tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9069955.post8788538727095523472..comments2023-10-26T08:02:44.948-04:00Comments on Connecticut Commentary: Red Notes from a Blue State: Democrats, Republicans And The Union VoteDon Pescihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11167988001948356357noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9069955.post-90409453116962633042014-07-22T10:10:52.069-04:002014-07-22T10:10:52.069-04:00I'd like to know about the history of public s...I'd like to know about the history of public sector unions here in Ct.<br />I'm betting the statutory language granting exclusive rights to unions is boiler plate duplicated in other moon-bat jurisdictions. It sounds so innocuous, if not righteous. There is no coercion of government workers. They have their choice of representation, etc. , and the taxpayers SHALL have the satisfaction of knowing that they are not unfairly exploiting the proletariat or "your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breath free, <br />the wretched refuse of your teeming shore..."<br />----------<br />Duty of fair representation. (a) Employees shall have, and shall be protected in the exercise of the right of self-organization, to form, join or assist any employee organization, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing on questions of wages, hours and other conditions of employment, except as provided in subsection (d) of section 5-272, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, free from actual interference, restraint or coercion.<br />(b) When an employee organization has been designated by the State Board of Labor Relations as the representative of the majority of employees in an appropriate unit, that employee organization shall be recognized by the employer as the exclusive bargaining agent for the employees of such unit.peter brushnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9069955.post-49028896825785402422014-07-21T20:15:58.330-04:002014-07-21T20:15:58.330-04:00And then of course there's Roosevelt:
Mr. Roo...And then of course there's Roosevelt:<br /><br />Mr. Roosevelt favored the unionization of private industry but drew a line in the sand concerning the unionization of government workers. Willing to help union workers obtain more of the profits they helped generate in the private sector, Mr. Roosevelt said “It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government,” because government workers do not generate profits; they negotiate for more tax money. A union strike against taxpayers, Mr. Roosevelt said, would be “unthinkable and intolerable.” http://donpesci.blogspot.com/2012/08/malloy-progressive.htmlDon Pescihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11167988001948356357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9069955.post-9423224455315592902014-07-21T14:57:07.075-04:002014-07-21T14:57:07.075-04:00Just as abortion is portrayed as a (woman's) r...Just as abortion is portrayed as a (woman's) right to chose or as, for Marx, freedom is eradication of private property, so labor unionization is a right to associate (with fellow oppressed workers and against oppressive Mr. Moneybags). Egalitarian social engineering requires coercion, not to mention disregard of natural, constitutional, and statutory law, but the left seems convinced that social engineering is liberty. The dishonesty is compounded with public sector unions where the company is a monopoly (e.g., government district schools) whose shareholders can't sell the stock they're compelled to buy. It's not clear to what extent the left believes its own b.s., but it's not 100%; intellectual dishonesty is rampant. I like this bit from Harry Truman's veto message on Taft-Hartley.<br />---------<br />The first major test which I have applied to this bill is whether it would result in more or less Government intervention in our economic life.<br /><br />Our basic national policy has always been to establish by law standards of fair dealing and then to leave the working of the economic system to the free choice of individuals. Under that policy of economic freedom we have built our nation's productive strength. Our people have deep faith in industrial self-government with freedom of contract and free collective bargaining.<br /><br />I find that this bill is completely contrary to that national policy of economic freedom. It would require the Government, in effect, to become an unwanted participant at every bargaining table.peter brushnoreply@blogger.com