"Public good" workers shouldn't be unionized

Great Debates
61

Interesting because these are all positions I was in and was protected by the union, either by having a union rep present or through contract negotiation. I believe the ball is now in your court.

[QUOTE=magellan01]
Because 1) their job exists solely to benefit the community and 2) there’s no other entity to replace them.

I’ll go a bit further and add that I think that the only people who should be able to have the power of a union to negotiate are workers who can be replaced fairly easily. You can’t fire the police department and hire a bunch of guys from down the street when their holding you up for more goodies. In today’s world, I think any worker should be allowed to “strike” to get what they want. If they don’t think you are worth it, they can hire someone else. If their calculation is wrong then the company will suffer and eventually go out of business to the guy down the street who saw the value you claimed and hired you. Anything else is prettified blackmail.
[/QUOTE]

So let me get this straight. If someone chooses to get a job in the public sector, a job that by your own admission is one that most others cannot do, you believe that they should give up their rights to unionize for their own benefit since they have committed to the public good?

62

So you had a rep, and you were still in that position?

63

I think they pretty clearly mean that they were in those positions, but were able to get out of them with the help of union representation.

Without union representation, what then? That’s the point.

64

You need to read for comprehension.
“these are all positions I was in and was protected by the union, either by having a union rep present or through contract negotiation. I believe the ball is now in your court.”

Even if union negotiation hadn’t been successful, having the option for collective bargaining that isn’t fully successful is still better than having no option for collective bargaining and no chance of success.

65

And you need to quit being so fucking condescending. It’s seriously getting old.

What he wrote was not clear. Was he or was he not required to use his own money to buy supplies? If he was not, is it clear that it was union representation that prevented it?

Why don’t you jump up his ass about writing for clarity?

66

Yes, it was.
There really are no valid divergent interpretations of “I was in those situations and was protected by my union.” It’s clear beyond dispute. Those situations came up. He was protected by his union.

67

:roll eyes: No, I’m not saying that. And did not say that. Hell, you quoted what I said. But then felt the need to change it for some reason. Odd. But let’s clarify anyway. The JOB exists to serve the community. The Town Dog Catcher job exists solely to benefit the community. The person exists to benefit himself, and other if he so chooses. He accepts pay to perform the service the community needs so he can provide for himself and his family. If the town in which the Dog Cather job exists was to miraculously never encounter a dog, it would be dumb to pay someone to do that job, as it would offer no benefit to the community. If you disagree, perhaps you should suggest that your town employ you as Unicorn Tamer or Dragon Slayer.

Ha. I must have missed you calling me a socialist. Damn, I always like a good laugh. Can you point to the accusation. I’ve been called lots of things on this board, but I think you’re the first to try “socialist”. Good stuff. Particularly for what it says of your powers of reasoning.

[QUOTE=Little Nemo;14980669Me, I’m not a communist. I don’t think the people exist to serve the government. I think the government exists to serve the people.[/QUOTE]

And what of the positions the government devises, like Dog Catcher, Mayor, Police Commissioner, or Secretary of Defense? All of those jobs exist solely to serve, to benefit, the community. If it doesn’t benefit the community, the job should cease to exist, right?

68

See my immediate previous response.

69

Is it a just a coincidence that the decline of the middle class correlates with the decline of unions in America?

70

Nope…It is quite clear that our form of organized labor as forced through the huge unions and the NLRB is quite ineffective in producing workers that are appropriate for the new world.

Automation is becoming cheaper than people and those people are not migrating to non-labor jobs.

This is not an issue with organized labor as a concept but our current system as it sits is pretty much an engine to produce mediocrity, despite the efforts of the workers.

71

I do and I agree but I still don’t see how that carries over to preventing the person with the job (in your example, dogcatcher) from exercising the same employment rights everyone else does.

The only way yours and Sicks Ate’s arguement makes any sense if if you believe the people that go into these professions that by your own admission need specialized training or knowledge as a form of community service. This does happen. I know of at least one small community (80 people) where the mayor is an unpaid part-time position and there are plenty of volunteer fire districts around. Certainly people in the military give up a lot of employment rights while serving their country.

I think where the disagreement lies is that if that is what you demand of your public servants, good luck finding enough qualified teachers, police, fire, judges, dogcatchers etc. to provide those services to a reasonable standard. I quit working at a district (actually did not sign a new contract) because there was ongoing employment abuse and no union. Guess what, so did a lot of other excellent teachers (for example there is only one NBCT left in the district and she will be leaving at the end of this year).

So if you want to run your state with the expectation that public sector employees are truly servants then that’s fine but you may want to look at what is happening in Wisconsin.

72

I had to buy my own teaching supplies to do my job when schools refused to buy them. Believe it or not, two black whiteboard markers do not last all year.

I had to buy supplies for students because it was required by state law that a student without supplies must be given them even if the student/parent can afford them on their own. The school told teachers that the law was that the TEACHER needs to provide material to students. One teacher found the law and saw that the LEA via the school needed to give the supplies and asked the school the provide them and quoted the law. The school refused and threatened to write up the teacher for insubordination. She walked into a meeting with the principal and her union rep.

The next day we all had a box of pencils and a ream of paper for student use.

[QUOTE=Sicks Ate]
Should I be required to work outside of my contracted hours for no pay because I serve the public?

No. One course of action would be to quit. Another might be to make it known at a meeting of the school board, or the PTA. Or call the newspaper.
[/QUOTE]

I’m confused. I shouldn’t be required BUT the solution is to quit? That sounds pretty non-optional to me. Oh and without a union, if I had complained publically I would have been fired immediately. How do I know this? People were fired for complaining and for discussing starting a union and in one case fired on the spot for telling their principal they were talking to an attorney about the district employment practices*.

*She was unfired when they found out she had recorded the conversation.

73

Don’t get upset with me just because I pointed out how silly what you wrote was. I’m sure you didn’t mean to write something silly but you should think more about what you’re writing to avoid this.

For example, “The JOB exists to serve the community”. Of course it does. But nobody is talking about the job joining a union. We’re talking about the employee joining a union.

But you said that an employee shouldn’t be allowed to join a union if their job is working for the government. Now if you had thought about what you were saying, you’d have realized that you were saying that people exist to serve the government and not the other way around. Which is silly.

The government exists to serve the people or at least it should in a democracy. If the rights of the people make things more difficult for the government, then the government should just suck it up and work harder. You don’t sacrifice people’s rights for government convenience.

Your idea that the people should surrender their rights to the government for the good of the community is one of the hallmarks of communism. I know you didn’t mean to support communism but that’s what you ended up doing. Like I said, think about what you’re saying and what it means.

74

In the portion of my post that you quoted, I linked to this article, and quoted this:

Total employer compensation cost in 2011 averaged $40.76 per hour for state and local workers; for private industry workers it was $28.24 per hour. The disparities are also big for federal workers. A janitor working for Uncle Sam makes $30,110 a year, while his or her private-sector peer makes $24,188. Federal graphic designers, “recreation workers,” and even P.R. flacks all make between 50 percent and 100 percent more than their private-sector colleagues.

So we are not comparing white-collar public workers to private-sector WalMart cashiers. We’re comparing government janitors to privately employed janitors, public school teachers to private school teachers, government graphic designers to private industry graphic designers. And when we do, we find that the public employees get much higher pay and many more benefits.

That article comes from 20 years ago, whereas the article I quoted was published this week. I see no reason to doubt that your article was correct at the time it was published. The phenomenon of public sector unions grabbing up a larger and larger share of the budget pie is fairly recent. As I pointed out in a previous post, state and local government budgets have shot up by 60% in one decade, with most of the increase going to salaries and pensions for government workers.

75

Just to add to the fire, I don’t know what requirements are in graphic design, janitorial staff, etc. but in teaching:

Private school: Bachelor’s degree in any field

Public school: Bachelor’s degree, credentialing classes (often at masters level), tests to prove subject and pedagogy knowledge, fingerprint clearance (required for all public school employees - not sure in private school), state-required professional development - around 120-150 hours every 5 years.

76

Nearly all of the inefficiencies in union pay are pension-related. Simply put, non-union jobs simply don’t have pensions anymore, and even 401ks are being eviscerated. We’re in a sad state where a large portion of the population has to choose between “never retire” and “drag down the economy.”

77

You should just try to digest the words I write and not spend so much effort on trying to spin them into something I did not write nor mean.

That’s what I said it.

:roll eyes: Yes. And my “the job exists to serve the community” was in support of my position. So you agree with my support. Good. I guess.

Yes.

Nope. You’re conclusion is what is silly, i.e., fallacious.

Yes.

This makes no sense. You do realize that the government is made up of the populace , right? And exist to serve it, right?

I’m not.

Nope. Ha! One clue to the absurdity of what you’re conjuring up in your head in regards to my position is that you’re classifying me as a communist. (And, evidently, a socialist, earlier, but you refused to give a cite for that.) That’s rich. This is the first charge I’m hearing of me being anywhere near the left end of the spectrum. Perhaps you’re angling for a free dinner at Mindy’s.

Now, you may be of the opinion that just because someone might not belong to a union that they are without means to improve their job situation. That’s false on it’s face, as there are million and millions of people who do that without the weight of a union at their backs. Is this really news to you?

Here’s an idea that may help you get over your infatuation with characterizing this—or any position I’ve ever held—as anything near socialism or communism: if having a union do your bidding is so important to you, don’t take a job where there is no union.

78

I’m trying to find links that substantiate this.

In my state, so far as I can determine, both Catholic school teachers and public school teachers must be licensed. I don’t see any of the additional requirements you mention for public school teachers in Fairfax County, the county i chose to search. Perhaps I’m missing them?

ETA: the point is that some of theose requirements are part of the licensing process, but that process applies to both private and public schools. I think.

79

Doubtful. Most states have no official certification requirements for private schools. Only public schools fall under the aegis of state education departments. If catholic schools require prerequisites equivalent to certification, that’s their choice and not a non-negotiable requirement like it is on the state level due to NCLB.

80

People in non-critical jobs (like teaching, for instance) are one thing, but critical jobs (like police, or firefighting) should be required to do their job until their contract is up. In comparison, we have one set of jobs that is very clearly structured this way - in the military, once you join, you cannot choose to leave, you cannot decide not to do your job in order to argue for better conditions, you do what you are told until your contract is up, or you are brought up on charges.

I would therefore argue that critical jobs that the public cannot effectively do without should be similarly handled. Criteria essentially being: anything that even a relatively short disruption of, has the high likelihood of causing immediate and widespread damage to people, infrastructure, or property. The prospective employee should sign a contract for a certain period of service, and until that service is complete, they should not have the option to either leave or refuse to do the job. ‘Blue flu’ and people organizing themselves to call in sick at the same time can similarly be headed off with rules against any conspiracy to negatively impact the performance of the job. Off-hand, the main jobs I can think of that I would include here are law enforcement and the fire department - a city without law enforcement will quickly find itself prey to looters and violent criminals of all sorts, and a city without a fire department will probably have widespread fires and such. Garbage collection could be considered within that criteria, but I suspect that since it requires no special training, no particular efforts are needed to retain existing employees: sanitation workers can refuse to do their jobs, be fired and be replaced before the problem causes significant disease and therefore a widespread public health hazard. I imagine there may be a couple other jobs that are similar in nature and fall within the aforementioned criteria that I’m not immediately thinking of as well, though.

Part of the key of a system like this is that people need to be enticed to sign those contracts (and renew if possible) so if working conditions in such a field are terrible, it’s likely something will have to change in order to keep the necessary number of employees, or many will not renew their contracts, word about the conditions spreads, and others do not sign up in the first place. Consider how the military deals with this in times when more soldiers are needed: they up the incentives to sign up, offering higher pay, benefits, etc.

Jobs like teaching, on the other hand, are not so critical as to cause immediate widespread damage should they not be performed for a time. So, something like a teacher’s union? I’m not sure where I would actually stand, if I had to answer the question in a forum where my answer has meaningful effects. Teaching is very important, but it’s also something that can be delayed for a time without catastrophic effects. If the union is making unreasonable demands that the public/legislature is unwilling to meet, there is no emergency need to get them back to work quickly; they can all be fired, and take as much time as is needed to hire replacements.