4 ms·

I don't see how the original transparency comment has anything at all to do with union busting.

• protomyth 11y ago
  If the union is the primary agent blocking transparency then one possible solution is to remove the block.
  • ssmoot 11y ago
    That... doesn't follow. What's to say you'll have salary transparency afterwards? Not you. You're merely speculating that they might be the "primary agent". Maybe there's a smoking gun I've missed. In TX at least, I think police salaries actually are public information. Check it out: http://salaries.texastribune.org/dallas/ http://salaries.texastribune.org/dallas/ Those salaries look, on the whole, pretty modest overall compared to the private sector. The "CEO" of Dallas makes maybe twice what a good programmer in SF might. The median police salary is under $60K. That's a decent living, but it's far from extravagant. That takes into account Police and Firefighter raises were suspended for a few years: http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/2013/11/proposed-3-year-contract-for-dallas-police-officers-firefighters-restores-pay-raises.html/ http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/2013/11/proposed-3-year-c... All while the unions and collective bargaining was in place. Which makes me think that talking about busting unions is a political sideshow to the original complaint.