If you read the full article, and look at the Before pictures as well, you’ll see that these trees had been topped before and not a lot of material was actually removed from the trees, so not all that much shade was really lost.
Additionally, Universal put up tents for the picketers to provide shade to them, to replace what was lost when the trees were trimmed.
Maybe Universal was being honest when they said this was a scheduled project that just happened to coincide with the picketing, I can’t say, but I will give Universal the benefit of the doubt and not convict them myself without actually seeing more solid evidence than a news article written by a biased reporter.
I’m not defending the trimming that was done either, just suggesting that taking a more moderate view of what happened may be a good idea, in light of what seems to be an all-around lack of facts and a definite lack of objective reporting.