jkm, the stolen pifwafwi
2/23/2010, 12:29 PM
i'm kind of a strange conservative in that i'm pro-union in the private sector. companies in the private sector are driven at a macro level by profit and at a micro level by managerial income. the profit is the key balancing term though, if the company is in the red, they are eventually going to go under (assuming not "to big to fail"). so there is an overwhelming force to not just lowball employees, but to bind them into contracts that make it impossible for them to leave so that they can lowball them further.
unions, in my view, tend to be a check on that process by standing up for the workforce and minimizing corporate greed. they also give employees a secondary outlet about work conditions, company corner cutting that can potentially go unheard in a non-union environment.
these pioneering areas by unions tend to trickle down to other types of employees over time (worker rights, overtime rules, child labor, etc). unfortunately for the workers, their isn't a check on the union's greed, so a lot of times the union ends up being shortsighted and doing more harm than good. not unusual when you deal with people who don't actually produce anything :(
i'd actually also argue that the private sector would benefit from more worker advocasy groups (call them union lite), that could take over a lot of jacked up processes within companies - things like whistleblower hotlines that almost always are answered by admiral ackbar on the other end especially for underage workers (http://www.ocregister.com/news/moore-230812-starbucks-records.html )
now what does this have to do with public sector workers unions?
well, its pretty simple - what motivates a government to keep wages down? it isn't like if they have a deficit they are going to go under and fire everyone. they are just going to either borrow money or raise taxes on their population to get back to zero.
so what ends up happening is that public sector unions end up getting 10x the sweetheart deal for their employees than private sector unions.
this is a fox opinion source so take it with a grain of salt
http://www.thefoxnation.com/business/2010/02/09/government-workers-make-45-more-private-sector-employees
whether its 45% or 10%, it doesn't matter - the deck is severely stacked on the side of those who collectively bargain. so they take advantage of it on both ends (current wage vs retirement). they can and do stack it even further in their favor by pouring millions into the coffers of candidates that will give them still further sweetheart deals.
and therein lies why this process is broken, they can give one person a million bucks who then spreads the resultant 100 million on the backs of 3-10 million taxpayers.
unions, in my view, tend to be a check on that process by standing up for the workforce and minimizing corporate greed. they also give employees a secondary outlet about work conditions, company corner cutting that can potentially go unheard in a non-union environment.
these pioneering areas by unions tend to trickle down to other types of employees over time (worker rights, overtime rules, child labor, etc). unfortunately for the workers, their isn't a check on the union's greed, so a lot of times the union ends up being shortsighted and doing more harm than good. not unusual when you deal with people who don't actually produce anything :(
i'd actually also argue that the private sector would benefit from more worker advocasy groups (call them union lite), that could take over a lot of jacked up processes within companies - things like whistleblower hotlines that almost always are answered by admiral ackbar on the other end especially for underage workers (http://www.ocregister.com/news/moore-230812-starbucks-records.html )
now what does this have to do with public sector workers unions?
well, its pretty simple - what motivates a government to keep wages down? it isn't like if they have a deficit they are going to go under and fire everyone. they are just going to either borrow money or raise taxes on their population to get back to zero.
so what ends up happening is that public sector unions end up getting 10x the sweetheart deal for their employees than private sector unions.
this is a fox opinion source so take it with a grain of salt
http://www.thefoxnation.com/business/2010/02/09/government-workers-make-45-more-private-sector-employees
whether its 45% or 10%, it doesn't matter - the deck is severely stacked on the side of those who collectively bargain. so they take advantage of it on both ends (current wage vs retirement). they can and do stack it even further in their favor by pouring millions into the coffers of candidates that will give them still further sweetheart deals.
and therein lies why this process is broken, they can give one person a million bucks who then spreads the resultant 100 million on the backs of 3-10 million taxpayers.