CNN Ordered to Rehire 110 Workers Fired for Belonging to a Union

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AFL-CIO News Blog

by James Parks

This report likely won’t be on CNN’s “Headline News,” but after five years, former workers at CNN have finally gained justice. In a decision made public today, an administrative law judge ordered the network to rehire 110 workers who were fired because they were union members. CNN also was ordered to recognize the workers’ unions, National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians-CWA (NABET-CWA) locals 31 and 11.


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), 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.


Laid-off CNN workers rallied outside the headquarters of CNN’s parent Time Warner in 2004.


Ed McEwan, president of Local 11, said the decision

is a victory for workers, but one that took far too long to achieve
because of our broken labor laws. Everyone in America should know that
the network management we rely on to bring us the news are not above the
illegal practices that they headline on a regular basis. From the very
beginning we promised our members that “we will not forget.” We didn’t,
and we’re keeping up the fight until fairness is fully won.


Read more: http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/11/24/cnn-ordered-to-rehire-110-workers-fired-for-belonging-to-a-union

---

See the full story at the link.

[rocktivity]

1. In the immortal words of Jon Stewart

AWWWWWWWK-ward!

:evilgrin:
rocknation

[BrklynLiberal]

2. YESsssssssssssssss

[4lbs]

3. I'm wondering if Lou Dobbs will go into an anti-Union rant tomorrow on his show

n/t

[ksimons]

4. wow - goes to show you what courts can do

hope they are continuing to be mindful of the money-controlled interests of these networks

[not fooled]

29. Yeah,but for the bad guys this is an "Oops"...

...meaning that the Federalist Society, Heritage et al. have yet work to do to further infiltrate and take over law schools in order to pack the courts with only anti-worker, anti union footsoldiers.

[GrantDem]

5. Awesome...

[eilen]

6. wooo hooo! IBEW

Our family belongs to Local 43

[catrose]

33. Muscians Local 94

back when I was a musician. paid to be one, that is.

[guitar man]

35. Tulsa!!

that's where AFM Local 94 is, Tulsa. :hi:

[12string]

7. I Hope

They get back pay.

[w4rma]

8. Hah! full back pay means that any business that is looking at doing this will think twice. (nt)

[NeoConsSuck]

9. Corporate News Network

why don't they set up their corporate headquarters in Columbia? Labor relations would then be right up their alley

Is anyone surprised by this?

[Fire1]

10. Union Prevails!! Yes, that's my Union!

[SammyWinstonJack]

13. !

:thumbsup:

[OhioChick]

11. Good to hear!

:kick:

[Truth Teller]

12. Liberal CNN? Firing union members?

Impossible!

[TommyO]

14. As a former CWA member, WOOHOO!

I've since moved into management in a company that has CWA-represented employees, but my heart and soul are with the union. They are the ones responsible for the benefits that even management employees enjoy.

Full back pay? That's five years worth of earnings that these men and women are going to receive, good for them, and a hearty "fuck you" to CNN.

[Omaha Steve]

15. They won't get full back pay

The law says that all earnings that the employees had since they were fired will be deducted. They will get compound interest. IF the EFCA act passes next year, it would triple the back pay amount AND add a fine for each individual.

Pass EFCA: http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/10keyfacts.cfm

Sign the E petition here: http://www.freechoiceact.org/page/s/aflcio?source=aflcioweb

[DavidMS]

38. Does this proposed law also allow for criminal RICO?

That would be even better. That could mean felony charges for management, long jail sentences and a major hit to earnings for the company. It would make anti-worker activity less likely.

[louis c]

16. Look for the Union Label

Good luck and God bless.

[Canuckistanian]

17. Once, my firing led to a union certification

Back in the 90's, I was trying to start a union where I worked.

The boss found out about it - and fired me on the spot. I went straight to my union lawyer and he filed a suit with the Labour Relations Board of Ontario.

We won. And as a result, instant union certification for our bargaining unit. Sweet.

But most workers don't have such an easy time, especially there in America, because your union organizing rights have been gutted.

Let's hope that starts to turn around with Obama. Well, let's face it, it can't get any WORSE.

[bread_and_roses]

18. Good News!!! (n/t)

[Judi Lynn]

19. You're right. Haven't seen the story on CNN. Great news. Thanks.

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :party: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

[Omaha Steve]

20. New info from WIN CNN may appeal and delay this again for many years

http://www.laborradio.org/node/9949

By Doug Cunningham

CNN is guilty of widespread and egregious misconduct anti-union conduct, demonstrating a "flagrant and general disregard" for employee rights at its New York and Washington bureaus. That’s according to a decision from a National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge. Brian Powers is an attorney for NABET-CWA, the union representing 110 workers that have been ordered reinstated at CNN.

: “Unfortunately CNN took the position that they were not bound by the contract, turned their back on the union, cancelled union contracts and proceeded to implement the bureau staffing project which resulted in the layoff of 113 qualified technicians in Washington bureau and the New York bureau. So really they’ve had no talks with the union. The union requested bargaining on three or four occasions, both in D.C. and in New York, and CNN rebuffed them at every turn.”

CNN could appeal this ruling, but Powers hopes to see the cable news network instead do the right thing and respect its workers.

: “CNN could recognize the union, remedy the violations and resume the bargaining relationship, which is of course what we hope will occur.”

[Joe Chi Minh]

32. If they do appeal, I hope they are not allowed to drag it out, and when it is heard,

they are fined substantially larger amounts than they woud have otherwise.

[KoKo]

21. Hot Damned! Great News! Never heard about this case in all my years

here on DU. This is the start of the great "PUSH BACK!" :applause: for the AFL/CIO! and workers rights, everywhere.

[Kaleko]

22. K & R

[Waiting For Everyman]

23. WOW! One for the good guys! nt

[agent007]

24. Good decision

unions have suffered too many years of abuse during this administration. On the eve of a new era, it's good to hear change is on the way.

[petwlkr]

25. Damn activist judges

:sarcasm:

[Oldtimeralso]

26. Great News!

And A Big THANK YOU to Omaha Steve for being the voice of labor here at DU.

[bluestateboomer]

27. Yippee!!

NABET-CWA is my union too!

:toast: :fistbump: :applause:

[lonestarnot]

28. More! More! More!

K & R

[no limit]

30. Can someone educate me. Do companies not have the right to reject unions?

If an employer doesn't want union employees working for them why should they be forced to?

[JAbuchan08]

31. Generally companies can't fire people for organizing into a union

If a company could simply fire all union members it would pretty much make unions pointless wouldn't it? It is the fact that they can't be fired simply for belonging to a union that gives the organization it's leverage. Although that doesn't really stop companies like Starbucks and Wal-mart from union busting anyway.

[gorfle]

36. Right but...

I have never understood the whole Union thing, either.

I can see that a company can't stop people from forming or belonging to a Union, but why does the company have to negotiate or talk to the Union?

It's like saying all employees can belong to whatever church they want, but my employer isn't going to talk to my Church for work-related things.

How does this work?

[Omaha Steve]

39. They can legally lock out employees

The law gives the employees the right to bargain in good faith once they have 50% plus one. This was not a lock out. A contract was in force at the time. It was an illegal bypass of US labor law. Pure and simple.

[vinylsolution]

34. Proof that people have the power

Join a union today - and let's de-Reaganize America!!

[Laelth]

37. k&r for some good news for labor. n/t

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth