The Great Union-Busting Thread

[derspiess]

There certainly is a problem with public education in the US, just as there is a problem with private health care.  These are  systemic problems, though, not ones that lie at the feet of teachers and doctors and nurses.  

Is it not possible that we have underperforming teachers in public schools?  I think many teachers are overpaid; I also think many are underpaid. 

If wages and benefits are out of line (and i am not sure that they are), then a responsible leadership will rein them in, even if that means taking on powerful interests.  It seems clear to me that all of the current efforts to rein in sending on public sector compensation are not created equal.  walker's approach, for instance, seems to me to be far less intelligent and principled than the approach  taken by Mitch Daniels in Indiana, for instance.

Less principled?  Sure, but it was political reality.  Not because Police & firefighter unions supported Walker, mind you (they didn't) but because he had to pick his battles.  Police officers & firefighters tend to be more popular than teachers; could you imagine how increased the increased shitstorm in Madison & in the media if they were added to the equation?

[grumbler]

Is it not possible that we have underperforming teachers in public schools? 

How is it possible that we don't have under-performing teachers?   We have under-performing workers in every other field.

Less principled?  Sure, but it was political reality.  Not because Police & firefighter unions supported Walker, mind you (they didn't) but because he had to pick his battles.  Police officers & firefighters tend to be more popular than teachers; could you imagine how increased the increased shitstorm in Madison & in the media if they were added to the equation?

Political reality was that the firefighters' and police unions did support Walker.  Walker has a political shitstorm because he deliberately provoked a political shitstorm.  Adding police and firefighters would have made no difference at worst and may have helped at best - as it made no difference or even helped when Daniels took the principled approach to this same problem in Indiana.  Walker appears to believe that the more bitter and partisan he can make the battle, the better-off he is.  I am thinking he is guaranteeing himself a single term, instead.

[crazy canuck]

Actually, they do.  Unions cannot survive if they're not in some way protected form being fired wholesale and replaced with non-union workers.

Sure they can.  If they manage to organize all skilled workers in a given area, management has no choice but to deal with them.

Unions need legislative protection to exist.  But necessarily the kind DGuller is referring to.  The most significant legislative requirement is that an employer is obligated to deal only with the union (and not individual bargaining unit members) when discussing terms of employment.  Without that legislative requirement Unions would have signficantly less power even if they did manage to organize and certify a particular bargaining unit.

[crazy canuck]

I think many teachers are overpaid; I also think many are underpaid. 

I am not sure how one comes to such a conclusion.  Overpaid or underpaid relative to what?  Most teachers' salaries are dictated by the financial constraints of the Government who pays them rather than the actual value they represent.  Typically private school teachers are paid more but the lower salaries of their publicly paid counterparts creates a downdrag on those wages since there is a large pool of able teachers for whom a slighly larger pay increase would be attractive.

Its always hard to assign a particular value to a job that has little immediate economic impact and the situation is more complicated for teachers since the job they do arguably has very significant long term economic impact.  Imo we should be paying as much as needed to attract the best and brightest to the profession of teaching.  If in your observation we are not doing so then that is good evidence that teachers are underpaid.

[Strix]

Unions need legislative protection to exist.  But necessarily the kind DGuller is referring to.  The most significant legislative requirement is that an employer is obligated to deal only with the union (and not individual bargaining unit members) when discussing terms of employment.  Without that legislative requirement Unions would have signficantly less power even if they did manage to organize and certify a particular bargaining unit.

Welcome to New York State. There is nothing quite like working in a closed shop Union state.

[MadImmortalMan]

From what I've seen, teachers make a similar amount whether they're public or private here. Our main problem is that the money we spend on education doesn't make it to the classroom. My mom's class has 30 kids and the state spends 10k per kid on education every year---that's $300,000 to run that class. Of course, some will be siphoned off for other expenses, but the amount that actually makes it to the class is a very small fraction of that.

[crazy canuck]

Unions need legislative protection to exist.  But necessarily the kind DGuller is referring to.  The most significant legislative requirement is that an employer is obligated to deal only with the union (and not individual bargaining unit members) when discussing terms of employment.  Without that legislative requirement Unions would have signficantly less power even if they did manage to organize and certify a particular bargaining unit.

Welcome to New York State. There is nothing quite like working in a closed shop Union state.

I think all Provinces in Canada are closed shop.  It is really the sine qua non of unions.  If it is not a closed shop a union is nothing more than just another potential stake holder.

[Strix]

Unions need legislative protection to exist.  But necessarily the kind DGuller is referring to.  The most significant legislative requirement is that an employer is obligated to deal only with the union (and not individual bargaining unit members) when discussing terms of employment.  Without that legislative requirement Unions would have signficantly less power even if they did manage to organize and certify a particular bargaining unit.

Welcome to New York State. There is nothing quite like working in a closed shop Union state.

I think all Provinces in Canada are closed shop.  It is really the sine qua non of unions.  If it is not a closed shop a union is nothing more than just another potential stake holder.

I know. I just find it funny that some people (not you) put the cart before the horse when it comes to Union work. They seem to feel that people join a Union to get a job when the reality is that most public jobs are Union Shops where you get the job than have to support the Union financially regardless if you join or not.

(and yes, I meant Union Shop and not Closed Shop as I am sure several replies will bring up the Taft-Hartley Act)

[Habbaku]

This is a reply bringing up the Taft-Hartley Act.

[Razgovory]

I don't think unions should be made illegal, but I would love it if the NLRA was ever repealed.  Unions don't need unfair advantages enforced by federal law when it comes to organizing battles.

Actually, they do.  Unions cannot survive if they're not in some way protected form being fired wholesale and replaced with non-union workers.

I'll give you an example of a good "union".

At my new job I will be represented by the Alberta Crown Attorney's Association.  Now, it technically is not a union, but it is a voluntary organization whose membership is open to all Alberta Crown Attorneys.  Membership is voluntary, so they work hard to give value for your membership fees, and they do get most people to sign up.  They do advocate with the government for their membership.  While it is not collective bargaining, they have successfully made the case for their membership such that they were given a substantial raise.

What about the Bar association?

[Razgovory]

"Union thug" seems to mean, slob, cockroach, and leech or more precisely a person who doesn't want to lose their job and votes Democratic.

No.  Maybe it gets overused (but in the internet era of political debate, what term doesn't), but there are clear examples of what a union thug actually is.  If you could access Youtube you'd see them.

Ah, I found something.  http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/  You'betcha!

[Barrister]

I don't think unions should be made illegal, but I would love it if the NLRA was ever repealed.  Unions don't need unfair advantages enforced by federal law when it comes to organizing battles.

Actually, they do.  Unions cannot survive if they're not in some way protected form being fired wholesale and replaced with non-union workers.

I'll give you an example of a good "union".

At my new job I will be represented by the Alberta Crown Attorney's Association.  Now, it technically is not a union, but it is a voluntary organization whose membership is open to all Alberta Crown Attorneys.  Membership is voluntary, so they work hard to give value for your membership fees, and they do get most people to sign up.  They do advocate with the government for their membership.  While it is not collective bargaining, they have successfully made the case for their membership such that they were given a substantial raise.

What about the Bar association?

Do you mean the Bar Association (which is a voluntary organization), or the Law Society (which is the licensing body every lawyer must belong to)?

And either way - what about them?

[Razgovory]

They function like Unions do.  In many states belonging to the Bar is not voluntary.

[derspiess]

How is it possible that we don't have under-performing teachers?   We have under-performing workers in every other field.

I meant more than an acceptable number of under-performing teachers.

Political reality was that the firefighters' and police unions did support Walker. 

The two significant statewide unions supported his opponent.  Looks like he did have the support of a couple city unions and the state troopers association. 

Walker has a political shitstorm because he deliberately provoked a political shitstorm.  Adding police and firefighters would have made no difference at worst and may have helped at best

In your mind.  But not everyone is grumbler.  The anti-Walker mantra would go from "Walker hates teachers" to "Walker hates teachers, policemen & firefighters!"  And when pro-union protesters are ransacking the state capitol, it's probably not the best thing to piss off public safety personnel. 

- as it made no difference or even helped when Daniels took the principled approach to this same problem in Indiana.

Different time, different state, different political climate.

Walker appears to believe that the more bitter and partisan he can make the battle, the better-off he is.  I am thinking he is guaranteeing himself a single term, instead.

I'd say the Democrat lawmakers who fled the state, teachers who called in sick & got fake doctor notes (great example for our kids there btw), and the nutjob pro-union protesters are making the battle so bitter & partisan.  Odd that you're not making any mention of those folks.

[The Brain]

Question: You say they serve no legitimate purpose. The Swedish model allows decentralised rule-making that can be tailored to fit the most diverse of fields and work-places. Would you rather we had bulky all-encompassing laws? Because that's the alternative. Unions are heavily involved in worker safety. Arbetsmiljölagen (labour environment law) is based on the principle of co-operation between employers and employees. Skyddsombud (worker's protection representatives) are chosen by the union. They are required on all work-places with more than five employees and have wide-ranging rights including the right to order immediate halt of all work if found necessary for the health and safety of the employees.

Unions are involved in a lot of things. Doesn't mean that they are necessary for those (or even desirable).