What they needed to do was accept the consequences of thier actions. Tell their supervisors they were out protesting, and then basically dare them to fire them. That would be a hell of a more effective protest measure then trying to weasel out some pay using sick time.
Modern protestors seem to lose sight of the fact that the core of non violent resistance is accepting the mandated consequences of your actions, be it imprisonment or unemployment. Your goal is to shame those in power into accepting your position, and to rally popular support to your side.
Todays protestors are more likely to scream for a lawyer to get them out of jail then to sit in the jail, accept the percived injustice of being jailed for an action, and then using that to force acceptance of your position.
Basically I'm calling modern american protestors a bunch of wimps compared to those who came before them.
collective bargaining was SUPPOSED to reduce liability for um, collective bargaining, meat-head(s). Stipulations as to unpaid leave (you can get FIRED for unpaid time, as has been pointed out) were designed to fuck strikers.
It isn't rocket science, but is astounds me the number of people who just don't get it. ANY of it.
Then the place to resolve this is on the state house floor, or the contract negotiation room, Barb. You dun accept a job and agree to the conditions, then find a MD to help you defraud your employer out of the benefit of the bargain. That is wrong.
part of the "bargain" is that they have collective bargaining. when the employer violates that part of the contract, you take advantage of the means legally available to you.