3 ms·

I think that rayiner's issue with the police unions is not that they represent their clients (AKA members), and act to elucidate the events surrounding alleged

by nickff 12y ago

I think that rayiner's issue with the police unions is not that they represent their clients (AKA members), and act to elucidate the events surrounding alleged misconduct. His issue (which also happens to be mine,) is that the unions use methods such as strikes and political means to avoid a full hearing of the facts, or any attempt at holding individuals responsible for their actions.

glesica 12y ago
But now you're asking for an entirely different political and legal system. Not to say that I disagree, but in an adversarial system you do whatever you can to defend your client (members). If the other side isn't competent enough to counter you and make sure the truth comes out then that isn't your problem. Frankly, when the cops in NYC went on a "soft" strike a few months back nothing bad happened. That suggests that we have too many cops. But if the politicians and the people (because, by and large, the majority in many places want more cops, not less) don't have the guts to do what is right, then they get the police force they deserve.
- rayiner 12y ago
  You don't need a different legal system. Just make police unions illegal, as the federal government has done for the military. That way, police will have to rely on private counsel or public defenders, just like everyone else.
  - glesica 12y ago
    That's fine for cops (although then you've still got the problem that the legal system is heavily stacked against the poor), but I disagree that all unions are inherently bad (even for cops, the union could just be limited to salary and benefit and general work environment negotiations). If we're going to make all unions illegal, then we better start enforcing some pretty strong anti-collusion laws. Let's ban trade and industry associations for starters. It is an established fact that companies will collude against their workers, allowing workers to collude against companies does nothing but level the playing field.

by nickff 12y ago

glesica 12y ago

But now you're asking for an entirely different political and legal system. Not to say that I disagree, but in an adversarial system you do whatever you can to defend your client (members). If the other side isn't competent enough to counter you and make sure the truth comes out then that isn't your problem. Frankly, when the cops in NYC went on a "soft" strike a few months back nothing bad happened. That suggests that we have too many cops. But if the politicians and the people (because, by and large, the majority in many places want more cops, not less) don't have the guts to do what is right, then they get the police force they deserve.

rayiner 12y ago
You don't need a different legal system. Just make police unions illegal, as the federal government has done for the military. That way, police will have to rely on private counsel or public defenders, just like everyone else.
- glesica 12y ago
  That's fine for cops (although then you've still got the problem that the legal system is heavily stacked against the poor), but I disagree that all unions are inherently bad (even for cops, the union could just be limited to salary and benefit and general work environment negotiations). If we're going to make all unions illegal, then we better start enforcing some pretty strong anti-collusion laws. Let's ban trade and industry associations for starters. It is an established fact that companies will collude against their workers, allowing workers to collude against companies does nothing but level the playing field.