HELL, NO !
No.
There is no need for adherence to realistic pay schedules when the employer is the government, which doesn’t have to abide by the same rules as business.
If the government overpays people, they do so with OPM (other people’s money) and are immune to immediate (or even eventual) correction by market forces.
imagine if the kids have the ability to create an union against their parents.
Hell, NO too!
Collective bargaining as defined from a piece by Mish Shedlock at his blog site:
“direct your attention to Shane Atwell’s rock-solid rationale as to why collective bargaining is extortion.
‘Collective bargaining’ is not what its name indicates. In fact, it means exactly the opposite of what you’d guess. Collective bargaining refers to the obligation of an employer to recognize the elected representatives of a group of workers and his further obligation to negotiate with those representatives. This last part is what makes ‘collective bargaining’ extortion.
Under collective bargaining laws, employers have to recognize an elected union and have to negotiate with them.
Imagine if the tables were turned and employers had the right to ‘employer bargaining’, under which the employer could demand whatever pay reductions or workday increases he wanted, the employees had to negotiate with the employer, and employees couldn’t quit!
[Such an arrangement] could only be classified as slavery.
The right to terminate the employer-employee relationship is a fundamental right of both employer and employee. Employment should be mutually beneficial to employer and employee and open to termination by either when it becomes non-beneficial (limited of course by any voluntary contractual agreements).
Collective bargaining laws have achieved two things for unions and union members. First the negotiations strongly tend in one direction until the employer moves his operations offshore [or to another state not subject to collective bargaining]. This ratcheting is inevitable given that employers are forbidden their ultimate tool: terminating employment.
Second, the misnamed [term] ‘collective bargaining’ has given an aura of moral righteousness to the unions who pretend to be fighting for true American values like the freedom of association. [However], they are fighting for values quite foreign to [the United States], values that come from Marxist collectivism, i.e. the expropriation of the property of employers and the negation of their rights.
[Therefore, wages and benefits garnered under collective bargaining arrangements are fraudulent in nature and should therefore be subject to revision.]
Contact your representatives and urge them to fight collective bargaining. [Please] support ballot initiatives [to restrict or eliminate collective bargaining] when they appear.
Any text in brackets above is mine. Thanks Shane. And good luck to Lanny Ebenstein in his mission to help right the wrongs in California.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock”
50% YES, 49% NO - ONLY 51 VOTES THUS FAR.
No 55% 34
Yes 44% 27
total votes: 61
NO!
Don’t the tax payers pay for a large portion of their health care?
“Unions” imply strikes, and public workers should not be allowed to strike.
The idea of “working for the public” means something like “working for the greater good”.
I know, I know. Worn out concepts...
No. We can thank John F. Kennedy for this debacle. Public sector unions received a boost in 1962 when President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10988, which granted bargaining rights to federal employees. The pace of organizing among all public sector unions subsequently accelerated.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=58926
Hell if this Keeps up the Unions will need more dues to Bus all The Protestors around the Country!!!!!
Keep it up ,sorry Ineed some Relief I live in Connecticut and we Have a Newly Elected Democrat Governer and Democrat Legislature Forever and we are Getting a 1.5 billion dollar Tax Increase ON EVERYTHING,but dont worry the Gov Is asking the Unions for 1 billion in Concessions which I am Positive he will Get ! HA
NO!!! And I say that as a public employee. (Local govt)
Civil serpents should not be able to bargain labor agreements with the state. They should be free to join and support employee associations which lobby the government, as any other citizen can, but not bargain contracts.
We also need state laws along the lines of the federal Hatch Act, enacted in the late 30’s in response to exactly the same abuses at the federal level that are commonplace in state and local government today: civil serpents engaging in partisan political activity while on the government payroll. Citizens have a constitutional right to engage in partisan political activity. They do not, however, have a constitutional right to a government job.
I was teaching a class years ago for a group of about 40 state civil serpents. A union goon came into the room just before lunch and announced to the group that department heads had authorized anyone who wanted to attend a Mondale rally that afternoon to do so. I only had about three people for the afternoon session, and I imagine many other non-essential (i.e., most of them) government employees in the city were at the rally, being paid by the taxpayer while cheering on their leftist democrat hero. I’d be willing to bet that the same thing occurred in Obama’s election campaign: if you had the ability to identify the participants in the rallies, you would very likely find a large percentage were government employees, most being paid by the taxpayer while cheering Odumbo on. This is simply completely intolerable.
Uhm, NO!
No 70% 211
Yes 29% 90
total votes: 301
Come on we can do better than this .. only 301 votes???
The problem with public sector unions is that they use their vast pot of dues to make lavish campaign contributions to the very politicians who give them what they want ...in essence bribery or at the very lest a conflict of interest. Let them have their unions and collective bargaining, but make it illegal for any public sector union to make political contributions of any kind monetary or non monetary.