Should State Unions Be Stronger Than a State government?

[Meister]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

 

[Nosmo King]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

A state government can kill someone (see death row). A union cannot legally kill anyone.

A state government has an obligation to its employees to provide decent, safe working conditions and a competative wage for labor. Should a state government be so strong that this simple obligation can be breached?

 

[bucs90]

NO. If the union was more powerful than the government, then the government isn't the government, the union is.

 

[Meister]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

A state government can kill someone (see death row). A union cannot legally kill anyone.

A state government has an obligation to its employees to provide decent, safe working conditions and a competative wage for labor. Should a state government be so strong that this simple obligation can be breached?

Not all state jobs are union jobs. They still enjoy a decent safe working environment with competative wages. But, aren't the unions pension and benefit contracts helping to bankrupt several states?

 

[JamesInFlorida]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

A state government can kill someone (see death row). A union cannot legally kill anyone.

A state government has an obligation to its employees to provide decent, safe working conditions and a competative wage for labor. Should a state government be so strong that this simple obligation can be breached?

Not all state jobs are union jobs. They still enjoy a decent safe working environment with competative wages. But, aren't the unions pension and benefit contracts helping to bankrupt several states?

And the state government's aren't? The government is the biggest culprit for states going bankrupt-not unions.

 

[mudwhistle]

NO. If the union was more powerful than the government, then the government isn't the government, the union is.

Unions are running this country into the ground.

What we're seeing is what happens when anyone dares to stop them.

 

[Meister]

A state government can kill someone (see death row). A union cannot legally kill anyone.

A state government has an obligation to its employees to provide decent, safe working conditions and a competative wage for labor. Should a state government be so strong that this simple obligation can be breached?

Not all state jobs are union jobs. They still enjoy a decent safe working environment with competative wages. But, aren't the unions pension and benefit contracts helping to bankrupt several states?

And the state government's aren't? The government is the biggest culprit for states going bankrupt-not unions.

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

 

[bucs90]

Union Bob says: "Of course the union should be more powerful than the government. As should a private union be more powerful than the company it works for. Thats common sense. What kind of society do we live in if workers unions can't force their employer to meet all their demands? Forcing your boss to meet all your demands is what a civil society is all about. Now............it's time for my lunch break, be back in a few hours."

 

[JamesInFlorida]

Not all state jobs are union jobs. They still enjoy a decent safe working environment with competative wages. But, aren't the unions pension and benefit contracts helping to bankrupt several states?

And the state government's aren't? The government is the biggest culprit for states going bankrupt-not unions.

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

I'll agree with this somewhat. I think some unions are needed for certain industries-but they do overstep what they should be doing, and certainly the amounts of unions is too high. I went to school in Buffalo, and the road workers were all union-they took months (literally probably 2-3) just to repave a road maybe a half mile long-everytime I'd drive by them (everyday on the way to school), they'd just be sitting there doing nothing. So I agree it is a problem, and while you may not be saying it yourself-there are many who think it's the single biggest problem to the economy.

I don't think they're untouchable from state governments-but I think there are other areas that should be addressed first (at least in my state-I can't speak on behalf of other states).

In other words, yes I think they need to be dealt with-but I think others are driving it way out of proportion.

 

[Nosmo King]

Not all state jobs are union jobs. They still enjoy a decent safe working environment with competative wages. But, aren't the unions pension and benefit contracts helping to bankrupt several states?

And the state government's aren't? The government is the biggest culprit for states going bankrupt-not unions.

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Personally,i wish they both had less power than they currently have. Both are the problem. It's a power-struggle that only benefits them both. Both should be kept in check.

 

[mudwhistle]

And the state government's aren't? The government is the biggest culprit for states going bankrupt-not unions.

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

They've already tried. The unions said NO!!!

 

[Meister]

And the state government's aren't? The government is the biggest culprit for states going bankrupt-not unions.

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

I'm assuming that they are trimming the budget.....but there is some serious unfunded benefits that has been laid on the backs of taxpayers. The state is broke, what part of that isn't sinking in?

The unions solution is a one time renegociated contract, this is going to be a long term problem....not a 2 or 3 year contract issue.

 

[syrenn]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

A state government can kill someone (see death row). A union cannot legally kill anyone.

A state government has an obligation to its employees to provide decent, safe working conditions and a competative wage for labor. Should a state government be so strong that this simple obligation can be breached?

Doesn't mean that they haven't or tired to.



What is legal or illegal, the unions don't really seem to care about.

 

[Meister]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

A state government can kill someone (see death row). A union cannot legally kill anyone.

A state government has an obligation to its employees to provide decent, safe working conditions and a competative wage for labor. Should a state government be so strong that this simple obligation can be breached?

Doesn't mean that they haven't or tired to.

ala, Jimmy Hoffa

 

[drsmith1072]

NO. If the union was more powerful than the government, then the government isn't the government, the union is.

Unions are running this country into the ground.

What we're seeing is what happens when anyone dares to stop them.

Simply put, it's the economy stupid.

If the economy was going better and unemployment wasn't high as it is the states would be doing fine. It's funny how the right never let's a tragedy go to waste as they try to blame only unions for all of the ill's as they take the side of the government over that of the workers.

And here I thought government was bad. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Not all state jobs are union jobs. They still enjoy a decent safe working environment with competative wages. But, aren't the unions pension and benefit contracts helping to bankrupt several states?

And the state government's aren't? The government is the biggest culprit for states going bankrupt-not unions.

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Only to those who choose to be willfully misinformed. The fact is that unions are more than willing to compromise but politicians like the governor of wisconsin are exploiting a bad economy to try to lay the blame at the feet of only the unions that he deems to be bad as he refuses to compromise.

 

[drsmith1072]

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

They've already tried. The unions said NO!!!

Actually the unions in wisconsin said they are willing to compromise but the governor said no. This isn't about the budget it's about squashing unions and stripping them of their rights.

Union leaders for the state's teachers, health care workers and other public employees say they'll give the governor the financial concessions he wants — amounting to a pay cut of 8 percent or more — but they will stand firm on what they call union-busting proposals.
Wis. Protesters Want Gov. Walker To Compromise : NPR

 

[Nosmo King]

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

They've already tried. The unions said NO!!!

So, the answer is obvious? Eliminate the right to collective bargaining and the state's budget will be in the black? You really think so?

 

[drsmith1072]

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

I'm assuming that they are trimming the budget.....but there is some serious unfunded benefits that has been laid on the backs of taxpayers. The state is broke, what part of that isn't sinking in?

The unions solution is a one time renegociated contract, this is going to be a long term problem....not a 2 or 3 year contract issue.

So what is your idea of a compromise?? The whole reason this is an issue is because the governor's, such as in wisconsin, are claiming there is CURRENTLY, short term problem, a crisis and yet according to http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb/Misc/2011_01_31Vos&Darling.pdf Wisconsin has a projected surplus. There are a couple of items that will need to be paid off or down but to claim it's a crisis is overstating it.