The 2-hour briefing on May 8 attracted representatives from congressional offices, and helped remind lawmakers of the need for the legislation.

“The most fundamental problem with U.S. labor law is that it’s good on paper, but it’s not punitive,” explained Human Rights Watch labor specialist Carol Pier.  “The employer doesn’t suffer any fine or any penalty (for law-breaking).”  Instead, she said, U.S. labor law tries to restore the status quo before the law-breaking, often with “don’t do it again” type orders.

“So if there’s language in a company handbook that says: ‘union-represented workers are ineligible for health insurance,’ you (the company) only have to promise” the National Labor Relations Board “not to do it again,” she added.  Though Pier did not name it, the firm found guilty of that offense was Wal-Mart.

And the appeals process for workers, even when they win a favorable NLRB ruling is so long that it can take five years or more for a case to wind its way through the courts and the workers would then get what the board ordered. 

“What worker wants to take her job back after five years?”  Pier asked.  “And what good does posting a notice” in the workplace “do if most of the workers are gone?”

 “This act is broken,” declared labor law attorney Sarah Fox, a former Democratic member of the NLRB.  She added that while the 1935 Wagner Act--the National Labor Relations Act--“was the first anti-discrimination law” of the 20th century, “It always surprises me how little opprobrium attaches to breaking it, as opposed to breaking laws on sexual or racial discrimination.”

“Every year, hundreds of employers admit to violating it.  Hollywood even makes movies about (violating) it.  Why?”  She answered her own question by citing the act’s weak penalties, “he said, she said” cases and “lack of coverage” by the corporate media.  That lets employers get away with law-breaking.

Fox focused on the weakest section of the law: The election campaigns unions must undertake, first to win representation rights, second to organize the workers and third to get a contract. The nature of the first campaign--with employers with all the advantages--often “makes the election invalid,” she said.

But after all the dry data, the Steelworkers had their say, as three men fired for trying to organize for the USW in their two plants--one each in Pennsylvania and Ohio--told their stories of the hostility, lies and obstacles they encountered during their organizing drives.

“I wanted a little better and safer place to work,” said Bob Boyle, fired April 28 from Oesterling’s Sandblasting & Painting Co., just outside Butler, Pa.  “I’m 56 years old” the 17-year-veteran of the plant said.  “Where do I go?  I don’t know.”

Boyle described management threats--plus a last-minute pay raise--that turned the tide from a 14-6 majority (plus his pro-union vote) for USW into a 14-6 defeat, before he was fired.  Those threats included a statement, now legal under labor law, from the firm’s accountant that it would “save $800,000 if the union came in.” Workers were led to speculate that their  401(k) accounts, vacation days, holidays and health care would be cut.  Management also threatened to sell to another firm.  

Management told the workers after the vote, and after an NLRB probe started of Oesterling’s labor law-breaking, that “It’s all Bob’s fault” they got agency subpoenas.  Managers then encouraged co-workers to refuse to work with him.  Finally, the company president turned to Bob and ordered: “Get out!”

Brian Breining, fired Jan. 24, and co-worker Brian Smith, fired April 6, from Cultured Stone Co., of Dover, Ohio, told similar stories.  They added they started taping their conversations with their supervisors to keep a record of all the violations.