Public-sector unions: why must they exist?

[crashtestdummy]

Being funded by taxpayers is not sufficient reason to make people subject to abuses of their superiors, poor working conditions, and the shifting of political winds.

This. Your (the OP's) perspective on this seems to be that since the people, including public servants, elect politicians, those public servants are already signing on to their own fate. That is the equivalent to saying that since many private company workers are given stock options, they also shouldn't have unions because they take part in electing board members. In both cases, that voting power is not particularly strong leverage either for negotiations or elections.

 

[zsdersw]

Maybe you should explain why they shouldn't.

It's quite simple. Public-sector unions already have the upper-hand. Taxpayers aren't going to let their city/county/town/school district default and be dissolved, and the unions know this, so they can extract from management pretty much what they want on that basis alone.

In private businesses, the company can default and cease to exist, leaving union workers with nothing.. so unions have to be a bit more reserved in what they demand.

 

[The-Noid]

The other major problem is the seemingly unsophisticated and uneducated nature of most local government.

The majority make decisions (especially in smaller communities) without a fundamental understanding of finance and economics. Much of this will come home to roost in the future.

There should be some sort of minimum test of knowledge relating to finance, etc in the local level. My home town borrowed $10.5MM last year, with a $43MM cash reserve, because "rates were low." They now have a $57MM cash reserve and no need for the extra cash. Smaller communities simply do not have the intellectual capacity to handle the large financial decisions that rely around running major government.

 

[ky54]

I have no problem with public sector unions existing what I do have a problem with is the undue influence they have on the people that control their pay and benefits. The money-laundering scam that is the political campaign donations huge wage and benefit contracts are awarded and the very politicians who passed them their election coffers get stuffed full of cash. This incestual relationship spits in the face of all the workers who get to pay for it.

 

[Ldir]

Civil service protections. Government workers have more protections that the private sector. Again, why is it a good thing for public employees with the ability to vote in the people who determine pay and benefits? Government is not like a private company which declare bankruptcy and nullify labor contracts.

Would you like to see the Air Traffic control employees form another union with the ability to strike? ATC is a function provided by the government. It is required at this time for safe air travel. Do you know how much money would be lost daily if ATC personnel were to go on strike?

Those are two different things. You can have public unions and still prohibit strikes. But public workers should be able to organize and bargain collectively just like any other laborers. Working for government does not change this.

 

[Ldir]

It's quite simple. Public-sector unions already have the upper-hand. Taxpayers aren't going to let their city/county/town/school district default and be dissolved, and the unions know this, so they can extract from management pretty much what they want on that basis alone.

In private businesses, the company can default and cease to exist, leaving union workers with nothing.. so unions have to be a bit more reserved in what they demand.

Your theory is refuted by reality. Government workers overall are not paid lavishly. They often earn less than in the private sector. People I know who left government said they make a lot more now.

 

[zsdersw]

Your theory is refuted by reality. Government workers overall are not paid lavishly. They often earn less than in the private sector. People I know who left government said they make a lot more now.

It's not refuted by anything. The benefit packages are indeed very lavish by private-sector standards.

 

[spacejamz]

Those are two different things. You can have public unions and still prohibit strikes. But public workers should be able to organize and bargain collectively just like any other laborers. Working for government does not change this.

There is no check and balance system to keep the government workers wages in line. In the private sector, employers will pay what the market will bear, so wages are kept in check.

For government unions jobs, the only thing that matters is how much the unions can contribute to a politician who in turn will increase their benefits while the tax payer gets screwed. Rinse and repeat until the city goes broke trying to pay for all of the benefits that union 'negotiated' for. Kinda like Greece.

 

[The-Noid]

It's not refuted by anything. The benefit packages are indeed very lavish by private-sector standards.

Every issue is looked at through one of two lenses.

In this day and age most don't look at facts or statistics. Rationalization and bias distorts issues that can be politicized.

 

[soundforbjt]

It's not refuted by anything. The benefit packages are indeed very lavish by private-sector standards.

And no one has noticed how bad things have gotten in the private sector in the last twenty years? I remember the benefits I had at one company I worked at were way better than the goverment's. Now the benefits at that company are pitiful.

Private sector workers have lost alot in the last couple of decades. Maybe they need to organize more.

 

[Ausm]

Actually, I think it does matter. Private businesses and companies are not funded by taxpayers.

So you think Public sector workers are paid to much is the crux of your op then?

Benefits make up a slightly larger share of compensation for the state and local sector. But even after accounting for the value of retirement, healthcare, and other benefits, state and local employees earn less than private sector counterparts. On average, total compensation is 6.8% lower for state employees and 7.4% lower for local employees than for comparable private sector employees.

http://www.nirsonline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=395&Itemid=48

 

[zsdersw]

So you think Public sector workers are paid to much is the crux of your op then?

No, the crux of my argument is that they're not necessary.. and that they have too much power by virtue of the public institutions they work for being things that don't face an end to their existence, unlike a private company.

I work in the public sector, but am not in a union.

 

[Ausm]

No, the crux of my argument is that they're not necessary.. and that they have too much power by virtue of the public institutions they work for being things that don't face an end to their existence, unlike a private company.

Why are you worried about their power if it doesn't revolve around the all mighty dollar?

 

[zsdersw]

Why are you worried about their power if it doesn't revolve around the all mighty dollar?

Because taxpayers should not be held hostage to a group of public employees who collectively think they're worth more and more each year.

 

[sm625]

Public unions must exist because, without them, wages would be declining precipitously, and the top 1% would be getting twice as rich twice as fast, and we would have a revolution. Cant have that. Public employee wages help prop up average wages. Without them, it would truly reveal how dire the situation is. Again, cant have that.

 

[The-Noid]

Public unions must exist because, without them, wages would be declining precipitously, and the top 1% would be getting twice as rich twice as fast, and we would have a revolution. Cant have that. Public employee wages help prop up average wages. Without them, it would truly reveal how dire the situation is. Again, cant have that.

Wages have been pretty flat at that is what people see. Just search google to see how many cities/states/etc are under a pay freeze.

It is the huge NPV of the benefits that people don't see that is the problem

I am not sure this point makes much sense.

 

[spacejamz]

Why are you worried about their power if it doesn't revolve around the all mighty dollar?

Most logical people don't want what's happening in Greece to happen here...

 

[Matt1970]

Unions are good for problems people may have with mid-level management. As for wages, supply and demand will take care of that.

 

[Texashiker]

As for wages, supply and demand will take care of that.

I guess that is why apple rakes in billions in profits, and the people at foxconn make a few hundred dollars a month?

 

[theeedude]

I'd like someone to justify with facts and sound logical reasoning why public-sector unions must exist. What essential purpose do they serve? Why must they have collective bargaining rights?

I made bold the two things I want to see but fully expect will not be presented.

Freedom of association.

 

[The-Noid]

I guess that is why apple rakes in billions in profits, and the people at foxconn make a few hundred dollars a month?

Do you not understand the difference between labor laws and unions?

You are horribly botching your argument.

Unions do absolutely nothing to prevent labor arbitrage.

 

[The-Noid]

Freedom of association.

Many union participants would argue there is not freedom of association. They are forced to join and collectively bargain.

 

[Texashiker]

Do you not understand the difference between labor laws and unions?

How long have you been working, 3, 4 maybe 5 years?

Have you ever worked in a union shop? I have.

Do you have first hand experience with non-union and union jobs? I do.

Please come back when you get some real life experience.

As for unions in the public sector, I work a non-union public sector job and make about 1/2 the national average.

My brother on the other hand, he works a union public sector job and makes good money.

 

[The-Noid]

How long have you been working, 3, 4 maybe 5 years?

Have you ever worked in a union shop? I have.

Do you have first hand experience with non-union and union jobs? I do.

Please come back when you get some real life experience.

You have experience working in developing, emerging and frontier markets?

You are comparing apples and oranges. There is no equivalence here.

Keep trying but you are blowing your argument.

 

[theeedude]

Many union participants would argue there is not freedom of association. They are forced to join and collectively bargain.

If they want the benefits of union negotiated contracts.