Memphis Police Sued For Intimidating Labor Organizers


Around the country, fast food workers continue to organize and protest to achieve a living wage. The Fight for $15 campaign, which works towards a $15 an hour minimum wage, is the main “face” of the living wage campaign. As it stands, in many parts of the country, people working full time at minimum wage cannot afford to support themselves or their families, which defeats the entire purpose of minimum wage laws.

But in Memphis, Tennessee, fast food workers have faced more opposition than normal, including illegal surveillance and intimidation by local police. Officers have followed protestors home, told them not to sign petitions, barred them from attending events at city hall, and even gone behind the counter at McDonald’s to prevent people from signing a petition. Furthermore, police have, on several occasions, said that they had “authorization from the president of McDonald’s” to arrest and harass protestors and organizers.

Neither the president of McDonald’s nor any other private individual can grant the police “authorization” to arrest anyone.

With that in mind, a civil rights lawsuit has been filed against the police, the city, and the mayor in order to address these issues. The suit was filed in the U.S. district court for the western district of Tennessee by the mid-south organizing committee of Fight for $15. It alleges that the Memphis Police Department engaged in “improper and illegal surveillance tactics aimed at having a chilling effect on the freedom of speech and the right to assemble or associate.”

Ashley Cathey, an employee of Church’s Chicken and member of the Fight for $15 national organizing committee, told The Guardian, “They’re trying to stop us from speaking out, but even though it’s riskier, we know we have a right to protest and we’re not going to be intimidated…our Fight for $15 is changing the country and it’s the Memphis Police Department that’s going to have to change along with it.”

Whether a judge agrees with the plaintiffs remains to be seen, but it would be a safe bet to assume that the trial will be followed by at least one round of appeals, regardless of who wins. Don’t be surprised if this one ends up before the Supreme Court.

Post a Comment

أحدث أقدم