Collective Bargaining Rights Debate in Wisconsin
Well, you win some and you lose some: A win in Illinois for death penalty opponents (like me). But the republicans dealt a huge blow to the collective bargaining rights of public workers in Wisconsin; virtually eliminating them yesterday. Now the people are upset. Hmmm, did they ever really consider what it means to vote republican before they did it? Voters choose with such short sight these days. Grrrrr.
Don’t know about the numbers. But collective bargaining rights are not entitlements; they’re rights, and arguably necessary policies for ensuring contentment among the workers at a company and fair treatment of those workers by the employer. They safeguard against corporate management exerting undue or unfair leverage or retribution against those speaking out about problems at the plant.
Collective bargaining as a concept costs employers nothing; it’s what workers collectively say they want that can cost. So, that said, would you support eliminating voting rights in places notorious for big spending (CA for example)? People vote to spend, and overspending is a big fiscal problem. So, we might eliminate their voting rights, and we’d thus solve the spending problem. Right? NOT!!! But that’s just the sort of thing that’s happening with collective bargaining in Wisconsin. If an employer can’t resource a particular benefit being fought for, then they should not sign the contract.
I support the
collective bargaining process in the fullest degree because it resulted in a much more pleasant and safer workplace in the 20th century.
Related Posts
References
Tags: Collective Bargaining Rights
This entry was posted
on Thursday, March 10th, 2011 at 3:44 am and is filed under Conservatism, Gripes, Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
March 10th, 2011 at 11:28 am
There are cases (as in the fired teachers example in Washington, DC) where the unions wield too much power, and where management does as well (as in the case of the exploited steel workers in the 1800s). But the solution to this is NOT to clip the wings of one party to give the other an unfair advantage.
Instead, you keep things equal and create public policy that encourages fair negotiation and prevents outrageous settlements. But you don’t take a group’s voice away. Indeed, the constitution guarantees citizens freedom of assembly. Yet disallowing collective bargaining would seem to conflict with that constitutional provision, and I know how bent republicans are on following the constitution.
March 10th, 2011 at 11:40 am
Oh, and as far as debating general conservatism goes, good luck. Personally speaking, conservative policies have been a big thorn in my side as well as those of some very dear friends; interfering with theirs and my own happy existence. I generally find said policies antiquated, inconsiderate of the “whole picture,” excessively exclusionary, and in many cases, based purely on religious doctrine rather than the actual life experience of constituents. No, if the goal of such a debate would be to sway me to think more conservatively as a matter of general principle, you’d almost certainly make no headway. So don’t waste your time.