Posted on 11/05/2005 9:41:22 AM PST by DogByte6RER
Who do unions benefit?
By: RAY HAYNES
Just why do we have government employee unions? We all know the story of the rise of unionism in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Our country was being run by robber barons, the capitalist exploiters who would abuse children for profit and allow people to die in substandard working conditions while they sat in the lap of luxury.
Unions fought the evil employers, pushed for labor reforms, minimum wages, safe workplaces and, through their tireless effort, made sure that people received a fair day's wage for a fair day's work in a safe work environment. Government employees were hired to enforce these rules and, faced with the prospect of jail time, the evil capitalist reluctantly acceded to the government control.
At least that is how it is taught in the government schools, which are run by the government employee unions.
Even assuming that life was as bad as the unions say it was in the private sector before forced unionism, why did we ever have government employee unions? Was it because the government was an evil employer, putting people to work in an unsafe work environment for unfair wages, or was it just a way for union bosses to extract money from unwilling employees in order for those bosses to corrupt the political system?
I think most people would agree that something is seriously wrong with our current government employee unions here in California. In the Gray Davis years, they overreached, grabbing for exorbitant wage increases and excessive pension benefits, using their forced union dues to give millions of dollars to Gray Davis and the legislative Democrats, in order to force the state, school districts, cities and local governments of all types to unionize and pay their unionized employees wages beyond what the taxpayers could afford.
In 1998, the California government pension system, CalPERS, was $60 billion overfunded. By 2003, the Democrats had increased government pensions so much that taxpayers had to borrow $2.5 billion a year to keep the pension system solvent. During that same time, those unions contributed over $30 million to those Democrat politicians.
The number of state employees, paying these forced union dues, increased 47,000 in these two years. The government employee unions have corrupted the whole system. Now they are spending the money they forcibly extract from their members to trash the governor, spending almost $100 million of the money they steal from these government employees.
But why do they exist? Is a government job so unsafe, so underpaid, that only a union can protect the government employee? Or is the system a sophisticated extortion scheme designed to keep left-wing politicians in power in Sacramento?
This much we know: Government employees make about 25 percent more than their private sector counterparts, and get benefits that are without equal in the private sector. They have ideal working conditions, and legally protected job security. They don't need a union to protect them from an unscrupulous employer.
So, why do these unions really exist?
Ray Haynes represents the 66th Assembly District, which includes portions of Western Riverside County and Northern San Diego County.
Does puppy need a treat?
Another good argument against compulsory unionism.
I don't (and I bet most posters here don't either) have a problem with the existence of unions. Forced, compulsory union membership is a whole 'nother matter.
To ensure that personal freedom doesn't run rampant and create a free society.
You CANNOT have personal freedom without supporting networks of organizations and communities. Isolated individual cannot be free (unless people around him are organized).
I too am a current federal employee and I quit the AFGE union in the mid 90s (it is voluntary.) I am glad that the feds CANNOT go on strike. Imagine what would happen if FBI agents or Border Patrol officers or postal workers went on strike. America's security and infrastructure would be crippled.
That is why President Ronald Reagan correctly fired the striking federal air traffic controllers in 1981. The PATCO traffic controllers were paralyzing air trasportation throughout America.
People who sign up to work as government employees need to remember that their civil service is to the public for the benefit and good of society at large. When I was appointed to my position in the federal government I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and to protect America from enemies foreign and domestic. I did NOT take any oath giving my allegiance to a socialist brotherhood/group which does not have the interests of our nation's security and viability at heart.
To put it plainly, if you seek a job where there is minimal expectations and accountability of the workers, look for your job through the Teamsters. Government workers already have low expectations and have very little regard by the public as a whole. The last thing we need to do is to give them the indolence and arrogance of Teamster unionists (although workers at the DMV and the IRS already have this bad attitude!)
Your statement my FRiend is a Revelation.
My lack of support of YOUR agenda has left me dead.
Therefore you are now in communication to another dimension.
You are the epitome of the quest for freedom.
I wish that were so. My experience with unions is summed up largely by saying that they protect the very worst workers.
Some of the best workers I have ever had work for me were in Unions, but many had no real appreciation or respect for the goons that run them or the stooges that support those manipulative parasites.
Benfits themselves and every instance where they are connected to government, they are overpaid.
(Police, fire and military excluded)
union = socialism = communism
Mulch, your thinking is "spot on"!
At present, unions exist to support the DNC.
Both are scrambling for a say these day's.
Perhaps they walk hand in hand?
There was no middle class in this country until the advent of labor unions.
The elite that rule this country are all capitalists and they are intent on destroying the middle class and bringing us socialism.
I have a cousin who is a union organizer. He used to organize unions in private industry, but he switched to organizing government workers because private industry organizing was too difficult. "You always have to worry about profits in industry," he would say; "however, in government you don't have that worry because government represents a bottomless pit of money."
Mobsters, union officials and liberal politicians.
Post #31 - BTTT
Unions benefit unions.
Especially withg the huge influx of people who don't assimilate.
KMUA
Well, I have had a few personal experiences with unions when I was in the construction agency. The company that I worked for was non-union. Our guys were paid very well, in fact they were paid better than union guys. They had to work overtime a lot (but were well paid for it) and did not have the same protections (if they got drunk on the job, they could be fired, etc.).
Sometimes, however, we would have a job where the electrician was pre-selected by the client, and the electrician was union, or some sort of deal like that.
The union guys always slowed up the job. They were late, they didn't work, when they did work they did a crap job, etc.
This is just my one experience, but I since beleive that at least in the construction industry, unions exist solely to protect lazy workers from having to earn their pay.
True, but they can lobby the government to setup HR rules that prevent you from being fired even if you are totally incompetant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.