Public Employee Unions...America's Last Defenders Of Rights In The Workplace For The "Hireling"?
"No refuge could save the hireling and slave,
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave," The Star Spangled Banner, Francis Scott Key 1814
Anyone who's come within a county mile of a news source in the last month or so knows that this country is again experiencing a social revolution, the likes of which we have not seen in many a year. While I suspect that many of us have been happy to sit on the sidelines and watch the world go by, there have also been quite a few very dedicated people who have been working hard on some very revolutionary plans so that our society could soon be changed to their way of thinking.
Well, as has often been said, America is a revolutionary nation, born of a revolutionary experiment with what Thomas Payne referred to as the "Rights of Man." Just what that phrase means exactly has been an issue since the foundation of our country. A number of the Founding Fathers were more than a little leery of pure democracy as something akin to mob rule, so we ended up with a representative democratic system called a "republic."
Still, America ended up with more rights for the everyday person than had been common at that time around the western world. Ironically, the Iroquois Confederation of Native Americans already had established many rights and procedures (including women's rights) that America's government would later ensure. Before long, France and other nations would experience revolutions of their own, as more and more people demanded a voice in their public and private lives.
Around that same time in history, the Industrial Revolution began. Entrepreneurs hired people of virtually all ages to work in their factories, mills and mines, at times for 14 hours a day, and often for starvation wages. Small craftspeople were soon replaced by huge factories. Before long, company towns developed, where workers depended on the company stores and housing available. The term "wage slaves" came into vogue to describe workers who, through debts or other economic circumstances, were chained to their jobs just as effectively as if those figurative "chains" been actual chains of iron.
Over the years, and often with bloody results, a labor movement was born. Ever so slowly over many years, child labor was limited, an eight hour day was established, and the rights of women and minorities in the workplace were established. Job benefits came along, as well as the right of an employee to have a due process hearing before dismissal. Most of these advances happened because workers had started trade unions. It is a simple and well-known fact that political and economic power and human rights are seldom, if ever, either granted from on high or relinquished voluntarily. Those concepts are born in struggle and dispute, and through very real battles that are either won or lost. Unions were the way that everyday men and women could band together to be sure their voices would be heard, when as individuals those voices could otherwise have been lost in the roar of factory machinery.
Before long, unions developed in the public sector, as well, and that's where the present controversy appears to be developing in our nation. Those unions helped to ensure that teachers, police, fire personnel and other public employees would have some protection through due process hearings against arbitrary administrative actions. They helped to bring in new safety equipment for the safety forces, and to negotiate for sick leave and pension plans for the injured or disabled. They helped to establish a fair system of salary schedules, often based on seniority and education, and they helped to ensure that all sides would be given a fair hearing in any labor dispute that might arise.
For a long time, however, and even these days in some parts of our country, there is, and has been, a philosophical resistance to public employee unions. The anti-union argument seems to go that public employees are public servants, and that with the current financial issues facing states, the only way that states can effectively address those issues would be if unions were out of the way, or at least, that their power would be reduced.
It is also felt by some of the current government leadership around the country that the best way to curtail what they perceive as the political strength of "union power" is through the legislative process, rather than through negotiation. That's where the current controversy arises. While there are a small number of states where public employee unions have little negotiating leverage (or may not even exist!), others, like Ohio, established the rights of public employees to negotiate long ago.
The trouble, in a nutshell, seems to be that once workers' rights have been either granted or established, having a government force them to give those rights up becomes a scary thought for many Americans. Although, like other aspects of life, I've found things that I've liked, and have not liked, about unions, the fact that they stand up for the working people is something that I appreciate.
After all, what part of "due process, employee rights, and collective bargaining" could we possibly have an issue with, whether regarding public or private unions? As has already been stated, many of the advantages that workers in virtually every field of endeavor in this country have benefited from have come either directly or indirectly by victories won by unions. The fundamental principle of being able to negotiate for better conditions in the workplace has long been considered an American right, and one, by the way, that we have seen eroded deeply by the loss of so many of our manufacturing jobs overseas. With the issue of public employee unions now before us, and with so many employment rights and benefits having already been taken from us as Americans, do we really believe that even more employee rights should be taken away, whether that might be in the public or the private sector?
The good thing about labor negotiations is very simple: In order to arrive at an agreement, BOTH sides have to agree, so it's not that a "union" is able to achieve anything they want without the other side signing off. It's the "give and take" of negotiation that often results in win-win situations for all concerned.
As far as the idea advanced by some that unions might be a part of the political "far left"? That, to me, is pure nonsense. Standing up for the American worker does not necessarily mean that one is slipping down a slide into "socialism," any more than being a "conservative" means that one necessarily has "fascist" tendencies. Forget about left-right politics for a moment, if you will. Human rights are human rights. The right to speak up and to better one's lot in life in the workplace should be something that all Americans should cherish.
I truly believe that there always needs to be some system of community checks and balances constantly evaluating and addressing what works, and what needs improving, whether that would be with our public schools or in our workplace environments. To that end, unions, advocacy organizations and others do indeed provide a significant counterpoint to "top-down only" ill-considered directives, whether from some "boss," or from our politicians, or from agenda-minded "reform" movements, whether those might be left or right wing.
In a free society, I believe it is essential for each citizen to be given the opportunity to speak out, and when necessary, organize and join others in order to effect change in their workplace lives for the better.
We do, however, need all sides in this critical discussion about our workplace rights of course, and to me, yes, that does include the unions. Their rights... are your own rights, after all is said and done. (By the way, I can only guess that if we, as a state, think that it's costly to do "collective bargaining" with public employee unions at the present time, I can only imagine how expensive this epic battle could get for all sides involved in the foreseeable future.)