General Arguments
·
March 9, 2011 at 1:58am
What are your main arguments against public sector collective bargaining (PSCB)?
I’ve read the following arguments on Ricochet:
- PSCB is untouched by any form of market discipline, so it results in higher-than-normal wages and benefits
- PSCB has a corrupting effect because it is allows for campaign contributions to politicians who are its most generous benefactors. The symbiosis results in an expansion of both the public sector and the party that it supports.
And then there’s this:
All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. - Franklin Delano Roosevelt
What other arguments should we make?
- Comment (5)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments:
Re: General Arguments
Process note: As long as the position remains a work in progress, this post will stay at the top of the page. It will get edited, however, as new arguments take shape.
Once we have a sense of the major arguments, we’ll split these off into separate discussions so they can be refined and, if necessary, substantiated.
Edited on March 9, 2011 at 3:08amNov '10
Re: General Arguments
Re: General Arguments
Jan-Michael Rives
You mean against? · Mar 8 at 7:02pm
Uh, yes.
Thanks for the catch. Corrected.
Sep '10
Re: General Arguments
Another argument might be that public sector unions are inherently different than private ones. Unions that I am most familiar with are trade unions. Trade union members are associated with a central collective or "hall" from which employers select union members to work for their companies. The union trains it's members in the skills of the trade and the companies that hire them give them the work experience. When workers are incompetent, lazy, or too meddlesome in the affairs of the company, companies can send them back to the hall and select someone else. This method allows companies to weed out the bad apples in the mix. Public sector unions on the other hand do not train their employees, nor can the employer send them back to the hall and get someone else. Once they are hired it is very difficult to get rid of them. Civil service work rules typically stand in the way of any real action to weed out bad employees. So the argument might go something like this: "Public sector employees are covered by civil service work rules that make it difficult to fire them for incompetence, laziness, etc. They don't need collective bargaining."
Oct '10
Re: General Arguments
Teacher unions have blocked educational reform for decades. This disproportionately hurts poor people, especially poor black residents of inner cities.
Also, municipal workers get benefits based on public popularity. So firemen and police officers get more benefits (early and generous retirement benefits, higher pay, etc) then teachers or sanitation workers. This isn't fair.
Public unions are also antidemocratic; they regularly thwart the will of the populace.