Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is playing hardball. On Meet the Press, he defended himself:
Wisconsin is “broke,” and unions use their power to block necessary cost-saving measures, Walker said.
“It’s about time somebody stood up and told the truth in this state, and said, ‘Here’s our problem, here’s the solution,’ and acted on it,” he said.
But how sensible is his proposal to remove collective bargaining regarding benefits for most public employee unions? As everyone points out, the unions are agreeing to his other proposals, such as paying for more of their insurance than before.
Why is he being so unreasonable, so “arrogant”?
Last Sunday, I considered the whys on Townhall. Contracts with public employees are completely out of whack because compensation is negotiated outside market competition and by politicians more afraid of the political clout of the powerful unions than their principals (the taxpayers) whose money they’re spending. So, wage rates and especially promises of future medical and pension benefits are sky high and open to abuse.
The union reps can’t be trusted, either. So honed to getting the most for union members (their principals), their monomaniacal purpose washes away every other thought. Now that the corner they’ve shoved the state into has been made apparent, they’ll concede points, sure. But taking away bargaining leverage?
No way. They want to be able to do it all over, when good times roll.
And that is why Gov. Walker’s proposal seems so sound.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
4 replies on “A Necessary Solution?”
FEBRUARY 26, 2011 2:38PM
Federal govt bans its own employees from unionizing
Here’s a “must read” concerning government employee labor unions.
Technically, the federal employees can join labor unions. But the unions cannot negotiate either pay or benefits. And workers cannot be compelled to join a union, or to pay dues.
The Wisconsin bill allows the employee labor unions to negotiate pay, but not benefits. So it turns out the Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is more pro-union than President Obama and the D.C. Democrats.
And remember, Wisconsin public employees have had civil service protection for over a 100 years — long before the government unions got a stranglehold on the state by unionizing the workers.
—
WALL ST JOURNAL
Union Power for Thee, But Not for Me
Obama hypocrisy — Federal government prohibits U.S. employee union shops, mandatory dues, negotiating for wages, etc.
by Kimberly Strassel
25 February, 2011
The union horde is spreading, from Madison to Indianapolis to a state capital near you. And yet the Democratic and union bigwigs engineering the outrage haven’t directed their angry multitudes at what is arguably the most “hostile workplace” in the nation: Washington, D.C.
It will no doubt surprise you to learn that President Obama, the great patron of the working man, also happens to be the great CEO of one of the least union-friendly shop floors in the nation.
This is, after all, the president who has berated Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s proposal to limit the collective bargaining rights of public employees, calling the very idea an “assault on unions.” This is also the president who has sicced his political arm, Organizing for America, on Madison, allowing the group to fill buses and plan rallies. Ah, but it’s easy to throw rocks when you live in a stone (White) house.
Fact: President Obama is the boss of a civil work force that numbers up to two million (excluding postal workers and uniformed military).
Fact: Those federal workers cannot bargain for wages or benefits.
Fact: Washington, D.C. is, in the purest sense, a “right to work zone.” Federal employees are not compelled to join a union, nor to pay union dues.
Fact: Neither Mr. Obama, nor the prior Democratic majority, ever acted to give their union chums a better federal deal.
Scott Walker, eat your heart out.
For this enormous flexibility in managing his work force, Mr. Obama can thank his own party. In 1978, Democratic President Jimmy Carter, backed by a Democratic Congress, passed the Civil Service Reform Act. Washington had already established its General Schedule (GS) classification and pay system for workers. The 1978 bill went further, focused as it was on worker accountability and performance. It severely proscribed the issues over which employees could bargain, as well as prohibited compulsory union support.
. . .
Read the Rest at Strassel: Union Power for Thee, But Not for Me – WSJ.com. (You must pay to read the full article, but you get the point from this introduction.)
This whole argument is about the ability to being able to control spending in the future as well as the current (current has been given.) I agree with the Governor but the big fly in the ointment is the exemption of the police & firefighters. He should have kept the point clear by covering all Public Employees.
Unions in the Federal sector came into being because of the failure of the Civil Service Commission in protecting Federal employees. It is true Federal employees cannot bargain for wages but they certainly can bargain for working conditions. Most important is the right to arbitration for disputes, including discipline. I have been one of those “union bosses” in the Federal sector and negotiated with management and it is no piece of cake. Management holds its own at the bargaining table.
The pay for government union workers is OUTRAGEOUS. Jacob’s article would be better with some examples. Let me provide one. Government K‑12 teachers in Milwaukee get over $100,000 in compensation for 9 months of work, equivalent to $133,333 for a full year. I, holding an engineering degree with honors, and 27 years of experience, would like to be paid as much. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703408604576164290717724956.html
A more market oriented wage would be less than the average for WI workers which is around $40,000/yr. That’s how much taxpayers are being ripped off by the government unions and the Democrats who support them by raising their pay.