Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, there is. This representation is provided by the elected officials and their agents.
[therefore, vote wisely]
Yeh, but we've tried that, but when we elect officials to represent us on behalf of the unions, the unions get butthurt and try to influence a recall and reelection. Vicious cycle eh
Yeh, but we've tried that, but when we elect officials to represent us on behalf of the unions, the unions get butthurt and try to influence a recall and reelection. Vicious cycle eh
I didn't say it was perfect but it's what we have.
For now, MIke. Within the next 20 years, many state pensions will fail. Since the majority of taxpayers are not in the public unions, well can't raise their taxes and win re-election. So like the town in Alabama that stopped paying pensions, and like several large cities in Bankruptcy now who while still paying, will most likely get usual BK court bargains, things will change. Demographics is working against this special interest group. State governments are majority GOP now, and will stay that way, as even the lefties often cross over cause they (quiet now) don't want to pay higher taxes, and they know their party is in BED with the unions.
For now, MIke. Within the next 20 years, many state pensions will fail. Since the majority of taxpayers are not in the public unions, well can't raise their taxes and win re-election. So like the town in Alabama that stopped paying pensions, and like several large cities in Bankruptcy now who while still paying, will most likely get usual BK court bargains, things will change. Demographics is working against this special interest group. State governments are majority GOP now, and will stay that way, as even the lefties often cross over cause they (quiet now) don't want to pay higher taxes, and they know their party is in BED with the unions.
I'm under no illusion that the 'system' will be the same in 20 years. As a local government employee, I'm watching the state of California do things that make me wonder, frustrated, cringe, etc. It's bad, bad, bad here. I expect that there will be a demand by somebody somewhere that my contribution be increased, my pension reduced, and/or the age I can retire to be elevated. We are all going to have to take a bit of this poison.
If private sector unions are to protect workers from unfair labor practices from the part of evil capitalists and corporations, are public sector unions meant to protect workers from evil taxpayers, you know the ones who pay their salaries?
Taxpayers aren't the ones who decide what the pay and benefits and working conditions are. Public service unions no more protect workers from taxpayers than private sector unions protect unions from customers
Unions exist to represent the workers, to negotiate on their behalf, to represent them in matters relating to wages, hours, and working conditions, and to generally protect their interests. They partially serve as a counterweight to the power of management, which, in the absence of organized labor, would have the power to impose its will arbitrarily and to treat the workers unfairly and without regard to workers' rights.
Management's treatment of labor over the centuries has demonstrated the need for workers to organize themselves into unions in order to have a hope for fair treatment, safe working conditions, and decent wages and benefits.
Public employers are no less likely than private employers to exploit the workers, to underpay them whenever possible, to disregard their need for safe working conditions, and generally to treat them unfairly.
I don't know, why would any city managers sign the contract?
You've just identified the big problem. Usually the managers on that side of the table have the best interests of the company in mind, and you have checks and balances. But with public sector unions, the manager that is supposed to be protecting their company (govt) gets elected thanks to the union's campaign contributions. So it's in their best interest to put the union's interests at the front, screwing the taxpayer.
If private sector unions are to protect workers from unfair labor practices from the part of evil capitalists and corporations, are public sector unions meant to protect workers from evil taxpayers, you know the ones who pay their salaries?
You've just identified the big problem. Usually the managers on that side of the table have the best interests of the company in mind, and you have checks and balances. But with public sector unions, the manager that is supposed to be protecting their company (govt) gets elected thanks to the union's campaign contributions. So it's in their best interest to put the union's interests at the front, screwing the taxpayer.
Not to mention that most of the management is actually unionized themselves.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What are public sector unions for?
