Accepting your figures, as obviously I must...is it your idea that the unions have now done everything they need to do and so can go away?
Again, a British perspective may help. Since 1979 various governments have been actively abetting the bosses in trying to dismantle the power of the unions and to roll back as many as they could of the beneficial changes that union activism has brought about. Whether, prior to that year, some of the unions in Britain had become excessively powerful, had abused that power, and therefore needed to be curbed, is up for debate; I personally distrust that view, since I encountered it in the Conservative propaganda newspapers my dad read. But in the years since Thatcher it has become obvious to any ordinarily perceptive person who works in the lower levels of the British workforce that strong unions are needed now as much as they ever have been, and that the existence of strong unions is vital as a deterrent as long as the bosses regard their employees as enemies or slaves. Which--let me assure you--they do.
Union leaders who enjoy lavish CEO-style lifestyles, if they exist, are abusing their personal power and their members should call them on it, because the next stage is reaching "accommodations" with the bosses in return for favours and at that point principle goes out of the window. That the unions are now as capable of buying politicians as the bosses I regard as a good thing, till the buying of politicians is outlawed for everyone.
A minor point; you've now used teachers as an example of public employees twice. I don't know about there, but over here teachers earn a hell of a sight more than most public employees, and could quite possibly afford to take a pay cut (though they would probably not think so, and their union is obliged to represent their views, not yours or mine). So if it's just teachers you're talking about, then I see your point, but if it's people like me, grunts who worked at the coalface and whose wages had to be hastily increased when the government (who employed us) brought in a national minimum wage so that they weren't breaking their own law...then no, I think the union's doing the right thing.
I'm really glad you've never needed to belong to a union. I hope that happy state of affairs continues.
Oh...and I would have said "Had there been Muslim union officials back then, we might have had a 4-day work week." "May have" implies that possibly we did, you aren't sure. Minor niggle, but as I've remarked before, it kind of bugs me.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
zaluzianskya and ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
skylark_photos
no subject
Date: 2011-02-20 01:46 am (UTC)Again, a British perspective may help. Since 1979 various governments have been actively abetting the bosses in trying to dismantle the power of the unions and to roll back as many as they could of the beneficial changes that union activism has brought about. Whether, prior to that year, some of the unions in Britain had become excessively powerful, had abused that power, and therefore needed to be curbed, is up for debate; I personally distrust that view, since I encountered it in the Conservative propaganda newspapers my dad read. But in the years since Thatcher it has become obvious to any ordinarily perceptive person who works in the lower levels of the British workforce that strong unions are needed now as much as they ever have been, and that the existence of strong unions is vital as a deterrent as long as the bosses regard their employees as enemies or slaves. Which--let me assure you--they do.
Union leaders who enjoy lavish CEO-style lifestyles, if they exist, are abusing their personal power and their members should call them on it, because the next stage is reaching "accommodations" with the bosses in return for favours and at that point principle goes out of the window. That the unions are now as capable of buying politicians as the bosses I regard as a good thing, till the buying of politicians is outlawed for everyone.
A minor point; you've now used teachers as an example of public employees twice. I don't know about there, but over here teachers earn a hell of a sight more than most public employees, and could quite possibly afford to take a pay cut (though they would probably not think so, and their union is obliged to represent their views, not yours or mine). So if it's just teachers you're talking about, then I see your point, but if it's people like me, grunts who worked at the coalface and whose wages had to be hastily increased when the government (who employed us) brought in a national minimum wage so that they weren't breaking their own law...then no, I think the union's doing the right thing.
I'm really glad you've never needed to belong to a union. I hope that happy state of affairs continues.
Oh...and I would have said "Had there been Muslim union officials back then, we might have had a 4-day work week." "May have" implies that possibly we did, you aren't sure. Minor niggle, but as I've remarked before, it kind of bugs me.