| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16033
Location: Colorado
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1499
Location: U.S.A.
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:54 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Unions have no place inside government; there is no reason they should exist. The government isn't some evil corporation; it's is under public control -- why should government workers need any more protection from the public than government regulations? Besides, if the government isn't taking care of its employees, nobody will want to work for it, and they'll be forced to get the private sector to provide the necessary services.
Public sector unions are why government workers are (on average) notoriously incompetent, unmotivated, and have such absolutely shitty customer service attitudes. Can you imagine a private company that operates like the DMV in most states? They'd as soon tell you to get fucked as take care of your needs. Can you imagine a private company where it's virtually impossible to fire anybody and they all automatically get raises and promotions regardless of their job performance or actual capabilities? If not, you've never worked in a U.S. Federal Government Agency.
Public sector unions are why we have police who get away with arresting people who take their pictures, teachers who are verifiable illiterates or teaching a subject they know less about than the students.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1205
Location: Jefferson, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| People, I'm sure, said that Reagan was GOP overreach. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16033
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@BK: Assumption being that unions are fixed, not remaining in existence as they have been. Eliminating unions is no better solution than keeping them as they exist.
@w: A person isn't inherently overreaching. Their policies potentially are. But you are correct. Some people thought he went too far.
Going back to what unions originally fought for/against, if we lose that, we're fucked. Obama will look like a picnic.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pjp, public sector unions must go. Private unions are of nobody's concern as long as everything is completely voluntary.
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16033
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I disagree unless it can be demonstrated that they are not necessary, which would require some kind of independent oversight. Which sounds a lot like a union.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | | I disagree unless it can be demonstrated that they are not necessary, which would require some kind of independent oversight. Which sounds a lot like a union. |
They were never necessary. They work for the government.
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16033
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't see how that matters. Private companies are, theoretically anyway, bound by labor laws.
One example would be rural postal carriers. The post office has (or at least had) awful policies & practices wrt their employment. They may have/had a union, but the working situation was significantly worse compared to non-rural workers.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1205
Location: Jefferson, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Are you going to opt for unionizing the military now? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16033
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Are you advocating slave labor, or maybe just a return of company towns?
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1205
Location: Jefferson, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 3:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| What's a company town? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16033
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Essentially coal or steel companies literally owning the town and every business in it. Employees must pay rent to the company, and purchase goods/services from company owned providers, etc. The company also decides your paycheck.
There's a specific term or example I was looking for, but can't find. This is good enough.
It was a rhetorical question to make a point. I don't believe you are, but I also think your question was equally preposterous.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 4:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | | I don't see how that matters. |
It matters because they negotiate their contracts with politicians using taxpayer money. Money taken from taxpayers, by force, is 'negotiated' between a union thug and and union thug friendly politician who guarantees sweetheart deals for the union in return for political support (campaign contributions etc) during the elections. So the taxpayer gets robbed even more, and the money taken from the taxpayer ends up in the pockets of the union bosses and dirty politicians. It's a vicious cycle of corruption.
With a private company, it's their own money that they negotiate with.
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1499
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | Essentially coal or steel companies literally owning the town and every business in it. Employees must pay rent to the company, and purchase goods/services from company owned providers, etc. The company also decides your paycheck.
There's a specific term or example I was looking for, but can't find. This is good enough.
It was a rhetorical question to make a point. I don't believe you are, but I also think your question was equally preposterous. |
Can you find any examples of Government employees who have used unionization to escape being forced to live in "company towns"?
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16033
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Muso wrote: | | So the taxpayer gets robbed even more, and the money taken from the taxpayer ends up in the pockets of the union bosses and dirty politicians. It's a vicious cycle of corruption. |
That is a theoretical and/or actual problem with them, but that doesn't inherently mean there is no value in having a union. The presentation made in the thread was that there is no need for one. Because it's the government, and there's no possible way workers could need a union. Also, see my comment about unions needing an overhaul.
@BK :facepalm:
EDIT:
Ignoring the part where I indicated I was making a point, or just plain ignoring that I never claimed there was a government company town to escape, that isn't the measure by which to determine the need for a union.
I accidentally came across a timely piece. | Quote: | | One of the more controversial initiatives of Governor King was a law requiring all school employees – including volunteers and contractors working in schools – to be fingerprinted by the Maine State Police, and to have background checks conducted on them. |
Clearly there could never be a need for a public union. Governments are saintly and honorable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_King#Tenure
If King wins his race, and I think he will, he will be an appealing figure. In a time of change, he will be considered for president in 2016.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sugar
Guru
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2012 7:28 am Post subject: Re: Union doom or GOP overreach? |
|
|
the focus should be on the public sector achieving certain social targets, rather than a dead end focus on costs.
Let's say I want to buy some beer. The non-alcoholic beer is half the price of the regular beer. I won't buy the non-alcoholic beer, because I want to get drunk, and it doesn't meet my minimum quality standards for this kind of product. Therefore, *before* any discussion about price, there must be a discussion about quality.
_________________
Jesus Could Be Their Candidate and the Republicans Would Still Lose |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2012 8:53 am Post subject: Re: Union doom or GOP overreach? |
|
|
| sugar wrote: | | the focus should be on the public sector achieving certain social targets, rather than a dead end focus on costs. |
The focus should be on what the actual taxpayers (not the leeches who pay no income tax) want from their government employees.
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
juniper
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 756
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2012 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
i am not sure where I am on this debate because I have seen some unions get damn sweet deals.
tube drivers to make 50k by 2015. this is a job for which there is little training. Nurses, teachers and a whole host of other rather important professions make far less. We pay extortionate fares here for the tube (the london tube is the most expensive in the world. the zone 1/2 rush hour single fare is £2.70 (=4.17 USD). just outrageous).
The underground isn't run publicly; it is a public private partnership.
that being said, other workers (aforementioned nurses and teachers) need a good union. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16033
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2012 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Unions are a rusty spoon. Pay one group X, then another group thinks it is unfair and wants more.
If you need tube drivers in a very expensive city, skill & training can't be the primary decision point for pay.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1499
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| juniper wrote: | | The underground isn't run publicly; it is a public private partnership. |
A public-private partnership that inherited a union as part of the deal, no doubt.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
