FDR Opposed Collective Bargaining for Government Employees

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph from the Land of Funk
Gold Supporting Member
Feb 12, 2007
59,384
24,018
2,290
I've been questioned in another thread regarding FDR's opposition to collective bargaining for government employees. Here's he is in his own words:

A letter to Mr. Luther C. Steward, President, National Federation of Federal Employees:

My dear Mr. Steward:

As I am unable to accept your kind invitation to be present on the occasion of the Twentieth Jubilee Convention of the National Federation of Federal Employees, I am taking this method of sending greetings and a message.

Reading your letter of July 14, 1937, I was especially interested in the timeliness of your remark that the manner in which the activities of your organization have been carried on during the past two decades "has been in complete consonance with the best traditions of public employee relationships." Organizations of Government employees have a logical place in Government affairs.

The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.

Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied.
Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that "under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government."

I congratulate the National Federation of Federal Employees the twentieth anniversary of its founding and trust that the convention will, in every way, be successful.


Franklin D. Roosevelt: Letter on the Resolution of Federation of Federal Employees Against Strikes in Federal Service
 
Unlike the right the left doesnt hold him up as an infallible god.

What he feared never panned out did it.
 
It is also worth noting that in today's political environment, FDR would probably be running as a Republican.
 
HAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FDR was a Democrat and your only response is that he would have been a Republican today.

That's a hoot.
 
Unlike the right the left doesnt hold him up as an infallible god.

What he feared never panned out did it.


You dim bulb of demented denseness.

Turn on the TV and watch the protests of "sick" public employees in WI.
 
It is also worth noting that in today's political environment, FDR would probably be running as a Republican.
The man who advanced socialism more in this country then anyone else in the history of this country would run as a Republican? How do you figure that?
 
It is also worth noting that in today's political environment, FDR would probably be running as a Republican.
The man who advanced socialism more in this country then anyone else in the history of this country would run as a Republican? How do you figure that?

Look at Bush's and Reagan's policies versus the stuff FDR actually did, and get back to me. There hasn't been a small government Republican in at least 50+ years. Most of FDR's stuff is pretty tame compared to Bush's expansion of the Fed.
 
Collective bargaining did not cause the budget deficit in Wi, the governor did by giving further Tax cuts to business.


Collective bargaining did not cause this protest , the threat of taking it away from workers caused this protest.

It in and of its self has not born out the fears FDR had about it.
 
Collective bargaining is a major cause of the budget problems in WI - and schools are closed as teachers strike (while "sick") because they don't want to pay far less for their benefits than the taxpayers who pay their salaries do.

And what about all those POOR KIDS WHO ARE STARVING WITHOUT THEIR FREE SCHOOL LUNCHES? The strike is "disturbing" them.
 
Unlike the right the left doesnt hold him up as an infallible god.

What he feared never panned out did it.

However Obama was compared to him now wasn't he?


The comparison of Obama to FDR has been looming in the background for the past two years. Time magazine, in the cover of its post-election edition, superimposed Barack Obama's head onto a memorable photo of FDR seated in his convertible following his 1932 landslide victory. The expectation was that Obama, like FDR, would lead Democrats to further gains in the ensuing midterm and then onwards and upwards to an era of Democratic dominance.

Source

OBAMAFDR.jpg


You were saying? :eusa_hand:
 
Collective bargaining is a major cause of the budget problems in WI - and schools are closed as teachers strike (while "sick") because they don't want to pay far less for their benefits than the taxpayers who pay their salaries do.

And what about all those POOR KIDS WHO ARE STARVING WITHOUT THEIR FREE SCHOOL LUNCHES? The strike is "disturbing" them.

They'll blame that on the Governor and the Republicans...just watch.

And their reasoning will be "If the Governor hadn't meddled with our benefits we wouldn't have had to go and protest..." or some such nonsense.

These people are just too predictable.
 
It is also worth noting that in today's political environment, FDR would probably be running as a Republican.
The man who advanced socialism more in this country then anyone else in the history of this country would run as a Republican? How do you figure that?

Look at Bush's and Reagan's policies versus the stuff FDR actually did, and get back to me. There hasn't been a small government Republican in at least 50+ years. Most of FDR's stuff is pretty tame compared to Bush's expansion of the Fed.
I'm not defending the Republicans, particularly W who was one of the worst Presidents in our history and no friend of small government. Though I'm not sure what you're referring to with Reagan. But to compare that to FDR, you need to learn more about what he did. Starting with Social Security, one of the greatest evils ever perpetrated on the American people by our own government. FDR buried State rights. He and Woodrow Wilson were the two worst Presidents in our history. Wilson started us on the path of joining the "World Community" and FDR ended individualism as a government protection. To compare the Republicans to that is just a failure to recognize perspective. Wilson and FDR are the two sides of Neocon, military to spread democracy and big government spending.
 
Last edited:
Collective bargaining is a major cause of the budget problems in WI - and schools are closed as teachers strike (while "sick") because they don't want to pay far less for their benefits than the taxpayers who pay their salaries do.

And what about all those POOR KIDS WHO ARE STARVING WITHOUT THEIR FREE SCHOOL LUNCHES? The strike is "disturbing" them.

Mischaracterization. The strike is about the attempt to weaken collective bargaining, not about the benefits. Most of the teachers I know in Wisconsin know that realistically they'll have to accept the cut. They're mad about the attempt to destroy their ability to negotiate in the future while leaving the public sector unions that supported the governor untouched.
 
The man who advanced socialism more in this country then anyone else in the history of this country would run as a Republican? How do you figure that?

Look at Bush's and Reagan's policies versus the stuff FDR actually did, and get back to me. There hasn't been a small government Republican in at least 50+ years. Most of FDR's stuff is pretty tame compared to Bush's expansion of the Fed.
I'm not defending the Republicans, particularly W who was one of the worst Presidents in our history and no friend of small government. Though I'm not sure what you're referring to with Reagan. But to compare that to FDR, you need to learn more about what he did. Starting with Social Security, one of the greatest evils ever perpetrated on the American people by our own government. FDR buried State rights. He and Woodrow Wilson were the two worst Presidents in our history. Wilson started us on the path of joining the "World Community" and FDR ended individualism as a government protection. To compare the Republicans to that is just a failure to recognize perspective. Wilson and FDR are the two sides of Neocon, military to spread democracy and big government spending.


Indeed. And the assault on us perpetrates to this day. Why we are where we are. People need to learn their history. It sure as Hell isn't being taught in the Gubmint schrools.
 
There has never been any "right" to public sector collective bargaining.....until the sixties when JFK issued an executive order to allow it....

maybe the next President needs to rescind that order.....(it certainly won't be BO)...
 
The man who advanced socialism more in this country then anyone else in the history of this country would run as a Republican? How do you figure that?

Look at Bush's and Reagan's policies versus the stuff FDR actually did, and get back to me. There hasn't been a small government Republican in at least 50+ years. Most of FDR's stuff is pretty tame compared to Bush's expansion of the Fed.
I'm not defending the Republicans, particularly W who was one of the worst Presidents in our history and no friend of small government. Though I'm not sure what you're referring to with Reagan. But to compare that to FDR, you need to learn more about what he did. Starting with Social Security, one of the greatest evils ever perpetrated on the American people by our own government. FDR buried State rights. He and Woodrow Wilson were the two worst Presidents in our history. Wilson started us on the path of joining the "World Community" and FDR ended individualism as a government protection. To compare the Republicans to that is just a failure to recognize perspective. Wilson and FDR are the two sides of Neocon, military to spread democracy and big government spending.

You need to look up Bush's attempts to undermine California's states rights. And you can't seriously claim that FDR's motives in WW2 were any different from Bush's motives in Iraq. Bush actually expanded entitlements with the Medicare prescription pla, so there is that strike too.

Reagan wasn't much better. Theres some sort of historical amnesia about him that overlooks his massive expansion of government spending I have never understood.

Fact is, no GOP president has actually shrunk the government in 50+ years if not more. Saying FDR would be a republican today isn't a slam on the GOP, but a statement of how few real differences there are now.
 
Last edited:
Btw, to be clear, I agree on Wilson. He is justifiably one of the five worst Presidents in History. It's all but impossible to read of the way he handled the great influenza outbreak and WW1 and not get angry. And he botched Versailles so badly we fought another war over it. He list of things he did wrong would take hours to type up.
 
Last edited:
Bub. Nobody who claims to be a conservative supports the massive growth of government spending performed by EITHER party.
 
Btw, to be clear, I agree on Wilson. He is justifiably one of the five worst Presidents in History. It's all but impossible to read of the way he handled the great influenza outbreak and WW1 and not get angry. And he botched Versailles so badly we fought another war over it. He list of things he did wrong would take hours to type up.


Wilson was just as idiotic as Neville Chamberlain.
 

Forum List

Back
Top