Public Employee Unions, Greece here we come!

[sgreger1]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38183.html

and: Train conductors making over 200k

While $200k for being a train conductor seems excessive, I think the railroads are private companies (albeit heavily subsidized). However, take a look at the Boston fire dept or the San Francisco bus drivers for excessive government wages -

http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...ighters_in_us/

http://www.examiner.com/a-669683~Met...00_in_pay.html


Imo, government employee unions should be made illegal. Unions were designed to protect workers from unsafe conditions and illegal abuses. They are entirely irrelevant to people employed by our own government except as campaign slush funds for the political tools who keep handing over more and more public money for ever-worse results.



It's now official: In 2009 the number of unionized workers who work for the government surpassed those in the private economy for the first time.

[tom502]

The downward spiral of the US.

[lxskllr]

Imo, government employee unions should be made illegal. Unions were designed to protect workers from unsafe conditions and illegal abuses. They are entirely irrelevant to people employed by our own government except as campaign slush funds for the political tools who keep handing over more and more public money for ever-worse results.

I wouldn't say that. Law protects workers against unsafe conditions, and illegal abuses. Unions give the worker bargaining power against large entities. An individual against a large company or the government has no bargaining power. Thousands of people do. Fair arguments can be made against the greed of unions, but stripping away the greed factor, they're still useful in the private AND public sector.

[sgreger1]

I wouldn't say that. Law protects workers against unsafe conditions, and illegal abuses. Unions give the worker bargaining power against large entities. An individual against a large company or the government has no bargaining power. Thousands of people do. Fair arguments can be made against the greed of unions, but stripping away the greed factor, they're still useful in the private AND public sector.

But public sector pays higher than private sector nowadays and the benefits are better than most of us get. They use their union power to convince the gov to give them reitrement packages backed by the US taxpayer etc. I don't think unions, who'se orriginal job was to stop factory workers and the like from creating slave labor, are necessary in today's public sector jobs. We have seen how this has played out in other countries such as Greece, they beg for more and more and then when the economy goes down, and the private sector take sa hit, they protest and force the government to make sure THEY don't take a hit and get to keep all of their goodies despite the economy.

[fdknuckles]

Sgreger..I've got to disagree with your statement regarding making unions illegal for public servants. As a whole, I am anti union, however I am a member of one. I am a public servant.
Allow me to clarify my stance on unions. I believe in a free market ecconomy where if I need a carpenter, electrician or plumber, I will have to pay a market rate for their services. If I do not offer enough for the job, they can turn me down, until my price goes up or their rate goes down.
Within public service however, there are what some might consider "essential" services (Police, Fire, EMS, Sanitation). Without unions, there would be no collective bargining agreements or a single contact point for a city to renegotiate benefits and wages. There can be NO STRIKING for essential services workers.

Should there be a strike of plumbers, electricians or carpenters, the market would self correct with "scab"(I hate that term) workers.

[lxskllr]

But public sector pays higher than private sector nowadays and the benefits are better than most of us get. They use their union power to convince the gov to give them reitrement packages backed by the US taxpayer etc. I don't think unions, who'se orriginal job was to stop factory workers and the like from creating slave labor, are necessary in today's public sector jobs. We have seen how this has played out in other countries such as Greece, they beg for more and more and then when the economy goes down, and the private sector take sa hit, they protest and force the government to make sure THEY don't take a hit and get to keep all of their goodies despite the economy.

They also fight for a greater portion of public funds. Lets use school teachers as an example. They try to get as much funding for public education as possible. They're looking out for the workers, but that in turn helps the schools, and the children. Without a strong organization, the teachers would get walked on, and more money would be funneled to the politician's pet projects. I'm surprised you, of all people trust the government to do the right thing.

[sgreger1]

Sgreger..I've got to disagree with your statement regarding making unions illegal for public servants. As a whole, I am anti union, however I am a member of one. I am a public servant.
Allow me to clarify my stance on unions. I believe in a free market ecconomy where if I need a carpenter, electrician or plumber, I will have to pay a market rate for their services. If I do not offer enough for the job, they can turn me down, until my price goes up or their rate goes down.
Within public service however, there are what some might consider "essential" services (Police, Fire, EMS, Sanitation). Without unions, there would be no collective bargining agreements or a single contact point for a city to renegotiate benefits and wages. There can be NO STRIKING for essential services workers.

Should there be a strike of plumbers, electricians or carpenters, the market would self correct with "scab"(I hate that term) workers.

Perhaps I go overboard in saying make them illegal. I just generally do not agree with them. Having a central place to negotiate from is great but it comes with so much other baggage, as unions tend to be more of a political entity than a justice one. Im just saying we have seen the fallout from massive unions for public employees, when times get bad they manage to keep their pensions and get their annual agreed upon raises while the rest of us lose our jobs. I just feel that the public sector is being promoted by various government policies in an attempt to have the state employ the most workers, or at least a substantial ammount. I feel that this is bad economics,as top heavy governments that employ most of the country tend to collapse. We aren't there yet but like my graph above shows, it's getting there.

[tom502]

I don't like how all the unions are backed by the communist party and the dems.

[fdknuckles]

I don't like how all the unions are backed by the communist party and the dems.

Believe me, neither do I.

[sgreger1]

They also fight for a greater portion of public funds. Lets use school teachers as an example. They try to get as much funding for public education as possible. They're looking out for the workers, but that in turn helps the schools, and the children. Without a strong organization, the teachers would get walked on, and more money would be funneled to the politician's pet projects. I'm surprised you, of all people trust the government to do the right thing.

It's a catch 22. I understand the need, but at the same time I don't feel the need is there right now. Teachers make plenty considering what they do, paying them more doesn't change anything they are still lazy and of little benefit nowadays, the teachers I had in school were no better than DMV employees if you ask me. (Reforming the education system is a whole other debate I wont go into).
The problem is that while I don't trust the gov to do the right thing, the unions are all in bed with the government and it just becomes a way for the government to centralize how they handle employees. With our current policies, it has made it to where a gov job is the best job since you get paid way more, get better benefits, and it's much safer than the private sector. I feel they are doing this to bring increased reliance on the government for everyones needs, just like they do with welfare, subsidies, and the new healthcare bill.

Who am I to talk though, my wife applied to work as a chemist for the USDA just yesterday. Private sector will pay her $40k, the USDA job pays $113k for the same job and has way better benefits. If you can't beat em, join em.

I may be wrong, and certainly there are places that need them I guess, but I just feel like we've seen what this leads to in the long run, and it's not pretty.

[lxskllr]

Perhaps I go overboard in saying make them illegal. I just generally do not agree with them. Having a central place to negotiate from is great but it comes with so much other baggage, as unions tend to be more of a political entity than a justice one. Im just saying we have seen the fallout from massive unions for public employees, when times get bad they manage to keep their pensions and get their annual agreed upon raises while the rest of us lose our jobs. I just feel that the public sector is being promoted by various government policies in an attempt to have the state employ the most workers, or at least a substantial ammount. I feel that this is bad economics,as top heavy governments that employ most of the country tend to collapse. We aren't there yet but like my graph above shows, it's getting there.

You gotta remember your view's probably skewed also. You're from CA, I wouldn't use you guys as an example to do anything right :^D Sometimes stuff turns out right, but I think that's just a fortuitous accident :^D

Unions have gotten too big for themselves, public and private. Instead of bargaining, they extort. Can't really blame them though. It's either screw, or get screwed in this country. Most people/corporations look out for their own interests, greater good be damned. Getting rid of unions will just reduce the screwers by half. I'm not sure that's the best course of action though.

[danielan]

Who am I to talk though, my wife applied to work as a chemist for the USDA just yesterday. Private sector will pay her $40k, the USDA job pays $113k for the same job and has way better benefits. If you can't beat em, join em.

I think that is where the problem is. It used to be that the public sector paid poorly, but made up for it in great benefits and early, generous retirement.

Now they have parity or exceed private wages and yet still have great benefits and early, generous retirement.

So, the problem of public sector unions is that they have been way too successful, retaining their benefits while the public sector has widespread wage and benefit erosion.

[fdknuckles]

Perhaps I go overboard in saying make them illegal. I just generally do not agree with them. Having a central place to negotiate from is great but it comes with so much other baggage, as unions tend to be more of a political entity than a justice one. Im just saying we have seen the fallout from massive unions for public employees, when times get bad they manage to keep their pensions and get their annual agreed upon raises while the rest of us lose our jobs. I just feel that the public sector is being promoted by various government policies in an attempt to have the state employ the most workers, or at least a substantial ammount. I feel that this is bad economics,as top heavy governments that employ most of the country tend to collapse. We aren't there yet but like my graph above shows, it's getting there.

If it makes you feel better, my benefits and healthcare have gone to s%&@ and I haven't had a raise in 3 years. I know the ecconomy is crap right now. I agree government is the problem, but people keep demanding more and more services. An entitled attitude is not a union problem, it's an American problem of the 21st century.

[WickedKitchen]

Wow. Interesting article.

I have an aversion to unions. Both of my parents were public school teachers and members of the union. I remember them both participating in a walk-out and marching a picket line. I was 7 (i think) and all I knew at the time was that they wanted to stop proposition 2 1/2...and I got a couple of days off of school. I didn't know what it was about at the time but even as a kid it didn't make sense to me. Now, being older, it makes even less sense. I understand the rational behind it all, but alas the method is improper, IMO. Labor unions in the private sector have a small bit of merit for safety reasons, but that's about as far as it goes.

Entitlement. That's the problem here. There's a sense of belief that just because you have a "job" you should get paid. How about if you do your job properly, and only if, do you get paid. Imagine a world where you get paid for your work only. I am a little biased towards this way because for the last seven years I've relied on commissions only. Perform and get paid. Fail and don't get paid. It's pretty simple. Now, I know this can't apply to every industry but it certainly can for teachers, researchers, medicine, and the like. Also, people believe that a job should include heath insurance. Health insurance is part of your wages. Period. If you've got children tack on 10k to 15k to your salary 'cos that's probably what it would cost you on the open market. I think the nation has helped create this problem by going along with it for sixty years. (good link - http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/t...ance.health.us). This mentality spread from health insurance to many other things. Now many believe that they should get things that others get so they can be treated "equally". Go screw. You do the same job with the same performance then you should get the same compensation. That's what our country was built on. Performance. That mentality is just not here anymore.

Unions for the public sector? If a government arm can operate successfully like a private business would then maybe unions are acceptable. Other than the USPS I don't think there's many other government programs that aren't in the red.

Now as always there are exceptions: (which is probably responsible for this crap in the first place...ahh, If I were king of the world. Ha!)
I think that if you were a US Soldier, CIA & FBI (honorable), Police officer, Fireman, or President/VP of the United States then you should be taken care of for the rest of your life providing you served in this capacity honorably and with a proper vesting period. Other than that, performance rules IMO.

[sgreger1]

You gotta remember your view's probably skewed also. You're from CA, I wouldn't use you guys as an example to do anything right :^D Sometimes stuff turns out right, but I think that's just a fortuitous accident :^D

Unions have gotten too big for themselves, public and private. Instead of bargaining, they extort. Can't really blame them though. It's either screw, or get screwed in this country. Most people/corporations look out for their own interests, greater good be damned. Getting rid of unions will just reduce the screwers by half. I'm not sure that's the best course of action though.

Well I certainly can't disagree with any of that.

& "Sometimes stuff turns out right, but I think that's just a fortuitous accident" <--- You better believe they will have a crack team of professionals dispatched to fix that as soon as it is discovered. "a SURPLUS in MY budget? Release the Kraken!"