There is a new bill coming up in the Ohio Senate and I am torn with this. On one hand, I hate the government getting involved in anything that really isn’t their business. From all appearances, that is what SB-5 is all about. Breaking up a unions ability to collectively bargain for the benefits/rights of all the employees working within said union. Specifically, the unions dealing with public workers. This means Police, Firemen, Teachers, and yes those folks at the DMV that we love to hate. There are many others affected by this bill and I recently, incorrectly summarized the bill as impacting relatively few people. I was wrong in this, and though it is no defense I had only glanced at the issue at hand.
Why did I only glance at the issue? Frankly, I hate unions. I think they promote laziness and have created much of of our society’s expectations of the world oweing them just because they exist. Unions are a blight on the nation and from what I know about economics, are one of the reason cost of living keeps jumping every few years. Yes, I am generalizing but I am sure you get my point. The people that I know that work for unions complain about their co-workers not working anywhere close to their potential. We complain about the DMV because they are so slow and inefficient. We complain about the price of automobiles, yet it is cheaper for a manufacturer to pay someone to fix cars after the line than to pay overtime to make sure the cars on the line are done right the first time. These are only a few examples. I am sure you can come up with more, and probably better examples of how union workers are counter-intuitive to real productivity and progress. Especially when talking about jobs that should be made obsolete by technology and are kept around only because unions force the issue.
I understand the purpose of unions and I agree with that purpose. This is why I am torn. I truly believe that without unions, many employees would be left without a living wage, and/or benefits. I would hate to see our country without unions no matter how I personally feel about them. Without the ability to collectively bargain for their employees, the union has no value.
When Unions and Companies go to the bargaining table, the companies are demonized for not wanting to pay more, or offer more benefits, or more time off, etc. Yet many times, the company comes to the table with all of their statistics of how little actual work gets done by the average American employee compared to how much productivity they get from workers in other countries earning a criminal pittance in comparison. We hear from union employees about buying American, but who can really afford to.
My proposition to resolve this issue is to hold the unions responsible for holding up their end of the bargain. Too often, union employees are lax in their productivity because they have no incentive. They can’t really get fired, they will get the same raise as everyone else when they hit a certain amount of years worked, and there is a precedent set as to the minimum amount of work that can be done without getting in trouble. Let’s find a way to hold the unions responsible for the productivity and efficiency of the employees they represent. Let’s have union stewards that understand what productivity statistics really mean. Let’s find a way to incentivize union employees to do the absolute best job they can rather than incentivizing just being a union employee for as long as possible.
Ayn Rand said that communism was “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need”.
I would like to see a happy medium found in this, but there is a saying about wishing in one hand…
Um… Karl Marx said that, not Ayn Rand.
Actually, Karl Marx was much more verbose on the subject. Ayn Rand paraphrased his statement.
Well, the slogan predates Marx, but he did popularize it. Ayn Rand quoted it to criticize it, but she didn’t coin the phrase. (Though you’re right; technically neither did Marx.)
Not to be difficult, but attributing it to Ayn Rand is really just not accurate.
Fair enough.
I’d only seen it written specifically that way in Atlas Shrugged, but I am not a political scholar.
I attributed according to my knowledge. If she would have attributed another author, I would have used that.
I dont disagree with you about the Unions per say… but you barely cover the real issues. Are the Unions part of the problem? Maybe. Why no blog about the 40% raise across the board Kasich has given his staff? Why no mention of the fact weve given up raises and taken pay cuts over the past few years, along with giving up benefits? Politicians squander our resources and tax money, not us. Unions are easy targets because we are ineffective and bogged down in are own system we created. But we are not the reason the state of Ohio is broke. Wall St is. A prolonged war we had no business being in has caused problems. Pork is DC, greed at the highest levels…. Unions are just a small fraction of the problem.
I didn’t go into detail about specific employees or unions because that wouldn’t address the point I was trying to make.
I want to see unions and union employees held responsible for earning the wages they demand. Do I think SB-5 is the way to go? No, absolutely not! Far from it actually. But the underlying message I have seen from the supporters of the bill has some merit.
Why can’t people earn based on their performance rather than how long they can hold a job?
TOTALLY agree on the fact that the unions carry too much dead weight… Unions will change when politicians and CEO’s of banks are held accountable
Politicians will be held responsible when voters decide to vote on what is good for the people rather than themselves at that moment (read: never). CEOs of banks are held responsible when they stop making money for those that depend on them for making money (ie: their job) and the politicians stop making loopholes for them to exploit.
Unions will change when there are enough hard workers sick of the slackers living off their effort and want to earn a living based on their own performance, not the amount of time they have paid dues to the union. Frankly, I see this as the most probable of the three changes.
Exactly. America is lazy and ignorant… just like our Unions!
I am with Mingus on this, I can see the good and the bad sides of unions, especially after having a class on working class history. I think unions were necessarry back in the late 1800′s into the 1900′s, but as with all things, the have become bloated, and a lets see how little we can do but yet still get our benefits. While I am generalizing a lot, I know union workers who work their ass off for their jobs, but again it is the few who make a ad name for the rest. As for the bottom line of course companies are going to take business overseas, they can make more money that way because they d not have to pay a worker as much as they would have to pay someone in a union, and they can pretty much walk all over those workers. I agree I think the deeper issue lies in those at the top, and while people say American’s are lazy again it is the select few, we still out produce, work more hours, and have longer work days than the rest of the world. So is there a fix yes there is but what is I don’t know, will it be easy to no it will not. On a side note all this union stuff makes me think back to the 1984 movie Gung Ho with Micheal Keaton in it.
I agree that there are people in my union who are.lazy asses and some who just aren’t very good at their job despite their best effort. The thing for.me about SB5 is seems scary as sh*t for those of us in unions. I’m not afraid of being paid for merit, I know I could do well there. But WITH a union, we take 2 weeks a year without pay and I have had no raise since starting in 07. I read an article this am where kasich said “people don’t understand the bill” paraphrasing. The fact is I hear WAY more about this bill from my union than I have from the state house. Please enlighten us, we work under you!
I think you are absolutely correct on all sides. SB-5 scares me because of, if nothing else, the precedent it sets.
As I said, for all my distaste for unions, it is better to have them than not. Without the collective bargaining power, unions are impotent.
I just hope that when SB-5 is defeated, unions turn and take a hard look in the mirror and ask how this bill has gained as much traction as it has.
I really doubt they will. It is all about money, and as much as unions scream about representing their constituents, at the highest level it really isn’t. Same with politicians, the union leaders will probably try and funnel more money into candidates that will support their agenda and not rock the boat like Kasich and Walker are doing. I honestly see no change in the upper leadership come out of this. It is not they who will suffer.