Unions distort fiscal issues for government

MADISON, WI - FEBRUARY 18:  National AFL-CIO P...Image by Getty Images via @daylife
Tina Korbe:

It was a common refrain among union protesters last weekend: “It’s about the rights; it’s not about the money.” But for Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, it is about the money -- both the money needed to balance the state budget and the politically influential money union leaders collect and now seek to protect.

Opponents of Walker’s bill to limit collective bargaining and reduce public teacher benefits seem to think the right to collectively negotiate should be treated as sacred. They just want a seat at the table, they say.

Given that, union workers claim they might even voluntarily agree to a reduction in the posh benefits they currently enjoy, such as pensions to which they contribute less than 1 percent and health care premiums for which they pay 6 percent.

But from Walker’s perspective, collective bargaining itself is a fiscal issue, in no small part because it allows union leaders to sit across the negotiating table from voters’ representatives and have an equal say in how the government spends its money.

As long as union leaders have to agree to government spending plans, voters’ representatives do not have the final say. Unions, therefore, can systematically redirect tax dollars to themselves.

The governor’s office is pushing back aggressively, offering real-life examples to support its proposal.

Thanks to union negotiating, for instance, public workers receive paid time off for union activities. In Milwaukee County alone, 14 employees receive salary and benefits to conduct union business, and three of those are on full-time release for union affairs. That means Milwaukee County spent more than $170,000 in salary alone for these employees to do nothing other than participate in union activities.

According to Walker’s office, collective bargaining also involves a certain surrender of management rights. Union-negotiated contracts restrict management’s ability to schedule workers based on operational needs.

...
The main reason the unions are fighting so hard to keep collective bargaining is that they hope to recoup their losses if Democrats return to power. They would take advantage of the inherent conflict of interest in negotiating with people they put in office with their dollars and votes. Another way to block this conflict of interest is to not permit government unions to make contributions to political candidates.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Is the F-35 obsolete?