (yours or somebody else). Hell, if the President comes around they shut down a bunch of lanes of traffic.

[GFK_of_xmaspast]

Now you got some time to agitate for better labor rights so your now-ex-boss can't do that.

[cdcarter]

So, to use the examples you're replying to here, do you also believed that organized labor doesn't have the right to strike if it might make you late to work, and that the NYT isn't allowed to run an article outing you as a major criminal if that might cause you to be terminateD?