Is it over for the unions?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Princess Doreen

The government is worse at attempting to run a business only they're not going to run out of money because they'll just keep taxing to pay for their over spending.

That's why the best run governments (cities, towns, villages, etc) hire professional managers to tend to the budget and business, while the elected officials do politics.

I recall that some of the newer young policemen of the town I grew up within wanted to unionize. Now, these police and firemen had always been well-paid, with good benefits. As this town grew, the money grew, it was well-managed, and everyone benefited: everything was well-funded: great schools, great parks, great public works, great public servants w/good equipment. So nobody saw the need for a union.

Finally the cops who wanted to unionize, got to unionize. The cops who didn't, did not. The union cops bargained their own agreement, even while management was telling them they would get more in the end if they didn't collectively bargain. They didn't believe it. Three years later, the police and fire who didn't collectively bargain, but just depended upon regular COLA and raises, were earning about $2,000 a year more per pay grade than the union guys.

[somerfrost]

Unions literally saved the lives of thousands of workers and enabled them to provide for their families. Over time, unions have become less responsive to their members and more political. That needs to change but there will always be a need for unions as the myth of "trickle down" will never become a reality without the ability of workers to stand up to the rich.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

That's why the best run governments (cities, towns, villages, etc) hire professional managers to tend to the budget and business, while the elected officials do politics.

I recall that some of the newer young policemen of the town I grew up within wanted to unionize. Now, these police and firemen had always been well-paid, with good benefits. As this town grew, the money grew, it was well-managed, and everyone benefited: everything was well-funded: great schools, great parks, great public works, great public servants w/good equipment. So nobody saw the need for a union.

Finally the cops who wanted to unionize, got to unionize. The cops who didn't, did not. The union cops bargained their own agreement, even while management was telling them they would get more in the end if they didn't collectively bargain. They didn't believe it. Three years later, the police and fire who didn't collectively bargain, but just depended upon regular COLA and raises, were earning about $2,000 a year more per pay grade than the union guys.

So things actually work without unions? and sometimes for the better? So why the argument so much for unions to be able to collectively bargain?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

So things actually work without unions? and sometimes for the better? So why the argument so much for unions to be able to collectively bargain?

Because people have the right to collectively bargain. You know, that Constitution thingy ...

[SOREHOOF]

Originally Posted by Riot

Because people have the right to collectively bargain. You know, that Constitution thingy ...

I can't let this slide. Where in the wild, wild, world of sports does the Constitution breathe one word about "collective bargaining"? Help me out here Riot.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

I can't let this slide. Where in the wild, wild, world of sports does the Constitution breathe one word about "collective bargaining"? Help me out here Riot.

I was wondering if anyone else would comment on this. I honestly have given up trying to reason with Riot especially when she makes comments like collective bargaining is a protected right in the constitution. Her statements mostly speak for themselves.

[SOREHOOF]

I don't think she's ever been in a Union. I have.
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am10.html

[Danzig]

riot may be referening the labor relations act regarding collective bargaining, which was upheld by a supreme court decision...so, just as abortion is considered a 'constitutional right', so is collective bargaining...it's not stated, it's implied i suppose.


however, state govts are exempt from said act, thus exempt from having to allow collective bargaining. an interesting turn of events there. it appears that altho people might not like the ledge and govs moves regarding collective bargaining, i don't know there's much that can be done now-until the next election of course.

i do find it interesting that a move that ostensibly takes one persons right away instead confers that right on the union. you see, when you unionize, you can no longer approach the higher ups on your own about something. the union does it for you-so didn't you just give away your right to free speech? the union votes, the majority decides. so, if you don't like something, but the majority disagrees, tough titties for you. the union doesn't take up your cause. the constitution protects even the most unpopular minority-westboro baptist church for instance. not the same for a union. they attempt to protect the group as a whole, but not so much an individual unless a grievance is filed. and i believe the grievance has to be deemed legit by the union.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

I was wondering if anyone else would comment on this. I honestly have given up trying to reason with Riot especially when she makes comments like collective bargaining is a protected right in the constitution. Her statements mostly speak for themselves.

Well, it would be so much easier for you, I'm sure, if you wouldn't misread or misstate what I've said, or say I've said things that I have not. Just a suggestion

[wiphan]

Here is what has been collectively bargained for

http://walker.wi.gov/journal_media_d...=177&prid=5675


What about the kids? Class size? Oh yeah it is about the $ really

[Riot]

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

I can't let this slide. Where in the wild, wild, world of sports does the Constitution breathe one word about "collective bargaining"? Help me out here Riot.

Wow. I forgot you were so literal. Sorry.

I never said the right to form a union was contained in the Constitution. The Constitution lays out the basic tenets of the laws of our land. The Supreme Court interprets laws we make in light of the Constitution. The right to form unions, and to collectively bargain, has been deemed legal under our Constitutional rights for decades.

And yes, I recall that I was a member of a union for 4 years in my 20's. ASFCME