CNN Versus Labor Law

I read the news today:

Judge Arthur Amchan found that CNN violated the rights of more than 250 employees at the network’s bureaus in Washington, D.C., and New York City when it ended its subcontract with Team Video Services (TVS) [in 2003-2004], whose employees were represented by NABET-CWA. He also ruled that CNN discriminated against TVS employees who wanted to continue working at CNN’s bureaus to avoid having to recognize and bargain with the union.

A couple of points. One is just to observe that labor law and its enforcement in this country are a joke. You want to engage in some illegal union busting in 2003-2004 and, at worst, you’ll get mild punishment for having done so years in the future. Two, this is what makes about 98 percent of the protestations I’ve read about the evils of the Employee Free Choice Act such a joke. People’s fussy concern about the integrity of union-management relations somehow doesn’t seem to manifest itself amidst these constant violations of existing law by employers. Related, this is what I actually like about Mickey Kaus’ take on labor issues — he just believes, without any evidence whatsoever, that unions and unionization are bad and they should be crushed by any means necessary and he firmly grounds his EFCA opposition in that principled point of view. Fourth, I don’t think we should expect to see anything remotely resembling fair coverage of the EFCA issue when it comes before congress. Fifth, there’s a lot the new congress and new administration could do in terms of stiffer penalties and more expedient justice to improve the state of labor law short of a card check bill.