doublegunshop.com - home Forums Ken Burn's Teddy R.

i know and have known a few individuals with career commitment to the public school teaching system. my hat goes off to anyone who can tolerate the various negative forces one has to deal with:

- unmotivated students
- jealous colleauges
- abusive parents
- cowardly administrators
- weasel like union reps
- penny pinching tax payers

kudos to anyone who earns a pension teaching in our public schools.

Hey, it's not like I agree with public sector unions. I don't and I think they should be banned.

I also think, as a less radical idea, that critical service employees should be banned from striking. Don't know the rules in the US but up here, provincially, some are. But many are not.

But that's the thing. Public sector unions have been allowed. Teachers have not been legally described as critical and have been allowed to strike. Those are the rules.

Until you get your shit together and repeal the ridiculous laws that got passed by Democrat and Republican, those are the rules you all gotta live by. So my original point still stands and I still think you guys are barking up the wrong tree by blaming the employees.

You guys have closed shop unions. Think you invented them. That means Bill couldn't work if he didn't join the union. That means he was forced to pay union dues, forced to strike when the union voted to strike, regardless of his own personal opinions about the subject.

Dave, answer me this. I have no idea what you do for a living but would you turn down benefits if offered?

The problem lies with the lawmakers, not the employees.

You've forgotten the power of presidents, Dave. Remember Reagan and the air traffic controllers? From Wikipedia:

"In the 1980 presidential election, PATCO (along with the Teamsters and the Air Line Pilots Association) refused to back President Jimmy Carter, instead endorsing Republican Party candidate Ronald Reagan. PATCO's refusal to endorse the Democratic Party stemmed in large part from poor labor relations with the FAA (the employer of PATCO members) under the Carter administration and Ronald Reagan's endorsement of the union and its struggle for better conditions during the 1980 election campaign.

"On August 3, 1981, during a press conference regarding the PATCO strike, President Reagan stated: "They are in violation of the law and if they do not report for work within 48 hours they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated."

On August 3, 1981, the union declared a strike, seeking better working conditions, better pay and a 32-hour workweek. In addition, PATCO no longer wanted to be included within the civil service clauses that had haunted it for decades. In doing so, the union violated a law � 5 U.S.C. (Supp. III 1956) 118p (now 5 U.S.C. � 7311) � that banned strikes by government unions. Ronald Reagan declared the PATCO strike a "peril to national safety" and ordered them back to work under the terms of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. Only 1,300 of the nearly 13,000 controllers returned to work. Subsequently, Reagan demanded those remaining on strike return to work within 48 hours, otherwise their jobs would be forfeited.

"On August 5, following the PATCO workers' refusal to return to work, Reagan fired the 11,345 striking air traffic controllers who had ignored the order, and banned them from federal service for life."

Reagan supported a union until it crossed the line and became toast. What's "ridiculous" in the above quote is not that "hired servants" are dictating to government. It's the notion they're accountable only to themselves.

pa: it is my understanding that on the direct order of the president, mitchell was court martialed and found guilty of insubordination and demoted. he chose to resign. what did fdr have to do with that in 1926, when cal collidge was pres?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Mitchell

"On August 5, following the PATCO workers' refusal to return to work, Reagan fired the 11,345 striking air traffic controllers who had ignored the order, and banned them from federal service for life."

ah, where is the likes of leadership like this now?

hoped it was sarah palin. guess not.

if not her, then who?

I'm not sure where the "Sucker" label came from, I must have missed it earlier in the thread.

I never voted to award a monopoly to any union. I also never voted to compensate a public employee at double the free market rate. Both are contrary to my individual freedom and equality, as I have to give up my economic freedom in order for both of those things to occur. Freedom is not an issue of majority "Mob Rule". That's exactly how the religious statists rationalize what is happening now, a circumvention of the Constitution.

They are receiving contractual compensation from a government entity that had ZERO fiduciary responsibility or liability, they used "other people's money" in order to buy votes.

Government unions should be abolished. As should the monopolies granted to private sector ones.

And yes, compensation of government workers that is above that a similar worker makes in the private sector is a form of Welfare. It's another form of unconstitutional vote-buying.

King, we 'discuss' the power of a certain prez. near daily. I am glad that you could see that it is possible for a union to 'cross the line'. Is it possible to discuss why it is impossible for a union to cross any ideological dem line.

CB,

to answer your question I do not,nor have I ever taken money from those who could not afford it,I am not a union member-have many friends that are but Private sector NOT public.
Like you I have no issue with what the private sector union members make,those are true negotiations between unions and contractors who win or lose NOT the money laundering of the teachers and other public sector unions. I have seen taxes go so high in New Jersey (small homes paying $12-15 k per year,many paying more much more) that the elderly are forced to eat cat food,freeze in the winter all to pay 6 figure pensions for retired teachers.
No I would never steal money like that,never !

I made my living in the service sector and the customers I had were all very very wealthy,I am very proud to say I don't rob others to survive and never would.

"It's another form of unconstitutional vote-buying."

Exactly !

Unions cross the line every day, Craig, sometimes purposely when negotiations break down to get arbitration. Governments and private sector companies do the same for the same reason. I'm not aware of anything "impossible" between any union or any party. Historically, conservatives have been the parties of business and liberals of the commoners, and that's about it.