4 ms·

Yes. I think that if they wanted better pay or working conditions, they should pick and choose private employers. If they’re employed in public jobs, just thei

by tomp 4y ago

Yes. I think that if they wanted better pay or working conditions, they should pick and choose private employers. If they’re employed in public jobs, just their increase job & pension security strongly outweigh most other considerations.

_uhtu 4y ago
Public jobs have good pensions and job security because of the unions... Even then, teachers don't make much. Come o..
- tomp 4y ago
  If that were true, all unionised jobs would have good security and pensions.
jeffwask 4y ago
Teachers are paid starvation wages. Jobs that require bachelor's degrees and often extended education and certification post grad that pays $50k. Once you are in the role you are essentially forced into 60-80 hour work weeks with no OT. Plus you get to dodge bullets... If you want to know why the quality of education in America has dipped look no further than paying teacher barely above retail workers. No knock on the folks who work retail but there is a drastic difference in level of responsibility both to the individuals in their care and society as a whole.
jzb 4y ago
Oh good. The “they should have picked better jobs“ argument. Hopefully, we all agree that we need public employees for these jobs. I have no idea why we think that they are less deserving of good conditions and good pay if we can acknowledge we need them to do their jobs. Job security doesn’t outweigh the need to have a living wage and decent benefits and decent conditions. Neither does a pension that some people won’t even live to enjoy. Everybody deserves livable wages and good benefits, not just private employees. Everybody. I don’t care if your job is teaching, garbage collector, fry cook, reporter, city collections clerk, any job under the sun that needs to be done, and a human being has to do it, requires a living wage and decent benefits. This is especially true of public jobs that we need people to do for society to function. We need teachers. We need janitors. We need people in all of these public roles. In fact, in North Carolina it’s a royal pain in the ass to get your drivers license renewed if you actually have to go to the DMV because they don’t have enough staff, because the pay sucks. That affects everybody. Maybe private employers should have to pay more than public jobs to offset the perceived security of public jobs. But that’s not the same thing as what you were arguing here.
- tomp 4y ago
  If I understand your argument correctly, you’re saying that the quality of public services would be improved by paying people more, not by giving unions more power? If so, I agree 100%. Another viable alternative is to reject socialism (central planning) and embrace markets (e.g. I see no reason why janitors, garbage collectors and even teachers (giving parents actual school choice) couldn’t be employed by private corporations that compete to perform a public service.
  - denton-scratch 4y ago
    Socialism !== central planning. Perhaps you were thinking of communism. Sure, you can simply privatize everything, and use taxpayers money to line the pockets of private shareholders. Taxpayers don't like that much, so in that kind of system people tend to oppose public services in general. And it involves the government handing out contracts for everything, which inevitably leads to corruption.
  - jzb 4y ago
    I'm saying that people deserve a living wage, etc. If that can happen organically without unions, great. Unions / collective bargaining is a path to achieving good wages and working conditions, because employers (public and otherwise) tend to worsen those things over time without workers having a closer to equal bargaining position. "Markets" have aggressively sought every way possible to get labor as cheaply as possible. The idea that privatizing public services is going to make things better for anyone other than the shareholders / owners of those companies is not only ridiculous in theory, it's proven to be false in practice. One only need look at private prisons, private hospitals, private healthcare, and (as I referenced before) the NC DMV for evidence of this. Many of the license plate agencies and such are privately run, and they're worse for it.
infamouscow 4y ago
If your presumptions were actually true, then why do we see public unions at all?
- tomp 4y ago
  Because game theory? They know they have nothing to lose while having lots to gain (better pay & benefits). Which is kind-of the point. Tragedy of the commons. The individuals (union members) gain while the public loses (more strikes, worse service, higher tax-financed salaries)
  - infamouscow 4y ago
    I don't find game theory to be a convincing explanation. If public workers were forming unions for game theoretic reasons why didn't essential workers form unions during the pandemic. Most of those essential workers were part-time and had no benefits to speak of. If game theory were taking place, then we'd see a lot more grocery store unions.

by tomp 4y ago

_uhtu 4y ago

Public jobs have good pensions and job security because of the unions... Even then, teachers don't make much. Come o..

tomp 4y ago
If that were true, all unionised jobs would have good security and pensions.

jeffwask 4y ago

Teachers are paid starvation wages. Jobs that require bachelor's degrees and often extended education and certification post grad that pays $50k. Once you are in the role you are essentially forced into 60-80 hour work weeks with no OT. Plus you get to dodge bullets... If you want to know why the quality of education in America has dipped look no further than paying teacher barely above retail workers. No knock on the folks who work retail but there is a drastic difference in level of responsibility both to the individuals in their care and society as a whole.

jzb 4y ago

Oh good. The “they should have picked better jobs“ argument. Hopefully, we all agree that we need public employees for these jobs. I have no idea why we think that they are less deserving of good conditions and good pay if we can acknowledge we need them to do their jobs. Job security doesn’t outweigh the need to have a living wage and decent benefits and decent conditions. Neither does a pension that some people won’t even live to enjoy. Everybody deserves livable wages and good benefits, not just private employees. Everybody. I don’t care if your job is teaching, garbage collector, fry cook, reporter, city collections clerk, any job under the sun that needs to be done, and a human being has to do it, requires a living wage and decent benefits. This is especially true of public jobs that we need people to do for society to function. We need teachers. We need janitors. We need people in all of these public roles. In fact, in North Carolina it’s a royal pain in the ass to get your drivers license renewed if you actually have to go to the DMV because they don’t have enough staff, because the pay sucks. That affects everybody. Maybe private employers should have to pay more than public jobs to offset the perceived security of public jobs. But that’s not the same thing as what you were arguing here.

tomp 4y ago
If I understand your argument correctly, you’re saying that the quality of public services would be improved by paying people more, not by giving unions more power? If so, I agree 100%. Another viable alternative is to reject socialism (central planning) and embrace markets (e.g. I see no reason why janitors, garbage collectors and even teachers (giving parents actual school choice) couldn’t be employed by private corporations that compete to perform a public service.
- denton-scratch 4y ago
  Socialism !== central planning. Perhaps you were thinking of communism. Sure, you can simply privatize everything, and use taxpayers money to line the pockets of private shareholders. Taxpayers don't like that much, so in that kind of system people tend to oppose public services in general. And it involves the government handing out contracts for everything, which inevitably leads to corruption.
- jzb 4y ago
  I'm saying that people deserve a living wage, etc. If that can happen organically without unions, great. Unions / collective bargaining is a path to achieving good wages and working conditions, because employers (public and otherwise) tend to worsen those things over time without workers having a closer to equal bargaining position. "Markets" have aggressively sought every way possible to get labor as cheaply as possible. The idea that privatizing public services is going to make things better for anyone other than the shareholders / owners of those companies is not only ridiculous in theory, it's proven to be false in practice. One only need look at private prisons, private hospitals, private healthcare, and (as I referenced before) the NC DMV for evidence of this. Many of the license plate agencies and such are privately run, and they're worse for it.

infamouscow 4y ago

If your presumptions were actually true, then why do we see public unions at all?

tomp 4y ago
Because game theory? They know they have nothing to lose while having lots to gain (better pay & benefits). Which is kind-of the point. Tragedy of the commons. The individuals (union members) gain while the public loses (more strikes, worse service, higher tax-financed salaries)
- infamouscow 4y ago
  I don't find game theory to be a convincing explanation. If public workers were forming unions for game theoretic reasons why didn't essential workers form unions during the pandemic. Most of those essential workers were part-time and had no benefits to speak of. If game theory were taking place, then we'd see a lot more grocery store unions.