Brady argument

There is a terrific post on the oral argument in the Brady case at Prawfsblawg, including a link to an audio of the argument. I'm not sure that it matters whether the union is decertified or not for purposes of the Norris-LaGuardia Act coverage of a labor dispute. A labor dispute can exist without a union. The players should have an unfettered right to disavow their union. Even if it is a tactic used to gain advantage, the National Labor Relations Act affords employees the right to decertify, and the union thereafter has no legal status as employee representative. Once done, the basis for the anti-trust exemption in labor relations no longer exists. I am surely an outsider to the dispute, but lots does not make sense to me. It seems like the owners are incurring huge potential risk with a lockout. All the bad possibilities of a strike exist, lost season, economic devastation, etc., and the real risk of blame for the outcome being placed on the shoulders of the owners, not players. Add to that anti-trust exposure, well, YIKES!