Article

2009-11-15 Economy

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by crosspatch 2009-11-15 03:20|| || Front Page|| [11132 views ] Top

#1 Seems the Mayor of Detroit doesn't want to withhold union dues from city employee paychecks figuring if the unions want their money, they can collect it directly from the members.

Something we can agree on. There should be no 'public' employees unions. The state is sovereign, representing the whole, and therefore can not negotiate or recognize an entity like a union which is not sovereign and represents a fraction of the whole. Either you take the work, or find work else where. People are entitled to free assembly. As such they may freely donate to causes they support and believe in. They are not entitled to ask the state to withhold money earned for labor executed. They may freely collect it on their own time and own dime short of racketeering.

Posted by Procopius2k 2009-11-15 08:12|| 2009-11-15 08:12|| Front Page Top

#2 The union knows that if Mayor Bing gets away with this, other cities desperately trying to rustle up every possible dime will jump on it.

Extra butter on my popcorn, please.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2009-11-15 11:19|| 2009-11-15 11:19|| Front Page Top

#3 Could be the ultimate red on red...

Posted by M. Murcek">M. Murcek 2009-11-15 11:34|| 2009-11-15 11:34|| Front Page Top

#4 Definitely a popcorn-worthy event. Bing (famous ex-Pistons basketball star) is a businessman which means he has some understanding of financial matters, doesn't appear to be corrupt and is not a race-baiter. This sets him apart from most Detroit mayors for the last half a century or so.

The public employees unions in Michigan are insanely powerful and can usually get judges to bend to their will. (all those members mean lots of votes. do you want them with you or against you next election?) Should be an interesting war. I wish him luck.

Posted by SteveS 2009-11-15 11:52|| 2009-11-15 11:52|| Front Page Top

#5 just like the Feds and State Revenooers. Withholding makes it seem like not such a big cost. If you had no withholding and had to pay your taxes (or union dues) in a lump sum once a year, the sheep might get.... riled

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2009-11-15 12:02|| 2009-11-15 12:02|| Front Page Top

#6 Something we can agree on. There should be no 'public' employees unions.

Unions have their purpose. People have the same rights as any other entity to organize and combine in their own economic interests.

What would be an improvement is to ban public sector unions from lobbying, period. Unions have the power of the strike and they have political power.

Granting them the privilege to lobby for legislation that directly benefits them is corruption defined.

Posted by badanov 2009-11-15 12:05|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2009-11-15 12:05|| Front Page Top

#7 I'll reiterate. There can be no political or negotiating equality between that entity representing the people as a whole and that which represents a subset of those same people.

People have the same rights as any other entity to organize and combine in their own economic interests.

Not against the People as a whole. Most transitions to military rule though history occurred when that subset organized and combined in their own economic interests. The principle stands, either work for the state [the people], under its conditions or quit.

Posted by Procopius2k 2009-11-15 13:10|| 2009-11-15 13:10|| Front Page Top

#8
Not against the People as a whole.

But the people aren't as a whole. They are as a whole still people, still all too willing to do the wrong things to charges without union protection.

Where does a female worker, for example, go under a non-union environment when a boss tells her to blow him on Fridays or lose her job?

The courts? Sure, take ten years and sue and maybe win. People need protections only a union environment can provide. The courts are abysmally poor arbiters of workplace fairness.

I got a snootful of real life, real live proof for you going back 20 years.

Most transitions to military rule though history occurred when that subset organized and combined in their own economic interests.

I noticed you didn't accuse unions of fomenting coup d'tats. Very subtle to mention a subset in the same response as unions. Very crafty.

And irrelevant.

The principle stands, either work for the state [the people], under its conditions or quit.

The principle stands under a narrow, not broad set of circumstances. You try to apply an overbroad and vague contention that groups of people are potentially evil, that they may foment a coup because groups of people combine to protect their interests.

The difference is that coups are normally fomented by groups of people organizing in their economic interests who also happen to have heavy weapons and a butt load of razors to act on their behalf.

Unions are not quite the same thing.

Posted by badanov 2009-11-15 14:40|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2009-11-15 14:40|| Front Page Top

#9 "Public Unions" are an oxymoron, heavy on the "moron". Government employees serve at the will of the people, expressed in the form of representative democracy. They have NO "right" to a job, nor any "right" to any special provisions, just for them. California's biggest problem at the moment is the inability to trim staff, due to an over-reaching group of unions. There need to be rules governing employees to keep the "next" government from firing them all, from coercion of any kind, and a means to "blow the whistle" on any supervisory infringement of basic rights, but a union is totally inappropriate.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2009-11-15 15:10|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2009-11-15 15:10|| Front Page Top

#10 People need protections from tyrants, large and small.

For the body politic, we have the US Constitution to protect us from the big tyrants.

For the little tyrants in the workplace, we have unions.

Posted by badanov 2009-11-15 15:23|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2009-11-15 15:23|| Front Page Top

#11 But the people aren't as a whole.

They are as a government.

Posted by Procopius2k 2009-11-15 15:48|| 2009-11-15 15:48|| Front Page Top

#12 For the little tyrants in the workplace, we have unions.

What do you do when the Unions are the tyrants?

Posted by DarthVader 2009-11-15 15:55|| 2009-11-15 15:55|| Front Page Top

#13 A government employee union that donates more than 60% of its contributions or bundled contributions to one political party should lose its tax exempt status. There should be no advantage to a party to expand government only to have that expansion result in an increase in cash to the party.

In fact, I would propose NO political activity at all for government employee unions. Individuals would be free to do as they wish but the union could not donate or bundle for any candidate.

Posted by crosspatch 2009-11-15 16:00|| 2009-11-15 16:00|| Front Page Top

#14 What do you do when the Unions are the tyrants?

A strong case for decertification of the union.

Posted by badanov 2009-11-15 16:46|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2009-11-15 16:46|| Front Page Top

#15 Here ya' go, #2 Mike.

Want some parmesan, too? ;-p

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2009-11-15 17:46|| 2009-11-15 17:46|| Front Page Top

#16 Personally I think Unions, ALL Unions should be banned from any sort of political activity. No contrbutions, no phone banks, no 'in-kind' contributions, nothing. nada. Zero. And any union caught in the political process should be immediately disbanned and its leaders jailed.

But then I think those on the unearned government teat should forfit their voting rights too....

Unions should not be able to vote themselves political power and people should not be able to vote themselves more benefits.

Posted by CrazyFool 2009-11-15 19:00|| 2009-11-15 19:00|| Front Page Top

#17 Where does a female worker, for example, go under a non-union environment when a boss tells her to blow him on Fridays or lose her job?

Oh please Badanov. There are any number of ways that an employee can deal with sexual harassment, especially in a government setting. These issues are dealt with in non-unionized businesses every day.

Non-union government employees are protected to an extreme degree. Government unions don't add to their protections, only to the taxpayers costs.

Posted by remoteman 2009-11-15 20:19|| 2009-11-15 20:19|| Front Page Top

#18 as a civil servant (Senior Civil /Bridge-Engineer) I'd like to correct a few notions. I work in a closed shop by certification from our City Council (not my choice). I am not required to contribute to the Union PAC, and I don't. We are NOT free to strike, and the majority of the membership (as I understand it) would NOT violate that. I know I wouldn't (scab central). We have good retirement plans to balance our salary, which, pre-recession was $40K+ under for similar jobs. Now that private is sucking, my salary/bennies are "obscene"? Bite me. I'm no union guy (don't pay the PAC add-on), but signed on for what I was offered at each contract time. I'd happily debate any and all off Fred's time

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2009-11-15 20:39|| 2009-11-15 20:39|| Front Page Top

#19 "I am not required to contribute to the Union PAC, and I don't"

Unions do not donate only from their PAC. For example, most (but not al) government employee unions are SEIU affiliates. A portion of dues goes to the national. The national makes political contributions to Democrats pretty much exclusively. The local could even make political donations or donate to its own PAC from dues.

The American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees is #2 on the all time largest political donor list (ahead of even Goldman Sachs) with 1% of their donations going to Republicans.

The SEIU is the 9th largest all time political donor with 97% to Democrats and 3% to Republicans. The IBEW is the 5th largest all time donor with only 2% going to Republicans. The CWA (union of electronic media journalists) is 12th with 0% going to Republicans.

Compare that with corporate donations. AT&T 44% Dem 55% Rep, National Association of Realtors 48% Dem, 51% Rep.

Government employee labor unions should be banned from political activities. The people should be able to engage in them, but the union should not be, particularly in closed shops where dues are mandatory.

Posted by crosspatch 2009-11-15 21:42|| 2009-11-15 21:42|| Front Page Top

#20 Reference for above comment

Posted by crosspatch 2009-11-15 21:43|| 2009-11-15 21:43|| Front Page Top

#21 There are any number of ways that an employee can deal with sexual harassment, especially in a government setting.

Good one, remoteman. I assume you never were a civilian employee in a law enforcement agency, where the harasser has a brass badge?

Been there, done that....it IS different in that situation, and trust me, I was thankful for my oh-so-unnecessary public union then.

As an aside to Frank G, hate to say it but you are wasting your breath. I wouldn't presume to know 1/10 about their jobs as they think they knew about mine....I know exactly what you are talking about. I was in the same kind of work situation, different city.

Posted by Cornsilk Blondie 2009-11-15 22:23|| 2009-11-15 22:23|| Front Page Top

#22 I feel unions serve a purpose. They just should limit their activity to the workplace and not politics. They currently give Democrats a very real financial incentive to expand government. Every additional government employee translates to more cash in their pocket. THAT is what I am against.

Government workers unions should be banned from political activity. That's all I am saying.

Posted by crosspatch 2009-11-15 22:41|| 2009-11-15 22:41|| Front Page Top

23:59 JosephMendiola
23:50 ed
23:38 trailing wife
23:31 lex
23:28 lex
23:26 Secret Master
23:20 Pappy
23:20 gorb
23:05 Pappy
23:05 49 Pan
22:53 Pappy
22:41 crosspatch
22:36 Aussie Mike
22:29 Aussie Mike
22:23 Cornsilk Blondie
22:14 M. Murcek
22:09 trailing wife
22:06 Barbara Skolaut
21:51 Angie Schultz
21:43 phil_b
21:43 crosspatch
21:42 crosspatch
21:42 Old Patriot
21:29 phil_b