4 ms·
Unions are there to take care of the interests of their members. This is undeniably good for their members, but I'd like to remind you that it's not always good
by runeks 3y ago
Unions are there to take care of the interests of their members. This is undeniably good for their members, but I'd like to remind you that it's not always good for outsiders.
For example, the union of California's prison guards (California Correctional Peace Officers Association) have helped lobby for the "three strikes" rule to get more people in prison: https://academic.oup.com/book/11009/chapter-abstract/159336778?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false https://academic.oup.com/book/11009/chapter-abstract/1593367...
- hnbad 3y agoArguably prisons should not be privatized in the first place. There are problems associated with prison and police unions in general but this specific problem is largely a result of prison guards having a direct incentive to want more people in prison.
- gadders 3y agoThey'd still want that in public-sector prisons. They still need prisoners to stay employed.
- bitshiftfaced 3y agoFrom the union's perspective, isn't it good to have more prisoners whether or not the prison is privatized?
- unmole 3y ago> Arguably prisons should not be privatized in the first place. Private prisons house ~8% of all prisoners in the US.
- philwelch 3y agoPeople who work for the government still, for some idiotic reason, are allowed to form unions.
- gadders 3y agoThere is also a case to be made regarding the behaviour of teaching unions prioritising their members over the children they teach.