View Poll Results: Is Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector a Right or is it a Privilege?

Voters
66. You may not vote on this poll
  • Collective Bargaining, at least in the public sector is a fundamental human right

    13 19.70%
  • Collective Bargaining in the public sector is a privilege.

    41 62.12%
  • Other, the issue is more complex than that (Explain)

    12 18.18%
Page 15 of 20 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 197

Thread: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

  1. #141
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    By the standard of supply and demand. If the government is having difficulty recruiting qualified people to fill some position, then they are underpaying them. If there are massive numbers of qualified people applying for some position, then they are overpaying them.
    This suggests those are the only factors. I see no reason to believe that so simplistic a view is correct. I can of many reasons beyond pay. If I'm unemployed, I am in demand. If you have a job, you have the supply. I will apply.

    They can do that individually. When they join an organization whose sole purpose is to strongarm the government (i.e. the representative of the people) into overpaying them by monopolizing the labor supply, they've crossed a line. Any money spent overpaying teachers could be better spent hiring MORE teachers, or improving education in some other way, or on some other public service. From the public's perspective, the money is essentially wasted. No one benefits from public unions except the public union employees...and they have no reason to expect to be immune to the laws of supply and demand any moreso than anyone else.
    Not as effectively. Seriously, one voice can be ignored much easier than many voices. Just as an industy CEOs will group together to negotiate with government, so do employees group together to negotiate wages and benefits. One is no better or more evil than the other. Employees wanting better benefits is no worse than business wanting better and bigger breaks (tax cuts and less regulation).

    That's based entirely on the assumption that merit pay would simply pay teachers for how well their students do without regard to any other variables, like the quality of students. I don't think there are many merit pay advocates who want such a system.
    Well that is what I've seen discussed. NCLB is entirely based on that false premise. So, I'd love to see another version explained.

    I'm not a big fan of private unions either, but there is one crucial difference that makes public unions a lot worse: Private companies are motivated by profit, and have a financial incentive to push back against union demands. Government officials are not motivated by profit, and thus often have no such financial incentive to tell the unions no. Along the same lines, who bears the consequences when private company executives allow unions to walk all over them? The shareholders, who chose to invest in the company and have the ability to fire the offending executives and/or sell their stock. Who bears the consequences when government managers allow unions to walk all over them? The public, who has nowhere else to turn for public services.
    I don't believe that. Government officals have no motivation to bankrupt the state, s it hurts them. they have every motivation to balance a budget and keep government open. And leaders do bear the consequence when they fail, as theyoften lose their seats, their position. An employee, any employee, should never be subject to an employer without the ability to negotiate collectively. While I fall just short of calling a union a right, I will be more than willing to let them fight for it. No law says anyone has to cave. but no laws should say they have the absolute rigth to forbid people to fight for better wages, benefits or conditions. Neither side should be handed an advantage.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  2. #142
    Sage
    Barbbtx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    W'Ford TX
    Last Seen
    11-10-12 @ 08:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,467

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    There is nothing wrong with right to work laws, however, if one chooses to join a union and have collective bargaining, that, I believe, is the right of association.
    UMMMM...if it allowed collective bargaining, it would no longer be a right to work state.
    Catawa is my favorite bleeding heart liberal.
    1/27/12

  3. #143
    Sage
    Mach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    11,520

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    You're just a generic conservative who supports corporate enslavement of the masses.
    So having a free market and less government control of our life = slavery.
    Having a powerful "group" dictate to us = freedom.

    Coroprations as far as I know, are 100% voluntary, and compete with one another.
    Are taxes voluntary?
    Is the U.S. government competing with someone or is it a monopoly?

  4. #144
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    Amazed, your response was interesting to me. Please help, some things are not obvious to me. Is it based on the Gov workers not being a members of "We the People" but rather they are part of the 'tyrannical' government?

    Posted by OhIsee.Then in response to Amazed:

    Wow, the juxtaposition of these two thoughts on one post with not [a] problem!
    Yes, Amazed I am.

    Public Employees have NO fundamental "right" to go on strike.
    vs.
    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.
    Thomas Jefferson

    With the following reply:
    Quote Originally Posted by Amazed View Post
    Another red herring.

    Sorry, no....

    It isn't "tyranny" to tell a Gov worker he/she can't strike.

    They aren't underpaid, they have the best benefits money can buy...and the best pensions, in short...they should shut up and work.

    They don't get to shut the Gov down because THEY don't want to pay any part of their benefits.

  5. #145
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    This suggests those are the only factors. I see no reason to believe that so simplistic a view is correct. I can of many reasons beyond pay. If I'm unemployed, I am in demand. If you have a job, you have the supply. I will apply.
    There are a certain number of positions for qualified teachers available; there are a certain number of qualified teachers to fill them. Each school wants to fill the position for the lowest price (salary) possible, while each teacher wants to find a position at the highest price (salary) possible. The price would naturally reach an equilibrium. In this regard, the labor market is not much different than a widget market. But when you introduce a monopoly on the labor supply (or the widget supply) which drives the prices artificially higher, the public suffers. This is why monopolies on widgets are generally illegal. Yet public teachers' unions monopolize the labor supply, and the public is the one that suffers.

    As to there being other factors besides overpaying/underpaying teachers that could lead to a disparity in supply and demand: Yes, but they're all ultimately tied to the salary. Jobs in crappy conditions command a premium salary, for example...while jobs in extremely secure/cushy conditions generally receive a lower salary.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley
    Not as effectively. Seriously, one voice can be ignored much easier than many voices. Just as an industy CEOs will group together to negotiate with government, so do employees group together to negotiate wages and benefits. One is no better or more evil than the other. Employees wanting better benefits is no worse than business wanting better and bigger breaks (tax cuts and less regulation).
    Depending on how exactly the businesses are grouping together, this may or may not be illegal too. And I agree that labor (or business) groups that want to lobby the government should be legal...but it should be just that: Lobbying. Not monopolizing the labor force to cripple the operations of the government, which the public paid for. If individual workers want to join a special interest group, of their own volition, whose mission is to advocate for policies that increase the median wage in the United States, they should absolutely have that right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley
    I don't believe that. Government officals have no motivation to bankrupt the state, s it hurts them. they have every motivation to balance a budget and keep government open. And leaders do bear the consequence when they fail, as theyoften lose their seats, their position.
    The experience of the past 50 years shows that this just isn't true. Governments at both the state and the federal level have almost constantly run deficits.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley
    An employee, any employee, should never be subject to an employer without the ability to negotiate collectively. While I fall just short of calling a union a right, I will be more than willing to let them fight for it. No law says anyone has to cave. but no laws should say they have the absolute rigth to forbid people to fight for better wages, benefits or conditions. Neither side should be handed an advantage.
    The problem with this is that a government employer is not a corporation. I saw this stated quite well in an op-ed piece a couple days ago: Private unions were created to guard against the greed of the corporations. Public unions were created to guard against the greed of...the public?

    The government simply does not have enough money to be wasting it on stuff like this. Public employees are not dependents of the American people who need charity; they are the people whom we hire to perform the services we deem important. We have public services that the American people need, and we have a limited amount of cash to pay for them. Every dollar spent overpaying a public union employee is one less dollar that can be spent on the public service itself.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 02-23-11 at 07:11 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  6. #146
    Educator
    Amazed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North of Dorothy's Home.
    Last Seen
    04-30-15 @ 10:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,001

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    So...you are saying that Public Employees have a Constitutional "Right" to Strike?

    Let me ask you, do you know who they work for?

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    Amazed, your response was interesting to me. Please help, some things are not obvious to me. Is it based on the Gov workers not being a members of "We the People" but rather they are part of the 'tyrannical' government?

    Posted by OhIsee.Then in response to Amazed:

    Wow, the juxtaposition of these two thoughts on one post with not [a] problem!
    Yes, Amazed I am.

    Public Employees have NO fundamental "right" to go on strike.
    vs.
    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.
    Thomas Jefferson

    With the following reply:
    Obama is NOT 50 feet tall, he is ONE inch deep.
    Mark Levin

  7. #147
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
    So having a free market and less government control of our life = slavery.
    Having a powerful "group" dictate to us = freedom.

    Coroprations as far as I know, are 100% voluntary, and compete with one another.
    Are taxes voluntary?
    Is the U.S. government competing with someone or is it a monopoly?
    Various government possibilities are competing with the voters in the US at this time, so its not a monopoly. That is what root of this this thread is about, a change in government.

    Mach, I'd like you to answer the same question I asked Amazed. Is your view based on the Gov workers not being a members of "We the People" but rather they are part of the 'tyrannical' government? thx

  8. #148
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,173

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barbbtx View Post
    UMMMM...if it allowed collective bargaining, it would no longer be a right to work state.
    not true
    there can be - and there is - collective bargaining in right to work states. i happen to be a union officer in a right to work state
    the distinction is that the represented employee in the bargaining unit of the union does NOT have to pay union dues within a right to work state
    the union still must represent them, just as it would a dues paying member. that causes us to distinguish between bargaining unit members and union members. only the latter pay dues. all are represented
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  9. #149
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    Quote Originally Posted by Amazed View Post
    So...you are saying that Public Employees have a Constitutional "Right" to Strike?

    Let me ask you, do you know who they work for?
    I've had many cases where they were clearly working for me and others I know. I sorry if you haven't had the same experience. However, last year I had a bad experience in TX, they thought we might have been smuggeling drugs and used the old seat belt stop....

    But, why don't you answer my simple question?
    Is your view based on the Gov workers not being a members of "We the People" but rather they are part of the 'tyrannical' government? thx

  10. #150
    Educator
    Amazed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North of Dorothy's Home.
    Last Seen
    04-30-15 @ 10:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,001

    Re: Is Collective Bargaining in the public sector a Right, or is it a Privilege?

    Your question pre supposes a Constitutional Right to Strike...I don't find that in The Constitution...now those Unions (Public) are free to ASK for whatever they want..they are free to walk off the Job if they want...but we are free to replace them if they do.

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    I've had many cases where they were clearly working for me and others I know. I sorry if you haven't had the same experience. However, last year I had a bad experience in TX, they thought we might have been smuggeling drugs and used the old seat belt stop....

    But, why don't you answer my simple question?
    Is your view based on the Gov workers not being a members of "We the People" but rather they are part of the 'tyrannical' government? thx
    Obama is NOT 50 feet tall, he is ONE inch deep.
    Mark Levin

Page 15 of 20 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •