I am a union man, born and bred and I'll die a union man.
 

Funny I should say that, at first blush, as I am a self employed sole proprietor with 0 employees.
We've been discussing unions pros & cons and I wanted to narrow the focus a little so I felt that a thread devoted to that subject might be something worthwhile.
So, my question for y'all is why do some think public sector unions are a bad thing? I'm curious as all get out about this subject because to this nail pounding construction puke everyone should have the right to organize and dicker with their employer whether it's private or public sector. That's from the city, state or federal level standpoint IMO. So coming from the less than sharpest tool in the shed, why are public sector employees any different from UAW, Teamsters etc employees? What underpins the philosophy that there is a difference? Edumacate me and let's try to save the brickbats for other threads.

To edit my earlier post to one sentence...jealously of private employees because of the decline of wages and pensions they no longer see and are upset that their tax dollars pay for government employees who have unions along with pension benefits. A decline in the economy of the United States in the private sector.

So instead of thinking or saying "Why is it my employer will not give me those benefits?" They say, "If I can't have them then they shouldn't either!"


Kinda selfish........

I for one know that you can not trust the company to do the right thing unless there are consequences.



Barney

1. Unions exist to give labor the bargaining power to keep from being screwed.
2. They do NOT exist to give labor the bargaining power to control industry.

I don't know how you balance the two.

Not selfish. Hopeless. Jealous. Resentful. They don't believe they'll ever be in the same position and feel the only way they can ever be on an equal basis with union workers is to bring them down to their level. Very sad.

John

Your right selfish was the wrong word to use in that situation. Envious would of been a better choice along with jealous and the others you stated.



Barney

1. Agreed
2. I don't see how unions really control the industry, the board of directors and their counterparts in the public sector are at the helm. That said, management and labor are parts of a whole with differing responsibillities and expertise brought to bear on the successful (hopefully) endeavors of the organization.

Being simplistic myself, I see it like a beehive. You have queens, princesses (when needed), worker bees, guards at the doors and nursery workers all working toward a common goal of survival. Survival entails every member being well fed and housed, everything else is opinions/bickering and jockeying for the best job that they're capable of. Which I think is a positive force. If you work harder or better then there should be rewards associated with the extra effort.
It sucks being a drone, tho.

You guys have pretty much said it all. I could add a few things. But naw, Maybe later.

Someone will be around soon to explain that public sector unions only exist to serve a political purpose. That the public employee basically works for the politician, who, in turn allows them to have a union and gives them whatever they want in exchange for their votes and political support. You don't have that in the private sector.

I understand what this means, but still don't care. The aggregate effect is that everyone who works for someone else is dragged down. And that, to my mind is the underlying purpose of the whole stinking movement----to keep people turned against each other, accellerating the race to the bottom, while those at the top rake in all of the cash.

Sooner or later, the whole process of fighting to regain a financially and politically empowered working class will have to start anew. In the meanwhile, the short-sighted imbeciles among us continue to march dutifully into peasanthood.

Dave

Excellent post Dave! Your last line is how I'm seeing it going these days. Well put!

Private sector unions have to bargain with employers with the knowledge that they cannot make demands that will render the employer unprofitable. The employers obviously have to consider this as well. There is a natural (and desirable) tension between company profitability and employee pay/benefits.

With public sector unions, they're negotiating without this tension to balance profitability with employee compensation. Sitting on the other side of the table are politicians (and their surrogates) who are more than willing to buy votes. In many cases, they buy these votes with generous future benefits that are not paid out on their watch. They balance their budgets (and brag about it) while passing the costs for these concessions to future administrations.

Here's a good article on the subject from Fareed Zakaria, a very intelligent guy and hardly a conservative.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...117244,00.html

Why has this happened? It's democracy at its worst. Public-sector unions, powerful forces in states and localities, ask for regular pay increases. Governors and mayors can dole out only so much in salary hikes because of requirements for balanced budgets or other constraints. So instead, they hand out generous increases to pension benefits, since those costs will hit the budget many years later, when current officials are themselves comfortably in retirement.

Here in the bolded I see a fallacious argument. These people have seen a stagnant pool in regards to pay increases since the meltdown and in what appears to me a enormous amount of shouldering the extra burden by taking paycuts and a heavier workload forced on them by layoffs decided by the politicians. Is Zakarias really contending that retirees aren't taking it in the shorts, too? Maybe I'm wrong but here in my town they're hot and heavy racing to the bottom. Costa Mesa (Costa Misery is what our neighbors call us):rolleyes:
BTW an independent audit conducted on our city finances found the city fathers basis for laying off half of the citys workforce to be nothing but bullshyte but as usual facts and figures are to be ignored. They are continuing on their merry way and it appears they aren't slowing down and taking a look at it. They are soliciting bids to replace all regular city services and spending a lot revenue hiring all sorts of consultants and yes men.
I see a handwringer in Zakarias if he's actually a liberal but he's reading like a news flack. All in all it read like an op ed piece pandering to the fact that a hit article sells more advertising then something mundane and scholarly.

I've been noticing a right turn in the LATimes of late. Makes me wonder who's behind that. Time to dig down that rabbits hole and see where it leads. WaPo seems to be indulging going that way too of late. NYTimes not as much.I could be confused.:confused:

Zakaria is one of the sharpest knives in the drawer IMHO. I don't know if you realize the sheer amount of public sector pension liabilities in this country. This may help:

A 2009 study by Robert Novy-Marx and Joshua Rauh for the National Bureau of Economic Research put the unfunded liability of all U.S. public pensions at $3.23 trillion. This collective pension debt, the authors warn, “dwarfs the states’ publicly traded debt,” making total state debt actually closer to 4.5 times the value of outstanding state bonds if pension liabilities are included.

Using a 2008 U.S. population of 304 million, Novy-Marx and Rauh calculate the per capita burden of this pension debt at $10,625 for every man, woman, and child in the United States.

http://www.carolinajournal.com/artic...y.html?id=7189

I think the unions have been quite successful in conflating the issues surrounding public sector and private sector unions. This has to do with the fact that the percentage of public sector union membership is over 4 times that of the private sector. This issues and labor dynamics are completely different, however. With all due respect, it seems that you've fallen for their ruse, Bob.

Sounds like we have a severe revenue generation issue..................

Maybe what we need is lower prices and more outsourcing?

It's such a simple concept to understand. I don't get why it's so hard for it to sink in with some folks.

Yeh, but you raise taxes and your tax base will move to another state (or even another country). I'm with Rex on this one. I simply cannot understand why otherwise bright people have been sucked into the public sector union's argument.

The Federal government recognized this years ago and changed their pension system in 1986. The states are at least 25 years behind the curve on this one.

I'm guessing it's more of the "tow the party line" stuff and less objective thinking.

I wish we were all as objective as you seem to be, Pat!

They have an op ed guy named Goldberg who takes the right wing view but I think he is there just to rustle up the crowd. A sort of in house troll as it were. I think his first name is Jonah something like that. A sort of Mezz lol...

I've so far kept it non personal. Thanks for disregarding that. Don't mistake self deprectating humor for ignorance, my friends. As to falling for ruses and being simple? Where in the hell is that coming from? I really expect more from otherwise intelligent, engaged and honest members here.
Pat I read your first source and stand by my characterization of Zakarias. I'll take a look at the other and cook up some party line toeing for ya Rex. :(

Yes, it is Jonah. The worst thing about him is he's a "reformed" liberal. No zealot worse than a convert!

John

Sorry if I offended you. It just seems so blatantly obvious to me that public sector and private sector unions have damn near nothing in common, other than a name and their support for the Democratic Party. In the case of private sector unions, that's reasonable and expected. As for public sector unions, it's actually kind of incestuous. I've had 38 years of direct experience with both public and private sector unions and it couldn't be more clear to me.

My goal in starting a thread separate from the others already in progress and devolving into entrenched positions was to try to understand from an anti union standpoint where the logical conclusions were coming from. The title of the thread wasn't meant to be so much provocative as honest in regard to my own feelings and beliefs. That doesn't mean I wouldn't welcome the chance to bat around turds with the less than honest, idealogically rigid members.;) Neither Pat or Rex fit that description IMO to be clear.

Offended? Not so much Pat, no worries. See my follow up post above.

I do see psu members and their elected reps as facing a hobsons choice in who to support. At least the Dems are not advocating the destruction of all unions.
Is it the possible appearance of conflict of interest that's bugging you?

And I never named names but still agree 100% with Pat on this one. Unions have no place in public employment.

I think it's more than just appearances. Zakaria's article, my earlier post and the sheer amount of public sector pension obligations together sum up my concerns.

Sorry for the butthurt impression I was throwing about.;)
I really would like to bull the idea around and see where it takes us. Y'all know I'm a true believer so try to convince me that Hoffa shouldn't be made a saint.:rolleyes: Really just a small fish in a big old pond full of bucketmouths..

It was a tongue in cheek jab at "race to the bottom" principle of operation.......

I think workers should be protected and not taken advantage of but how long
can a company make it in this world economy paying high wages and trying
to compete with workers who live in straw huts and eat sticky rice? And should
my tax dollars be used to bail them out again? And how can the United States
generate revenue when there is no profit to be earned? And what about the
majority of American workers who do not earn tripple inflated union wages?
Are they expected to buy those same products on lower wages.
And who are the greedy ones again?

Sorry Pat but being for private unions but against public ones is like being only half-way for or against abortion. Nothing wrong with a fireman cop or teacher protecting their lively hoods thus giving us the public the best service they can. If you have noticed there does not seem to have been a rabid overreach on the part of most government employees lately. Walker got the concessions he wanted but had to shove in the knife anyway. Yes we need pension reform and there are some bad apples here in California...
If my union goes away and all the other public ones go away the USA is basically non-union so perhaps you will not have to concern yourself with the private unions you support.
I understand the the feelings of non-union taxpayers..... or maybe I dont. But our country is consumer driven. Lower wages means lower spending.Period. Lower spending will keep us in this recession. In third world countries government employees don't get paid alot...that is why you have to pay them bribes to do anything for you. In some countries the cops pull you over not to ticket you but to collect the shakedown...and if you don't pay you get the ticket
Can't happen here? I like stadium endings sorry....

If the Government is willing to cut public sector employees negotiated deals in place then why not start with the elected ones first. Tie any cuts with cuts to all and see how far it goes. It's funny that when the unions were the strongest and tax rates a whole lot higher things were pretty good for all.

To me it looks like a race to the bottom is what is happening right now.

Cuts to teachers fireman ,police and the likes seem OK. But say anything about cuts to the vast Military Industrial Complex and see what happens!

Barney

I agree with you Ice Nine on 99% of what you say but I'm gonna turn off my monoblock spaceheaters and get a cold drink and watch some soma television an' nod out. Back in a few....

Maggotbox 150 Spaceheater Deluxe Biamped Monoblocks (25watts Olde Skool.)
(Tube complement in each)
2)5U4GB
5)6V6GT
1)12AT7
1)6AT6
18 freakin'tubes in a computer desktop system. I use the term desktop loosely...JBL L80T3 floorstanding desktop speakers.

And, how are American workers at any rate, union or not, supposed to compete with people who live in straw huts and eat sticky rice? Why are we concentrated on dragging everyone down to the lowest common denominator rather than seek balance? Why should I have to give anything up because the schmuck down the street has no personal pride, nor balls enough to stand up for himself and would work like a slave for a bucket of gruel and a pat on the back?

How in the heck do we build an economy based on wages that do not support strong consumerism?

Look at what the median home price is and what the median wage is.
Then come back and tell me why homes don't sell. Not even in the "healthier" areas of the nation...........

Those are the real questions.:p

Dave

You sound like a small business owner there Dave?

I'll bet these kinda things go on in your town also:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012...lls-57000-hou/

Sickening abuse at tax payer expense.

No, I actually work for a living.:p

To be fair, most of the small business owners I know do work quite hard. Some say they do, but it's not hard to see they're full of shit if you watch them long enough. (There are several in my family.)

I consider most small business owners to be in the same boat most blue collar folks are. (The big boys pulling down million dollar salaries over at Megalithic Giganto-Corp have NOTHING in common with the rest of us.) That being said, I do believe they have been over-lionized. Anytime politicians start telling any segment of society that they are the "engine of the economy" or the "center of the universe", or whatever......LOOK OUT! There's trouble coming.

Seriously.

Dave

It appears you had "Sickening abuse at taxpayers expense."
Looks like it's been dealt with.

Dave

I don't buy the whole "race to the bottom" rhetoric when it comes to public sector employees. For the most part, there is no threat of outsourcing police, firemen, teachers/professors, school employees, etc.

For how many years though before someone took a look at those saintly public union employees.

Notice Dave, it was the fat asses sitting behind the desks with most of the abuse. guess what, they are in unions also.

A drop in 57K hours in two years does not alarm you? That is 6.5 years worth of sick time abuse that's been going on for how long..........?

They dont go away....the positions will remain...but what type of services will you get if they are underpaid and/ or at the mercy of the current administration. Political patronage can be a bad thing....sorry if I offended you but I am a public employee myself..

The current antigovernment vibe isjust too much for me sometimes....

Yeah thanks. Illtone it down a bit mygoal is to be the Mezz of the left (middle)