5 ms·

> ...they often become corrupt... Unions are what protect significant chunks of the middle class and it's because they're so important that these flagrant abus

> ...they often become corrupt... Unions are what protect significant chunks of the middle class and it's because they're so important that these flagrant abuses must be corrected.

downWidOutaFite 3y ago
I don't get how people on both political sides are often split on supporting teachers unions vs police unions. Be consistent! Whatever problems you think the union you don't like has, the other union has similar issues. I say get rid of both of them, bosses don't like unions for a reason and we're supposed to be their bosses.
- autoexec 3y ago
  > bosses don't like unions for a reason Bosses don't like unions because they want to exploit their workers and treat them unfairly. This is why police will always need unions. Police shouldn't be expected to work overtime without compensation, they should be allowed to have breaks, they should make a living wage, they should get sick time, they should have safe working conditions and they should get family leave. These are the same reasons teachers should always have unions. The problems people have with police unions is their political influence which is nothing remotely like the situation we have with teachers. Elected officials agree to provisions that should never be allowed on the table. In the end, it's not the union that is the problem, but the people who agree to anything and everything that the police unions ask for. If a union is demanding things like the department limit or not allow officers to be interrogated, or the destruction of their disciplinary records, or the banning of body cameras/civilian oversight then it's up to our elected officials to draw the line and say "those terms are unacceptable" just like we'd expect if teacher's unions demanded limo rides to school every day, billion dollar paychecks and the right to abuse students. Some things are simply not acceptable. Our elected officials have zero problems with denying teacher's requests for a living wage, or for smaller classroom sizes, or for not being forced to pay for school supplies out of their own pockets, but they instantly give police whatever insane things they ask for. That's a problem that goes far beyond negotiations with the police unions. There's no police union that can prevent bad cops from being charged with a crime. Unions don't have that power. Police unions can't stop a judge from finding a police officer guilty of a crime either. Unions don't have that power. Unions can't stop that judge from sentencing a criminal police officer to decades behind bars. Police unions don't have that power either. So why is it that those things almost never happen when they should? A police union can ask for internal department policies that make it harder for everyone else to hold police accountable, but they can't stop it from happening. DAs and judges aren't soft on corrupt cops because they're forced to be by police unions. They choose to be. Usually for political reasons or out of fear of retaliation. When police are allowed to "resign" over something that would get any one else thrown in prison that's not the union's fault. There are many people in many positions of power who are regularly complicit in allowing bad cops to get away with their crimes. Police still need unions, same as teachers, our elected officials just need to say that enough is enough and show some backbone instead of giving in to every ridiculous demand that enables the corruption within police departments to continue. It's up to us to be willing to vote people out of office if they refuse to.
- chasing 3y ago
  Some people are capable of thinking with a level of nuance deeper than "unions bad."
  - adastra22 3y ago
    Other people are able to fully consider all the relevant factors, history and circumstances, and still come away with the belief that unions are near-universally bad.
  - JackFr 3y ago
    Teacher's unions aren't there to improve student outcomes. They exist for he benefit of teachers. Police unions aren't there to improve public safety. They exist for the benefit of the police.
    - acdha 3y ago
      Here’s the thing: both of those are good. Anywhere you have a large group of people doing a job, you will inevitably have issues where their bosses want to make decisions which will negatively impact life for a lot of working people, and collective bargaining helps counterbalance that. There are problems with certain unions, but that has to do with the framework around them. When a police union protests because one of their members is found guilty, that looks like a union problem but it’s really a symptom of a deeper leadership problem: you’re hiring a ton of cops who think they’re above the law!
    - nothercastle 3y ago
      Most organizations are there to benefit the organization or leader not the members or public.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - xboxnolifes 3y ago
    Maybe some, but nearly every person I've ever heard even mention unions has held one of two (mutually exclusive) views: "unions good" or "unions bad". It's never "<specific union> is bad/good, because <specific reason>".
- IshKebab 3y ago
  It's because teachers unions and police unions are different. Not rocket science.
- pavel_lishin 3y ago
  > Bosses don't like unions for a reason and we're supposed to be their bosses. Because the "Bosses" in your example want to extract the maximum out of a worker, in exchange for giving them the absolute minimum. But I don't want to treat our teachers that way. I don't think of them as just another resource I can minmax my way through. Furthermore, I'm not my teacher's boss. They're not a public servant; they're hired by a school board, or a principal. Those folks are either elected, or hired by someone else. I can see, I guess, the reasoning that I'm the boss of anyone I can vote for - but that chain doesn't just keep going forever.
  - downWidOutaFite 3y ago
    Bosses is obviously not a perfect analogy. But the reason we pay for their services is not to create good jobs, it is to get good schools and police departments. We should be focused on getting the best outcomes for our tax dollars. The best outcomes would generally be produced by a happy workforce, so I'm not saying worker needs should be ignored. But taxpayer and employee interests are not perfectly aligned, employees will always be trying to maximize pay and reduce hours. Giving workers too much power moves us away from what should be our goals of providing a great education in a safe community.
sbierwagen 3y ago
11.3% of US workers were in a union in 2022. Either the middle class is a hell of a lot smaller than I thought, or it's not a terribly significant chunk. (I am a union member, formerly IBEW local 46, now IAM district 751)
- acdha 3y ago
  They’ve been shrinking, although recent growth suggests that trend might be reversing, but unions also help non-members. If you work at a non-union job, your compensation will still reflect the need to be competitive with other places which similar unionized positions. Where I live, there are a ton of charter schools but they tend to track the public school district’s union pay scale pretty closely. When they negotiated a pay raise, there were probably an equal number of non-union teachers who benefited within a couple of years.

> ...they often become corrupt... Unions are what protect significant chunks of the middle class and it's because they're so important that these flagrant abuses must be corrected.

downWidOutaFite 3y ago

I don't get how people on both political sides are often split on supporting teachers unions vs police unions. Be consistent! Whatever problems you think the union you don't like has, the other union has similar issues. I say get rid of both of them, bosses don't like unions for a reason and we're supposed to be their bosses.

autoexec 3y ago
> bosses don't like unions for a reason Bosses don't like unions because they want to exploit their workers and treat them unfairly. This is why police will always need unions. Police shouldn't be expected to work overtime without compensation, they should be allowed to have breaks, they should make a living wage, they should get sick time, they should have safe working conditions and they should get family leave. These are the same reasons teachers should always have unions. The problems people have with police unions is their political influence which is nothing remotely like the situation we have with teachers. Elected officials agree to provisions that should never be allowed on the table. In the end, it's not the union that is the problem, but the people who agree to anything and everything that the police unions ask for. If a union is demanding things like the department limit or not allow officers to be interrogated, or the destruction of their disciplinary records, or the banning of body cameras/civilian oversight then it's up to our elected officials to draw the line and say "those terms are unacceptable" just like we'd expect if teacher's unions demanded limo rides to school every day, billion dollar paychecks and the right to abuse students. Some things are simply not acceptable. Our elected officials have zero problems with denying teacher's requests for a living wage, or for smaller classroom sizes, or for not being forced to pay for school supplies out of their own pockets, but they instantly give police whatever insane things they ask for. That's a problem that goes far beyond negotiations with the police unions. There's no police union that can prevent bad cops from being charged with a crime. Unions don't have that power. Police unions can't stop a judge from finding a police officer guilty of a crime either. Unions don't have that power. Unions can't stop that judge from sentencing a criminal police officer to decades behind bars. Police unions don't have that power either. So why is it that those things almost never happen when they should? A police union can ask for internal department policies that make it harder for everyone else to hold police accountable, but they can't stop it from happening. DAs and judges aren't soft on corrupt cops because they're forced to be by police unions. They choose to be. Usually for political reasons or out of fear of retaliation. When police are allowed to "resign" over something that would get any one else thrown in prison that's not the union's fault. There are many people in many positions of power who are regularly complicit in allowing bad cops to get away with their crimes. Police still need unions, same as teachers, our elected officials just need to say that enough is enough and show some backbone instead of giving in to every ridiculous demand that enables the corruption within police departments to continue. It's up to us to be willing to vote people out of office if they refuse to.
chasing 3y ago
Some people are capable of thinking with a level of nuance deeper than "unions bad."
- adastra22 3y ago
  Other people are able to fully consider all the relevant factors, history and circumstances, and still come away with the belief that unions are near-universally bad.
- JackFr 3y ago
  Teacher's unions aren't there to improve student outcomes. They exist for he benefit of teachers. Police unions aren't there to improve public safety. They exist for the benefit of the police.
  - acdha 3y ago
    Here’s the thing: both of those are good. Anywhere you have a large group of people doing a job, you will inevitably have issues where their bosses want to make decisions which will negatively impact life for a lot of working people, and collective bargaining helps counterbalance that. There are problems with certain unions, but that has to do with the framework around them. When a police union protests because one of their members is found guilty, that looks like a union problem but it’s really a symptom of a deeper leadership problem: you’re hiring a ton of cops who think they’re above the law!
  - nothercastle 3y ago
    Most organizations are there to benefit the organization or leader not the members or public.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- xboxnolifes 3y ago
  Maybe some, but nearly every person I've ever heard even mention unions has held one of two (mutually exclusive) views: "unions good" or "unions bad". It's never "<specific union> is bad/good, because <specific reason>".
IshKebab 3y ago
It's because teachers unions and police unions are different. Not rocket science.
pavel_lishin 3y ago
> Bosses don't like unions for a reason and we're supposed to be their bosses. Because the "Bosses" in your example want to extract the maximum out of a worker, in exchange for giving them the absolute minimum. But I don't want to treat our teachers that way. I don't think of them as just another resource I can minmax my way through. Furthermore, I'm not my teacher's boss. They're not a public servant; they're hired by a school board, or a principal. Those folks are either elected, or hired by someone else. I can see, I guess, the reasoning that I'm the boss of anyone I can vote for - but that chain doesn't just keep going forever.
- downWidOutaFite 3y ago
  Bosses is obviously not a perfect analogy. But the reason we pay for their services is not to create good jobs, it is to get good schools and police departments. We should be focused on getting the best outcomes for our tax dollars. The best outcomes would generally be produced by a happy workforce, so I'm not saying worker needs should be ignored. But taxpayer and employee interests are not perfectly aligned, employees will always be trying to maximize pay and reduce hours. Giving workers too much power moves us away from what should be our goals of providing a great education in a safe community.

sbierwagen 3y ago

11.3% of US workers were in a union in 2022. Either the middle class is a hell of a lot smaller than I thought, or it's not a terribly significant chunk. (I am a union member, formerly IBEW local 46, now IAM district 751)

acdha 3y ago
They’ve been shrinking, although recent growth suggests that trend might be reversing, but unions also help non-members. If you work at a non-union job, your compensation will still reflect the need to be competitive with other places which similar unionized positions. Where I live, there are a ton of charter schools but they tend to track the public school district’s union pay scale pretty closely. When they negotiated a pay raise, there were probably an equal number of non-union teachers who benefited within a couple of years.