Elected city officials represent taxpayers, not employees' unions
Greensboro Mayor Yvonne Johnson supports collective bargaining rights for public employees, Mark reports. That's disappointing.
The proposed city budget explains why it's a poor idea:
"Salary adjustments will vary based on employee performance but should average 2.3 percent across the organization."
Simple enough. Two-plus percent isn't much, but money is tight. Private-sector workers -- taxpayers -- certainly aren't doing any better.
That was the manager's proposal. The City Council can adjust the final budget. But what if there were collective bargaining?
Of course, that opens the door to unions -- probably several unions. Before he could fashion his budget proposal, the manager would have to make a bargain with the various unions: one for police officers, another for firefighters, maybe another for sanitation workers, what have you. All could come to different agreements about salary and benefits. But one thing you could be sure of: There would be no variance based on employee performance. Good workers, poor workers. All would get the same pay adjustments.
Once these agreements were concluded and reflected in the proposed budget, the City Council would get its turn. Could it cut the budget without reopening the bargaining process with the various unions? Or would it have to accept any agreements -- contracts? -- signed by the manager, having its hands tied?
Many cities in collective bargaining states enter into long-term contracts with unions that obligate them to salary increases in years when a slow economy might depress tax revenues. That would force the governing body to raise taxes to meet its contractual obligations, unless the contracts allowed layoffs -- both bad options.
Public employees should be treated fairly, as should taxpayers. Collective bargaining can put employees in an adversarial position against the taxpayers. Elected city officials should decide whom they represent.
Comments (9)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Doug:
I agree wholeheartedly! Public sector employees tend to have a monopoly on the sort of work they do, i.e., police, fire, etc., and therefore would have bargaining power that private sector employees generally don't have (who will do police work if officers go on strike, or teach school children if teachers strike).
Keep up the good work.
Best regards,
Posted on June 12, 2008 10:33 AM
And I second that emotion. One need look no further than the California public employee unions and the major mischief they cause come budget time to see what a terrible idea collective bargaining with government employees is. Either taxes increase or services get cut in order to keep up with contractual salary obligations.
(And lest we forget, "collective bargaining" means "going on strike," too -- unless we want to see Greensboro turn into, say, Philadelphia of the 1970s and its garbage strikes, by all means we should avoid this road ...)
Posted on June 12, 2008 3:06 PM
Couldn't agree more with all of the above.
Just recently, you had a thread on a California town, which is going bankrupt because it can't afford to pay its unionized police officers and fire fighters (who earn $150,000-$200,000 on average). If Mayor Johnson gets her way, this could be what we see here in Greensboro. Not to mention the constant threat of strikes, like Sam mentions.
It sounds like the Mayor is trying to win votes among public employees -- at the expense of us taxpayers who will have to foot the bill
Posted on June 12, 2008 4:32 PM
You are all a bunch of idiots.
Did you ever notice that nobody every talks about the initial purpose of unions? Not to mention collective bargaining is a tool, not a carte blanche to unionize. If you would like to see North Carolina service workers continue to be ranked among the lowest paid in the nation, continue to have these archaic notions about supporting our working class.
Posted on June 13, 2008 4:03 PM
You are all a bunch of idiots.
Did you ever notice that nobody every talks about the initial purpose of unions? Not to mention collective bargaining is a tool, not a carte blanche to unionize. If you like to see North Carolina service workers continue to be ranked among the lowest paid in the nation, continue to have these archaic notions about supporting our working class.
Posted on June 13, 2008 4:03 PM
You are all a bunch of idiots.
Did you ever notice that nobody every talks about the initial purpose of unions? Not to mention collective bargaining is a tool, not a carte blanche to unionize. If you would like to see North Carolina service workers continue to be ranked among the lowest paid in the nation, continue to have these archaic notions about supporting our working class.
Posted on June 13, 2008 4:04 PM
Thanks for the comment, Amado.
I'm such an idiot I can't find data showing where North Carolina public employee compensation ranks. Do you have anything on that?
Posted on June 13, 2008 4:13 PM
And I'm such an idiot that I only hit the "post" button once when commenting here.
I guess my posts just don't have that particular je ne sais quoi that some contributors have.
Posted on June 13, 2008 8:02 PM
Maybe if you changed the spelling to Bubbeaux ...
Posted on June 13, 2008 9:46 PM