Most likely there are already processes in place to get down to the truth on matters like these. Slow-moving processes - but processes, nonetheless. You know - formal appeals, FOIA requests, lawsuits, expert testimony - that sort of thing.
But this all makes for poor ad copy, of course. "Bold, Crafty Innovator Thwarted, 'Cause Unions!" -- that's what gets people to click on your article. And share it in venues such as this one.
The problem is that all those things cost money, and the "bold, crafty innovator", after putting $1M of his own money into it, can't afford to pay for all that. The city, and the union, have very deep pockets, and have no incentive to do the right thing and pay for it.
I'm not saying he has no reason to find fault in either the DOB's initial decision about his new crane, or in Crain's coverage of the issue.
Just that it's kind of weird (in my view) that so many people seem to be happy to conclude that we somehow "know" that it was union arm-twisting which (at least temporarily) sealed his fate. Despite the complete lack of primary (or even secondary) evidence for such a connection.
But this all makes for poor ad copy, of course. "Bold, Crafty Innovator Thwarted, 'Cause Unions!" -- that's what gets people to click on your article. And share it in venues such as this one.