30 seconds whats wrong with public workers unions.

That's not really something to call wrong. All groups want something and try to get politicians to give it to them. In the last election the Tea Party got a lot of people elected and they are already threatening to get them booted in the next election if they don't do what the TPers want. Just becuase this is a union doing the same thing, doesn't make it wrong.

Political policies are supposed to based on the will of the people and this is a faction of the people. The only question is whether they have the numbers to control the outcome on their own, or if they need others groups/individuals to vote with them.

eber322 wrote:

That's not really something to call wrong. All groups want something and try to get politicians to give it to them. In the last election the Tea Party got a lot of people elected and they are already threatening to get them booted in the next election if they don't do what the TPers want. Just becuase this is a union doing the same thing, doesn't make it wrong.

Political policies are supposed to based on the will of the people and this is a faction of the people. The only question is whether they have the numbers to control the outcome on their own, or if they need others groups/individuals to vote with them.

Correct but they are not funded by the tax payer. As public unions are.

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

Correct but they are not funded by the tax payer. As public unions are.

Ok, I get what you're saying now. However there's still a problem here. Regardless of whether the union is public funded or not, the individuals that make it up can still go out and vote as a block. So, even though you have a point, there is no way to stop these kinds of unions from sending out their members to vote... unless you want to deny people the right to vote because they belong to public funded unions?

Or do you want to remove the rights of public employees to unionize? Unions, despite their problems, are a very necessary component of the work place. I'm far more concerned with the employers that are allowed to deny their workers the right to unionize than I am with the existing unions. I wouldn't deny anybody the right to unionize, in fact I'd penelize any employer that denied their employees that right, including the government.

eber322 wrote:

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

Correct but they are not funded by the tax payer. As public unions are.

Ok, I get what you're saying now. However there's still a problem here. Regardless of whether the union is public funded or not, the individuals that make it up can still go out and vote as a block. So, even though you have a point, there is no way to stop these kinds of unions from sending out their members to vote... unless you want to deny people the right to vote because they belong to public funded unions?

Or do you want to remove the rights of public employees to unionize? Unions, despite their problems, are a very necessary component of the work place. I'm far more concerned with the employers that are allowed to deny their workers the right to unionize than I am with the existing unions. I wouldn't deny anybody the right to unionize, in fact I'd penelize any employer that denied their employees that right, including the government.

Federal government does have the right for collective bargaining. Neither should the states. I work for the State of Virginia and we have no union and we are doing just fine.

If you work for the public and paid by the public, a union with public funds is a conflict of interest isn't it?