http://pleasantonweekly.com/square/print/2009/05/14/public-sector-unions-growing-power


Town Square

Public Sector Unions Growing Power

Original post made by Ceasar on May 14, 2009

An outstanding analysis of the growing power of public sector unions is in the Wall Stree Journal's Editorial page. This guy crushed it
(accurate assesment of the situation).


Web Link

Comments

Posted by Joe, a resident of Downtown
on May 14, 2009 at 4:14 pm

BULLSEYE, and many have been talking about this for years. Public sector unions are corrupt and their only real purpose is to perpetuate their own existence at the expense of taxpayers. Make no mistake, these are not labor unions whose main iintent is the protection of its members, these are evil entities who flood elections with money to push their agendas. Even here in little ole' Pleasanton we see their handywork...do you really think that the PUSD's proxy campaigners, SPS, could generate enough money without funds from the unions? I don't believe it for one second!!!


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on May 14, 2009 at 4:27 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

"A study in 2005 by the nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute estimated that the average public-sector worker earned 46% more in salary and benefits than comparable private-sector workers. The gap has only continued to grow. For example, state and local worker pay and benefits rose 3.1% in the last year, compared to 1.9% in the private sector, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)."


Posted by Jill, a resident of Birdland
on May 14, 2009 at 4:41 pm

When faced with economic reality, a real labor union will give in to concessions if they know it will help the private sector company out of hardship in order to save jobs. Not so with the public sector union, their mantra is that the "taxpayer can always give us more". Well now we have the power to vote on May 19th and June 2nd and send the devil back to hell where he belongs-NO-NO MORE ! We got them and we can send a message loud and clear that this cycle of tyranny is about to end.


Posted by Pleasanton Resident, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on May 14, 2009 at 4:50 pm

Two school employees unions filed suit against the State of California this month saying the state must repay schools the amount it is taking away.
The unions are the California Federation of Teachers and Service Employees International Local 99 in Southern California. The suit was filed in San Francisco Superior Court.

Now who do you suppose will be paying the legal costs the State will incur because of this lawsuit?


Posted by The Browser, a resident of Del Prado
on May 14, 2009 at 5:27 pm

I never thought I would see gold turn to rust, but, like they say, if you live long enough. What will the unions do when they drive us all away, try to turn that rust back into gold? Birdland Jill is right, vote to put an end to this insanity now. Vote against the state propostions and measure G and you are voting against the unions.








Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 14, 2009 at 6:27 pm

Unions are silly. So if the government keeps squeezing the private sector/taxpayers, after a while there will not be enough tax revenue (we already have that problem) - then what? who is going to pay all this nonsense union salaries, pensions and benefits? No reform means eventually running out of cash, as it happened in Vallejo.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 14, 2009 at 6:28 pm

On May 19:

YES on 1F (no raises), NO on everything else


Posted by Ceaser, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on May 14, 2009 at 9:11 pm

I would like to make the distintion between public sector and private sector unions. Private sector Unions are subject to market forces. Public sector unions rely on taxes. Once they wrest control of the politcal process, its game, set, match.

Taxes will go up and the ranks of public employees will grow.
The cycle will, I mean, has bankrupted the state.


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on May 14, 2009 at 9:17 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

Ceaser,

That's part of what the article says.

"some critics, including private-sector labor leaders such as George Meany, observed that government is a monopoly not subject to the discipline of the marketplace. Allowing these workers -- many already protected by civil-service law -- to organize and bargain collectively might ultimately give them the power to hold politicians and taxpayers hostage."


Posted by Bad Business, a resident of Happy Valley
on May 14, 2009 at 10:16 pm

Oh the wonderful private sector! If only everything could be run like the private sector.

Bear Stearns, AIG, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley. Can anyone please tell me what vital service these "companies" provide that benefits us so greatly? Do they do anything of value? Why do we even allow them to stay in business? Why are the tax dollars of the middle class and the poor paying to keep them around. Do they do anything of value?


Posted by Joe, a resident of Downtown
on May 14, 2009 at 11:48 pm

"...give them the power to hold politicians and taxpayers hostage." Don't think Meany was right, well chew on this.
We all know that the taxpayers are the number one hostage, but their reign may soon be eclipsed by the President himself. In regard to the Chrysler issue, the Obama Administration has proposed that Chrysler's secured creditors receive 28cents per dollar on the $7billion owed them but that the United Auto Workers union get 43cents per dollar on $11billion in claims AND 55% of the company.


Posted by Life-long Learner, a resident of Harvest Park Middle School
on May 15, 2009 at 10:20 am

Steve Malanga's article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal is exceptional and should be required reading for all of us, on both sides of the issue. I urge everyone to share the link Web Link with family and friends. Thank you Ceasar, for sharing it with us.


Posted by Life-long Learner, a resident of Harvest Park Middle School
on May 15, 2009 at 10:45 am

Bad Business, you posit an interesting question. The argument presented to our last President was that companies like AIG, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley were too big to be allowed to fail. The argument continued that if companies like these failed, the entire world economy would collapse, sending us into a world-wide depression of undetermined length. I'm not an economist and it doesn't sound like you are either. That said, there isn't agreement in that community with regard to what actions should or shouldn't have happened last fall. Perhaps these companies should have been allowed to fail. Perhaps TARP was ill-conceived and is being poorly executed.

Bad Business, you clearly have basic issues with capitalism that go beyond our current crisis. Perhaps you prefer a Soviet or Beijing-style of central command and control governance. One where every action you take is monitored and measured. One where you have zero freedom to choose your path in life. One where some faceless minion will direct you to what you will achieve, educationally, socially and financially, from cradle to grave. Bad Business, with the path we are currently taking, at all levels of government, we're fast on the way to this form of governance. Perhaps not in ten or twenty years, but in fifty years, unless we, the people, make a change now.


Posted by Einstein, a resident of Mohr Elementary School
on May 15, 2009 at 10:54 am

Einstein is a registered user.

Life-long learner,

I think you make some good points and actually I belive we should have let them fail and that is normally what happens in a free market. If you take a look at the top 10 companies in the US in 1900 and compared them to the top 10 companies in 2000 you would find that all of the 1900 companies do not appear on the 2000 list and most have ceased to exist. I believe this is natural and everything needs to evolve otherwise by not changing they become extinct. We are artifically proping up AIG, the financial companies, Chrysler, and now GM. These companies need to go the way of the Vanderbilt Railroads and evolve. Afterall, who in the right mind would buy a GM product after this is all overwith? Well the answer is not few as it is a losing proposition. I guarantee that if the government did not intervene and these companies had went away it would have provided opportunity for some of the other companies which had been run correctly.


Posted by Ceasar, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on May 15, 2009 at 2:11 pm

Did you know that many city employees all over the state get free health benefits FOR LIFE for working 5 years for a city. Spouses are often included. What kind of knucklehead would give that perk n a collective bargaining negotiation? Answer: Someone hoping to get re elected.

This is madness.


Posted by Bad Business, a resident of Happy Valley
on May 15, 2009 at 5:08 pm

No, I don't want what they had in the Soviet Union. I would be happy if we just put back the regulations we had in 1999.

1. Roll back the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000

Web Link

2. Reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act

Web Link

3. Put back the uptick rule

Web Link

The current recession would be mild or non-existent with these.