Mitch Daniels Suggests Doing Away With Government Unions

Back when people first started to organize into unions, they did this for two main reasons: protection from harsh working conditions/bosses/companies and an honest wage for an honest days work. Of course, this was in the private sector. Shift to the public sector: now they mostly exist to fleece the American taxpayer so that the public union members can make vastly more than people in the public sector and reap rewards such as time off and pensions that are unavailable in the private sector. There used to be a saying that no one goes into public service to make money. Nowadays, government jobs pay way more than they are worth, it is virtually impossible to terminate an employee involved in misconduct, and they are left with golden parachutes when they retire

(Fox News) On the heels of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s history-making recall victory, the governor of nearby Indiana with his own record of curtailing union benefits suggested public-sector unions are past their prime and should be abolished.

“I think, really, government works better without them,” Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels told “Fox News Sunday,” when asked whether public-worker unions should even exist.

Daniels said that vote should send a message about the problems with public-sector unions.

“I think the message is that, first of all, voters are seeing the fundamental unfairness of government becoming its own special interest group, sitting on both sides of the table,” he said.

Daniels said private-sector unions, while in decline in America, remain “necessary.” But he suggested the public-sector unions have hobbled governments by gobbling up taxpayer resources with generous benefits and salaries and “bulletproof” job protections.

What purpose do government sector unions serve? Liberals tell us that government is simply mega-awesome. So, workers certainly wouldn’t need protection from from government….well, except perhaps those who have to work for Shelia Jackson Lee need protection. What we saw in Wisconsin was a year and a half temper tantrum over public sector unions having to pay a tiny bit more towards their health insurance and into their golden pensions, along with no longer being able to bargain for perks other than salary. And the unions lost. Those of us who see our hard earned tax dollars going to provide pensions which pay more yearly than the public sector worker earned while working are tired of this nonsense.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Mitch Daniels Suggests Doing Away With Government Unions”

  1. Lightwave says:

    “What purpose do government sector unions serve?”

    What purpose do government EMPLOYEES serve? Break the unions, you can fire the employees, you can shrink the government and do the same job with half the number of workers in a situation where making a profit is necessary. There’s no reason why the DMV or the county clerk’s office can’t be run as efficiently as your local coffee shop.

    Government employees should be private contractors. I understand being a police officer is dangerous and difficult. So is the armed forces, and soldiers, sailors and airmen don’t get nearly the benefits a Chicago desk sergeant does. Let the free market decide what a city is willing to pay for hiring good cops, NOT the unions. If they can’t get the job done with the budget they have, then people will move out because of the high crime rate to communities where people do pay their cops better.

    • loki924 says:

      While I agree with your sentiments I do feel obligated to point out a few glaring errors. Chicago Police are not unionized they belong voluntarily to fraternal organizations that none are required to join. 2. Chicago does not have desk sgts.,there are only patrolmen/women assigned to the desks. 3.For the most part since King Richard the II became mayor the contracts with the police and firemen in Chicago have been settled by arbitrators, not really the way unions do it. As for comparisions with the military I don’t think you will find many 60 year olds on the front lines most are “desk sgts”.Other than that I agree that for the most part public unions should be abolished.

  2. Trish says:

    Great suggestions lightwave! I was just telling my husband that in my opinion the cities ought to farm out their trash collection to private entities, and here you take that a couple of great steps further.
    In my township we pay for our trash pickup- there is no municipal trash collection. If I don’t like how they do their job- I can hire a different company.
    In the cities, they have to put up with poor service all the time. And how many times have we seen the streets fill up with trash, becuase the workers go on strike? In Phila alone, it has happened numerous times.
    Competition and the market place will make our nation better, and is far healthier than government paid, uninspired workers!!!

  3. Excellent, excellent points, Lightwave. I also find it interesting how the unions for police, fire, etc complain about those jobs being tough and dangerous. What they forget is that people voluntarily joined.

    Remember when the NYC sanitation department went on strike during the snow storms in 2010/2011 just to make a point? They all should have been fired

  4. gitarcarver says:

    Break the unions, you can fire the employees….

    Do you think dealing with firing someone in private sector unions is any easier?

    Just how do you propose to “break the unions?” Make it illegal to join a public sector union? Wouldn’t that be against the First and Fourteenth Amendments? (right to assemble – which has long been held as a right to associate – as well as “equal protection.)

    How do you propose to get around the rights of people in order to “break unions?”

    The problem with government unions is not simply the unions themselves. It is the relationship between unions and elected officials. There is a conflict of interest where the unions can contribute and influence the election of the very people that will sit across a negotiating table with them.

    That is the real issue.

    Governments on every level have had elected officials negotiate sweetheart deals and contracts with unions in the public sector. In return, the unions support that individual for re-election.

    It is the relationship between the elected officials and unions that is skewed. In the private sector, union contracts, as well as compensation for non-union workers, is based on “management” and the workers both looking out for self interests. In the private sector, that self interest for management is the health and profit of a company.

    In the public sector, there is no concern for the “health and profit” of the government. Elected officials can continue to give sweetheart deals because it is not their money. Elected officials do not have to worry about the health of the “company” because they have no competition and can simply increase revenues at the point of the taxing sword.

    Unions, private sector management, and government officials must change the focus and the relationships they have with each other if the country is to survive.

  5. […] No more public-sector government unions? Republican Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels commits blasphemy or heroism — depending upon your feelings about funding outrageously expensive government worker goodies […]

  6. Kevin says:

    If I could only reply to Mr. Daniels’ opinion with a single word, it’d be “YAY!”