I don't believe this. Have you got a cite for this?
@JonKramer @Pat Okay, that article doesn't say what your OP says. It says they're liable for the damaged work product because they took affirmative steps to damage it (by loading their trucks and leaving it there) instead of safeguarding it.
That makes sense. If nuclear power plant workers walk off, they should be expected to shut it down first.
@LouisIngenthron @Pat affirmative steps to damage would be to douse it with gasoline and light it on fire. Use of the equipment as intended by the company, manufacturers, etc is not attempts to damage.
If you are fired, what is your responsibility to a company beyond returning equipment? You have to work for free for the company for even a single second? Strikes are a similar situation. As soon as a strike is on, and the company knows these are coming, you have no moral responsibility for company equipment. The SCOTUS has now said that an employee, on strike, has a legal responsibility. The company can and should have prepared for care of their own equipment. That isn't an employee's responsibility.
Your nuclear power plant example fails because the employees, and employers, both have legal and moral obligations that extend far past company equipment.
@LouisIngenthron @Pat you see, the striking workers did NOT turn off the frozen food truck. They returned it to the depot and left it in care of management, still running.
That isn't kicking a hole in the wall on the way out.