No public employee should be allowed to strike, that is why the The National Labor Relations Act, NLRA, or Wagner Act of 1935 specifically excluded public employees.
Ironically, it was John Wagner, Mayor of NYC and son of the NLRA's sponsor that first broke ranks and issued an executive order that allowed public employees to collective bargain and ultimately strike for very publically stated political gain. This was followed by JFK who issued a similar executive order in 1963 when he found himself not polling well.
Laws like the Taylor Law which give public service unions voice through mediation rather than strikes are more tha appropriate as public service employees are employed by the people not a for profit organization and strikes have ramifications for public safety and the public health and welfare.
Sections 7 and 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) guarantee employees the right to create, join, and participate in a labor union without being unfairly intimidated or punished by their employers.
(Maybe your brown-shirt profile pic should have different face; Hitler nationalized the trade unions under the Deutsche Arbeitsfront.)
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable."
"But FDR had no inkling of what the end game would be. In 1958, New York City Mayor Robert Wagner signed an executive order allowing civil workers to unionize. It was an obvious appeal to union voters. A Wagner aide suggested that city workers would be a large enough constituency to guarantee his re-election."
"Let's take a look at some quaint language in "Labor Relations in the Public Sector," a text authored by Professor Richard C. Kearney who cites commentators from days gone by:
"Public work was regarded as a short step above the dole ... for people willing to exchange a decent wage ... for security and an undemanding job." No longer. With benefits - they are making twice as much. (It is not surprising that of the 10 counties with the highest per capita income, six are in the Washington, D.C. area.)
Fast forward to the counterculture years: "Federal employees were thought to have been professionalized into objective, politically neutral competence, cleansed of radicalism ... and made both happy and prosperous by very generous salary increases.
The outbreak of protest in the federal service obviously jarred these conceptions. Why the sudden militancy of public workers in the 1960s?"
Politically neutral competence? For starters, how about Kennedy's executive order unionizing the federal bureaucracy, ignoring FDR's advice. Federal employees were the missing piece of the public sector work force, so Kennedy cemented the special relationship between all public sector unions and the Democratic Party.
Kearney observes that until 1965, public workers were "generally perceived to be ... humble servants of the people ... They scarcely seemed part of the American labor movement."
You are correct - But he was still the Son of NY Senator Wagoner who authored the NLRA, and was still the first politician since enactment of the NLRA to use executive order to allow public workers to unionize.
He also very openly claimed that it was in an effort to garner re-election support from public workers in hi bid to hold office.
Thank you Mr. Weiss for correcting my error in the first name of Mayor Wagner
"Humble servants of people," that's a hoot. Reminds me of a chronicled list of teacher duties from the turn of the century (19th/20th) that included topping the coal stove and removing the ashes. It obviously predates the requirement for a Masters Degree for permanent certification, etc. Should we assume that Gibson Girl attire will return?!
Excuse me CM, "Humble servants of people," were Professor Richard C. Kearney (Himself and educator) words not mine.
I was not advocating lower pay for teachers, infact I believe teachers should be among the highest paid of all public sector employees, I am against public employees of any persuasion of striking is all.
I believe strongly in a mediation system for public employees to be precise. When public employees strike, they are not hurting a business entitty, they are hurting the community in which they serve and in many cases live.
I know all too well what teachers do and the multitude of daily task they perform that go largely unidentified.
The issue at hand is whether going on strike or to arbitration is the only issue of the poll. The pay for teachers, police officers and first responders should be the best that a community can afford, the key phrase is 'The Best That A Community Can Afford"
I suppose it boils down to whether you believe the government is the dictator of what one needs or the people of a communty select the government that they need.
Employment in public service is not the same as working for a corporation or family held business, and the issues are not in anyway the same.
When a public union makes demands, those who have to pay for them have no representation across the table from the union. Officials don't care because it's not their money.
Not sure, but I think the last state wide public employee strike was in 1979, when the Correction Officers went out for about two weeks. Now there is binding arbitration if an agreement is not reached.
There were two major strikes by city employees in NYS in the last decade, Buffalo City school teachers in 2000, and NYC transit workers in 2005.
In the case of the Buffalo City School Teachers, they were fined 1 1/2 days pay for ever day they struck, which left many with reduced paychecks at Christmas Time.
In NYC, the union leadership was threatened with incarseration, I am not sure if any of them were actually jailed, but it did bring the strike to an end.
Peter while you might be right that government employees shouldn't have been allowed to unionize, that genie is out of the bottle and will never change, just like we will never return to the gold standard.
Binding arbitration is the most effective way to deal with impass between local and state governments and Unions, it works, it happened right hear in Batavia recently with the police department and actually garnered concessions from both sides that might have gotten ugly otherwise.
We should eliminate the Dept of Education, and get government out of the business of schooling. It's amazing how all the top higher levels of learning are privately owned and run.
That's why (among other
That's why (among other things) New York State has the Taylor Law.
Yes, but they should run the
Yes, but they should run the risk of being replaced also.
No public employee should be
No public employee should be allowed to strike, that is why the The National Labor Relations Act, NLRA, or Wagner Act of 1935 specifically excluded public employees.
Ironically, it was John Wagner, Mayor of NYC and son of the NLRA's sponsor that first broke ranks and issued an executive order that allowed public employees to collective bargain and ultimately strike for very publically stated political gain. This was followed by JFK who issued a similar executive order in 1963 when he found himself not polling well.
Laws like the Taylor Law which give public service unions voice through mediation rather than strikes are more tha appropriate as public service employees are employed by the people not a for profit organization and strikes have ramifications for public safety and the public health and welfare.
They shouldn't be allowed to
They shouldn't be allowed to unionize to begin with.
Sections 7 and 8 of the
Sections 7 and 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) guarantee employees the right to create, join, and participate in a labor union without being unfairly intimidated or punished by their employers.
(Maybe your brown-shirt profile pic should have different face; Hitler nationalized the trade unions under the Deutsche Arbeitsfront.)
Robert Wagner was the mayor
Robert Wagner was the mayor of New York City
"... Meticulous attention
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable."
FDR 1937
http://www2.hernandotoday.com/news/hernando-news/2010/oct/17/ha-fdrs-wa…
From the same article
"But FDR had no inkling of what the end game would be. In 1958, New York City Mayor Robert Wagner signed an executive order allowing civil workers to unionize. It was an obvious appeal to union voters. A Wagner aide suggested that city workers would be a large enough constituency to guarantee his re-election."
"Let's take a look at some quaint language in "Labor Relations in the Public Sector," a text authored by Professor Richard C. Kearney who cites commentators from days gone by:
"Public work was regarded as a short step above the dole ... for people willing to exchange a decent wage ... for security and an undemanding job." No longer. With benefits - they are making twice as much. (It is not surprising that of the 10 counties with the highest per capita income, six are in the Washington, D.C. area.)
Fast forward to the counterculture years: "Federal employees were thought to have been professionalized into objective, politically neutral competence, cleansed of radicalism ... and made both happy and prosperous by very generous salary increases.
The outbreak of protest in the federal service obviously jarred these conceptions. Why the sudden militancy of public workers in the 1960s?"
Politically neutral competence? For starters, how about Kennedy's executive order unionizing the federal bureaucracy, ignoring FDR's advice. Federal employees were the missing piece of the public sector work force, so Kennedy cemented the special relationship between all public sector unions and the Democratic Party.
Kearney observes that until 1965, public workers were "generally perceived to be ... humble servants of the people ... They scarcely seemed part of the American labor movement."
You are correct - But he was
You are correct - But he was still the Son of NY Senator Wagoner who authored the NLRA, and was still the first politician since enactment of the NLRA to use executive order to allow public workers to unionize.
He also very openly claimed that it was in an effort to garner re-election support from public workers in hi bid to hold office.
Thank you Mr. Weiss for correcting my error in the first name of Mayor Wagner
"Humble servants of people,"
"Humble servants of people," that's a hoot. Reminds me of a chronicled list of teacher duties from the turn of the century (19th/20th) that included topping the coal stove and removing the ashes. It obviously predates the requirement for a Masters Degree for permanent certification, etc. Should we assume that Gibson Girl attire will return?!
Excuse me CM, "Humble
Excuse me CM, "Humble servants of people," were Professor Richard C. Kearney (Himself and educator) words not mine.
I was not advocating lower pay for teachers, infact I believe teachers should be among the highest paid of all public sector employees, I am against public employees of any persuasion of striking is all.
I believe strongly in a mediation system for public employees to be precise. When public employees strike, they are not hurting a business entitty, they are hurting the community in which they serve and in many cases live.
I know all too well what teachers do and the multitude of daily task they perform that go largely unidentified.
The issue at hand is whether going on strike or to arbitration is the only issue of the poll. The pay for teachers, police officers and first responders should be the best that a community can afford, the key phrase is 'The Best That A Community Can Afford"
I suppose it boils down to whether you believe the government is the dictator of what one needs or the people of a communty select the government that they need.
Employment in public service is not the same as working for a corporation or family held business, and the issues are not in anyway the same.
When a public union makes
When a public union makes demands, those who have to pay for them have no representation across the table from the union. Officials don't care because it's not their money.
Absolutely not. As much as I
Absolutely not. As much as I support organized labor, public employee strikes are out of line.
Not sure, but I think the
Not sure, but I think the last state wide public employee strike was in 1979, when the Correction Officers went out for about two weeks. Now there is binding arbitration if an agreement is not reached.
There were two major strikes
There were two major strikes by city employees in NYS in the last decade, Buffalo City school teachers in 2000, and NYC transit workers in 2005.
In the case of the Buffalo City School Teachers, they were fined 1 1/2 days pay for ever day they struck, which left many with reduced paychecks at Christmas Time.
In NYC, the union leadership was threatened with incarseration, I am not sure if any of them were actually jailed, but it did bring the strike to an end.
Peter while you might be right that government employees shouldn't have been allowed to unionize, that genie is out of the bottle and will never change, just like we will never return to the gold standard.
Binding arbitration is the most effective way to deal with impass between local and state governments and Unions, it works, it happened right hear in Batavia recently with the police department and actually garnered concessions from both sides that might have gotten ugly otherwise.
We should eliminate the Dept
We should eliminate the Dept of Education, and get government out of the business of schooling. It's amazing how all the top higher levels of learning are privately owned and run.