It's not directing them to perform an action that could reasonably require recompense. Saying "No" takes no longer than saying "Yes".
If you're saying that the employer would have no authority to do what is directed, I can't even imagine how you could argue they don't. If you're saying the state doesn't have the authority, well I guess the courts will figure that one out.
As for your second point, the state enforces numerous employee rights on private property already. How is this one fundamentally different?
If you're saying that the employer would have no authority to do what is directed, I can't even imagine how you could argue they don't. If you're saying the state doesn't have the authority, well I guess the courts will figure that one out.
As for your second point, the state enforces numerous employee rights on private property already. How is this one fundamentally different?