Is this the end for public service unions?
It's tough to be a union man in the U.S. these days. As unionized private-sector jobs continue to disappear, the burden of paying for the seemingly lavish benefits of public employees has fallen on a shrinking base of disgruntled taxpayers.
That’s why Wisconsin and several other cash-strapped states are in the midst of turmoil as their Republican governors attempt to rein in spending by checking the growth in public employees' benefits.
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s budget bill, for instance, would make civil servants – excluding local police, state troopers and firefighters – pay substantially more for pensions and benefits, and would, since it hopes to subject salary increases for government workers to a state-wide referendum, likely cripple public service unions as a force in both collective bargaining and politics.
Under the bill, state agencies would also no longer deduct union dues from workers’ paycheques, forcing unions to collect them on their own. And the legislation would also require unions to hold recertification votes annually.
The measure has prompted widespread protests at the state Capitol and seen some public sector workers walk off the job. Several Democratic senators have actually gone into hiding in order to hold things up on the Senate floor.
Nonetheless, unless Walker relents — and there’s little sign of that — Wisconsin’s populist attack on unions seems likely to succeed.
Could the same thing happen on this side of the border? Probably not, since a Supreme Court decision a few years ago guarantees Charter protection to collective bargaining.
Despite this though, there is a growing sense here that the public service has flourished during the recession, while private sector wage and benefits have withered. And the gap seems to be increasing.
The Canadian Federation of Independent Business, for instance, claims public servants enjoy a premium of something like 35 per cent in wages and benefits, compared to their private sector counterparts.
Would you like to see a Wisconsin-like policy shift here in Canada? Is the public/private gap simply too large?
By Gordon Powers, MSN Money
Posted by: Shawn Dickson | Feb 28, 2022 4:55:58 PM
Are unions necessary.....you bet they are. There would be no middle class in this country if we didn't have unions. Please name me one large corporation in Canada where its high paid executives sit down and discuss how they are going to give more to the people who actually do most of the work ?? You have to fight for your pay and benefits. Maybe the ex-CEO of Enmax that just resigned with a 5 MILLION dollar adios wants to share. Perhaps the CEO of BMO that made almost 10 MILLION bucks last year wants to give up some of his cash!! I worked in aviation for 17 years and have been around the world many times. You lose the unions here in North America and there will only be the very rich and very poor....just like India, Nepal, Indonesia ,Peru, Myanmar, Cambodia, Bolivia, Egypt or Honduras, to name a few. I have been to all these countries and trust me......it isn't pretty!
Posted by: Brian | Feb 28, 2022 5:26:53 PM
We need protectionism!!! The WTO has brought us to the point where we cannot continue to live at our standard of living. I don't see how ensuring that Microsoft can move anywhere it likes to make more profit while its employees are barred from doing so improves the lot of the working person. Perhaps a policy shift to the " good old days" of protectionism is needed to save what is left of our economy. Make thw Chinese work hard for their money, and give political aid to our industry. Why is it fair that anyone can own our companies while China and India have native majority control policies?
Posted by: Quarmby | Feb 28, 2022 5:37:39 PM
The question is; Is the public/private gap simply too large? The answer is a resounding YES! The public service employees should be making 20% less than their private sector counterparts. Why you ask? Due to the ridiculous level of job security they enjoy for one, lack of accountability for another and finally...because we in the private sector are paying their salaries with our hyper inflated taxes. As for Senators, abolish that cess pit! The CEOs...pay them a stipend of no more than $100,000 per annum, with a bonus system designed to reflect their "further contribution to profit", maxing out at 3% of profit to be split amongst all management. If they have an annual loss....they get zero bonus. Now cut the MP pensions in half and to zero for service under 20 years. Teachers...make them fully accountable by annual parental/grade curve review and introduce a 48 week minimum work year, in line with the real world.
Posted by: Josh | Feb 28, 2022 6:28:26 PM
What options will governments and corporations have if the "little people" have no one to advocate for their position and they become upset? At the moment in the Middle East the unarmed 'little people' are destroying the political and business structures because their voices have not been heard.
Now think of all the guns that are owned in America. What happens when people lose their faith in the rules of 'fairness' we live by at the moment. Should be "interesting".
Posted by: Jack | Feb 28, 2022 6:44:01 PM
As a retired business owner I gave my head a shake after reading some of these comments.Most business people will pay what they can afford to pay and still remain profitable and stay in business. Some people seem to think that businesses have a bottomless bank account , well I have news for them they don't. Also how many union members have ever lain awake at night because the bank called about the overdraft ? I have done so many times ,and as a taxpayer I am very tired of unions that keep demanding more and more from me . Also most of the wage demands anymore are based on greed and NOT on need.
Posted by: DDD | Feb 28, 2022 7:07:20 PM
Can not say more than what riff and Trixie had to say.......well put
Posted by: Dave | Feb 28, 2022 7:10:18 PM
The public unions have to be forced to halt any wage increases and benifits until the vast majority of private workers wages catchs up
Posted by: Rob | Feb 28, 2022 7:13:39 PM
To generalize things a bit, unions were originally created to protect employees from their employers' greed by giving them power in numbers, correct?
But in the case of public unions, there is no "greedy" employer taking advantage of people for the almighty dollar - the employer IS the government. It's ironic that these public union employees will be the first to tell you that the government is a benevolent entity working for the good of us all on one hand, but then demand protection from that same entity through a union on the other.
This begs the question, if public employees need unions to protect them from the government, what's protecting the rest of us from government? If government is insensitive to even its own members' needs, are we really to believe that the government acts for the "common good"?
Those who are scared of mankind's lust for money and want unions as a form of protection generally don't look at the other side of that same coin: lust for power. People in government are human, and are just as susceptible to vices, corruption, and self-serving motivations as the rest of us. The person with the drive and tenacity to succeed in the political sphere is one that lusts for power to control the lives of others, even if they've managed to delude themselves into believing that such power is required to "do good" (from which money is easily attained as a secondary benefit).
My concern is not the existence of unions, which I believe can be a great tool for society. It's the tendency for unions to rely on institutions and practices founded on the use of power to force others to bend to their will through violence and intimidation instead of voluntary cooperation. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Posted by: Fubar | Feb 28, 2022 8:30:43 PM
I can agree with both sides of equation that has been put forth..The basics boil down to the almighty dollar(both cost and profit).Don't blame the unions but rather the governments and corporations that gave them the world in the 80's and 90's all to avoid a strike,or most importantly profits,It all turned in these current years to bite them in the ass,so pay up and shut up,you guys laid the ground work now do what people have had to do in 3 or more recessions and learn to run your finances adequately.Stop or impose tarrifs on the product built in China and charge corporations a levee when they move their manufacturing to overseas location and exploit the labor market in offshore countries for their gain.Too bad we are all stuck on the almighty dollar but the corporations and the goverment push us this way.Look at Ontario,we have had in the past a manageable deficit,then thru this current reccesion,the current pinheads in power"don't vote Liberal again" spent to the tune of 25 billion dollars and introduced taxes that have hard hitting effects on the average great Ontarians,HST,car insurance hikes,extreme hikes in hydro rates"for more Tax Dollars" Hell,there are states that produce next to nothing and their hydro rates are half of ours if not more.Green has a place and time but this is definitely not the time to rape a province.If we vote the numbnut liberals back in it will be game over for the tax payer.I can just see it now,,,a tax on water from the ground orlakes for cottagers or small town landowners..Don't vote goof again people,8 years of taxes are ENOUGH
Posted by: Bryan Vogler | Feb 28, 2022 8:49:50 PM
From a railway historians point of view
The stae of Wisconsin was the first place William Corneilius Van horne built a railraod into Canada. He had joined his republican power house from his Headquarters in Chicago before and during the Civil war to LaCrosse, Wisconsin.
He was non-union man all the way, hiring the cheapest labour he could, including the Chinese who later built the Fraser Canyon section of the C.P.R. He would not supply a hospital or any benefits, and made sure the wages for the work done was the poorest in Canada.
He was a Republican and President Lincoln,s right hand man, blocking all traffic west of the Mississippi through political wil and criminal solutions the Republicans refused to make. The gang of the Central Pacific, were granted the first railway across the U.S and were all Republicans using imported chines labor, and some the same ones used by the C.P.R.
When the C.P.R. came along into Canada, the Republican Party came with it along with its attitudes toward the working man. Today it is has become historic, and has the republicans of today want to wind back union wages, Van Horne and the C.P.R. have to remember one thing.
John A.MacDonald, Canada,s first Prime Minister appointed Van Horne to build a railroad, he also passed a law allowing trade unions and others to unite Canada to make a better country for all.
Van Horne claimed bankruptcy during the building, and canada stood behind him with necessary finances to join the Country from Sea to Sea. Now the C.P.R. is the largest transportation company in Canada, and they owe every canadian citizen the same benefits of there workers, which are pretty damn good.
By the way people wonder why the Conservatives of today likje to hold hands with the Republicans, nothing but history. its not enough that the C.P.R and Canada agreed the debt was paid, the union end was held up also, through wars and depressions, through negotiations and arbitrations and direct back to work orders for the good of the country. Today Wisconsin takes an ugly turn toward there history of a slave free state giving poor wages to all and calling it equality. they were free, but without funds its civil war again.
Posted by: Kevin | Feb 28, 2022 9:24:39 PM
In todays world union jobs provide an income people can some what live on. Big companies want to break unions and continue to increase the gap between the rich and poor. The money spent by the public sector, especially federal is outragous. Its always the unions they blame first. When in fact its the upper managers and Gov't elected officals that should be to blame. The money they waste is outragous. Look at the wages and benefit packages managers and politicians get. Its tax dollars too! If unions are broken, in time they will emerge again when people realize what it was unions gained for the working class and have no longer. Unions do grow deadwood and that needs to be addressed. In all though when with unions the money is spread out. With privatization a few make alot and the rest make ALOT less.
Posted by: Dean | Feb 28, 2022 9:36:38 PM
I have no problems with unions per se. I think there are 4 major problems that we need to do away with.
1) The difficulty with which employers have terminating bad employees. There are too many employees that either cant do their job due to ability or have lost the desire to do their job and its time to move on.
2) The seniority system has to go. Promotions and retention need to be based on merit, see point #1.
3) Union's belief that they should regulate who can do what job. Employers need to be free to manage their organisation.
4) The right to Strike. I don't know any other circumstance where coercion can be legally used outside of government authority. Frankly I think the right to strike is un-Canadian. You don't like your job then leave it.
To those that say if we didn't have unions everybody would be working for $3 an hour I'll let you in what everybody who isn't a member of a union knows. If an employer cut wages to $3 an hour, they wouldn't have any workers!
To those that think we all should all unionise. If every bodies wage increases due to unionisation, then the cost to purchase everything goes up as well and you haven't accomplished anything, you just get inflation that spirals out of control. You honestly have to ask yourself, should a janitor make the same wage as a doctor?
Collective bargaining and unionisation have a place in society, realistically large employers cant and shouldn't negotiate with thousands of employees separately. Where the problem lies is with is the huge disparity between what a unionised worker makes and a non-unionised worker make doing the same job. Weather you are a cashier at walmart or a government kiosk, you should be making roughly what the going wage is for that skill set is. Nothing wrong with the government paying a bit more, but when it is 50% to 2x, there is clearly a problem.
Posted by: Ben from sask | Feb 28, 2022 11:21:21 PM
I work for a public union and see both sides to this debate; before I worked with one, I was one of the most anti-union people out there. Like most debates there is truth to both sides.
I just want to raise one point that has not been discussed yet. I if you do not have a union to protect public employees than every four years when the government changes you would have massive layoffs, patronage appointments would become the norm and all the waste$$ and inefficiency $$$ that would accompany a massive firing that would occur with every political swing . The union protects not only the worker but the interest of the taxpayer; do you really want your government workers to take jobs knowing that their career has a four year time limit-talk about a cash grab! - Would you commit years of training and pick a career when it is certain to end badly after 4 years? ; without the protection a of union the cost of government would likely be far greater than it is now. Do we really want a political system that allows “Vote for me and you get a government job!!” to be the norm? Get rid of the unions and yes wages will go down, but will services be better? Will the cost of government be less?
I wonder.
Posted by: SP | Feb 28, 2022 11:31:55 PM
"253 of HSBC SR staff earn more than £1m as it reported a more than doubling of profits to $19bn in 2010".
So, in a year of an ongoing recession and modest growth HSBC made a profit of $19 Billion and yet still pays some employee's just above minimum wage (and would pay less if there wasn't minimum wage laws in place).
You're probably aware that 80% of Swedish employee's are unionized and in 2008 unemployment only went up to 6.8% right? And that Nominal GDP is nearly $48,000 and they're not exactly oil exporters like Canada right?
Oh yes... Union BAD.... Slavery Good ! Don't pay private sector workers more pay everyone else less.
Posted by: Rob | Mar 1, 2022 12:47:57 AM
Dean & Ben from sask:
I like your guys' posts - well said (refreshing after reading most of the posts). Dean, you stated my case better than I could. While Ben brings up a good point and I guess I'd have to agree given the current system we have to work with, I can't help but think that this just illustrates how dysfunctional the government (read: coercive) standard operating procedures are.
I hope we'll be farsighted enough to incorporate any changes necessary to prevent our public services from bankrupting future generations (who conveniently can't vote), but given that politicians' biggest motivator is to get elected at the next election - long term consequences be da*#ed - I'm not holding my breath.
Posted by: ordinaryjoe | Mar 1, 2022 9:43:01 AM
Public Sector unions and Private Sector unions need to support each other. We don't need to have
separate agendas. Union is union.
Posted by: JT | Mar 1, 2022 9:48:12 AM
Hey all of you union guys that are believing the propoganda about the "disappearance of the middle class with the loss of the unions"... the North American economy is driven by small and medium size business! There are a lot more of us private non-unionized middle class workers and business owners than there are of you!! Why shuold we carry the burden of your overpaying job when we took the time and effort and invested in our education, skills and ourselves to be able to work at a "middle class" paying job without needing a union to get us extra pay, unrealistic pensions and ridiculous job protection.
Posted by: Rob | Mar 1, 2022 10:02:00 AM
For an excellent overview of unions from an economic perspective, albeit originally written more than 60 years ago, see:
http://fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/#0.1_L20
Posted by: Trixie | Mar 1, 2022 10:50:47 AM
I came back and read these comments. Thanks to Dean for his comment. I couldn't have said things better myself. Rob, your idea of researching unions from 60 years ago would be a good idea, if unions worked the same today that they did 60 years ago. My research suggests that unions of today do not work the same as they did, and are actually more of a hinderance in today's society than a help. Just my 2 cents worth.
Posted by: Tenacious Otter | Mar 1, 2022 3:23:18 PM
@ Ordinary Joe, I belong to a union, I have for nearly 25 years. I'm a tradesperson, I've worked across Canada from B.C. to Ontario, as well as in the States, for many different employers, that ought to tell you something about the security of my job. There is no seniority, no tenure, nor security within the structure of the organization I belong to. Employers are not required to continually employ this person or that person. In fact they do just that, hire and layoff whomever they wish to meet the needs of their company, they can do this on a day to day basis, I'm currently composing this on a Tuesday afternoon, the company I work for has no obligation to re-call me for any future contracts they may acquire. The companies I work for are in direct competition with companies that hire tradespersons, with the same skill set I have, working in the non-union sector. Clients are free to enter into an agreement with whomever they feel will meet their needs. Don't confuse public sector unions with private sector unions, they don't play on the same field.