|
Freedomswatch.org
Contact Officials Sign Petition Invite Friends Support the Troops Contact Us
Blogs
Monday, May 12, 2008
Forcing Emergency Workers to Unionize?
By Joe Eule :: 1 Comments :: Email to a friend
 
The Wall Street Journal today sounds the alarm on another ghastly power grab by Big Labor – a bill being pushed by congressional liberals that would require state and local police and firefighters to submit to collective bargaining. The bill, which is scheduled to be voted on in the Senate this week, would make top union officials at local unions the sole bargaining agents for police and firefighters in every community with a population exceeding 5,000. Currently, states have the ability to set their own policies with respect to public workers. This bill would replace every state law with one written in Washington. 
 
As "unfunded" federal mandates go, this is also a doozy. Unions that organize private companies are at least subject to market competition. If they make their employers uncompetitive, the union workers lose their jobs. Public unions have far more clout because there is no competition for government services; they are by law a monopoly. This is especially true of police and firefighters, who can do great harm to public safety if they strike. Unionization gives them enormous clout that drives up costs and eventually the tax burden.
 
Not only that, but the Journal rightly points out that passage of this bill could have negative national security repercussions as well. 
 
The bill's mandates would also complicate the task of post-9/11 public security. Federal emergency plans rely on the cooperation of local "first-responders," who need the flexibility to adapt to local problems and circumstances. Work rules negotiated according to national union standards make no sense when the safety needs of New York City are so much different than those in Fargo.
 
Since this bill passed with a 314-97 veto-proof majority in the House, it is up to responsible conservatives in the Senate to ensure it does not win with a two-thirds vote in that chamber. But even if it is killed this year, this bill will be back. Big Labor is poised to spend in excess of a billion dollars on an “all in “ bet to elect liberals this year. If they are successful, this bill along with card check legislation will be at the top of their agenda in 2009.
Comments
By keeeemosabe @ Tuesday, May 13, 2008 1:45 AM
314 to 94. That says the measure must have merits appreciated by a veto proof super majority. And if it were to fail there will be more dog-pile efforts, you say? I say," Comin' back atcha good buddy: "Elections have consequences." HMMMM Where did I here that about 8 and 4 years ago? I heard it so many times I began to believe it. Now you can start believing it too! Har Har " It's a haaarrrd raaaaiin that's gonna fall...." Have fun on the minority side. Y'all just wore out your welcome with arrogant attitude.

Click Here to post a comment
© 2008 Freedoms Watch | Legal Disclaimers | Privacy Policy

Paid For By
   Freedom's Watch