- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
As the SCOTUS rules on public unions in 2018, prepare for lots of media sympathy
Posted on 10/4/17 at 12:58 pm
Posted on 10/4/17 at 12:58 pm
I have never had this question answered by anyone who supports the right of gov't employees to unionize.
Who is trying to exploit you?
The whole reason there was an effort to unionize private workers was because the boss/company/capitalist tried to lower pay and cut safety costs because it increased his profits. Somebody is BETTER OFF FINANCIALLY, in theory, when private workers are mistreated.
What is the comparable entity in the public sector? There is no profit. There is no person or persons who makes more money because government workers see their pay get cut or their safety standards lowered.
So why do you need a union when nobody is out to get you?
As jonah goldberg over at national review humorously notes:
Who is trying to exploit you?
The whole reason there was an effort to unionize private workers was because the boss/company/capitalist tried to lower pay and cut safety costs because it increased his profits. Somebody is BETTER OFF FINANCIALLY, in theory, when private workers are mistreated.
What is the comparable entity in the public sector? There is no profit. There is no person or persons who makes more money because government workers see their pay get cut or their safety standards lowered.
So why do you need a union when nobody is out to get you?
As jonah goldberg over at national review humorously notes:
quote:
Government unions have no such narrative on their side. Do you recall the Great DMV Cave-in of 1959? How about the travails of second-grade teachers recounted in Upton Sinclair’s famous schoolhouse sequel to The Jungle? No? Don’t feel bad, because no such horror stories exist.
This post was edited on 10/4/17 at 1:00 pm
7
Posted on 10/4/17 at 12:59 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
protection, my friend. protection.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 1:00 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Prepare for me and millions like not to GAF what the media or the unions think.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 1:10 pm to CAD703X
quote:protection from what?
protection, my friend. protection.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 1:11 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
protection from what?
Being held accountable and made to do your job.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 1:13 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
This could be a really, really big deal.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 1:17 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
So why do you need a union when nobody is out to get you?
To have the collective power to get what they want. If there ever is a taxpayer's albatross it is us having to pay for their retirement system. That's right, you and me are paying for someone's else's retirement. Doesn't get much more disgusting that that.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 1:31 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
like my old co-worker used to say if you were looking for sympathy: you can find it in the dictionary between shite and syphilis.
I cant get behind this idea of unionized government employees, but I am no legal scholar. what is the crux of the legal argument being made?
I cant get behind this idea of unionized government employees, but I am no legal scholar. what is the crux of the legal argument being made?
Posted on 10/4/17 at 1:33 pm to Homesick Tiger
With teachers, it's not about pay. It's about limits to what administration can make them do. They chomp at the bit to reduce preparation time, increase mandatory meetings, and eliminate lunches. Administrators always try to do these things. I had to call them out at every school I taught at.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 2:17 pm to 9th life
quote:
I cant get behind this idea of unionized government employees, but I am no legal scholar. what is the crux of the legal argument being made?
They cannot engage in a strike, and pay and benefits are set by Congress.
Management sets all rights to assign work (so, using my agency as an example, the union can't demand five full-time employees on a large audit if management decides only two are needed) and to contract out work (that's why we have a crap IT department which we think is Russian or Chinese owned--they cannot answer even the most basic of questions).
Really the only thing they can do is handle grievances when someone thinks management is out to get them. Though in many cases they're simply wanting to avoid doing any real work, sadly I know some a-hole managers who do use employees as whipping persons and thus the grievances are legit in some cases.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:58 pm to Quidam65
No, their real purpose in recent history is to collect dues with which to support Democratic candidates who will support them with higher wages andbenefits.
That will be the critical issue, whether they can mandate dues payment by all workers
That will be the critical issue, whether they can mandate dues payment by all workers
Posted on 10/4/17 at 4:52 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
There should be no federal unions.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 5:08 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:
To have the collective power to get what they want. If there ever is a taxpayer's albatross it is us having to pay for their retirement system. That's right, you and me are paying for someone's else's retirement. Doesn't get much more disgusting that that.
Yeah it's so criminal helping pay someone's retirement who worked in the public sector. Lol. What a crybaby bunch of bs.
Money is actually withdrawn from every single check in the public sector and goes towards your retirement. It is invested to earn interest. Maybe next time get a f****** clue
Posted on 10/4/17 at 5:15 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
This is true, but I suspect it's like legal/illegal immigration in that nobody actually has opinions on government and private unions, just unions.
(I personally think there's a case for strengthening private unions.)
(I personally think there's a case for strengthening private unions.)
Posted on 10/4/17 at 5:28 pm to Iosh
For reference, I asked this same question today on my Facebook to a relative who is in the AFSCME and he said taxpayers get lower taxes at his expense, so the tax payers are trying to exploit him
I guess that's a fair answer in theory. A politician could run on a platform of lowering taxes by cutting municipal worker pay
I guess that's a fair answer in theory. A politician could run on a platform of lowering taxes by cutting municipal worker pay
Posted on 10/4/17 at 5:34 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Ideally, that's what "run government like a business" means. You pay the lowest price the market will bear. (In practice it mostly means lobbyist tugjobs.)
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News