L.A. Police Union Urges Members to ‘Stand in Solidarity’ with SEIU and MoveOn.Org
I had been expecting it, but when it finally came it was far worse than I had feared. I could scarcely believe my eyes.
The message that appeared in my email in-box Thursday evening came from the board of directors of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the union that represents rank-and-file LAPD officers, of which I have been a member for many years. It was an email version of the latest post on the LAPPL Blog, and it began thus: “The attack on Wisconsin workers is an attack on union members across the nation.”
A bit hyperbolic, perhaps, but no big surprise so far. The League has for some time been engaged in a preemptive campaign against legislation here in California that is in any way similar to that which has caused the recent furor in Wisconsin. (Such a law is all but unthinkable here in Democrat-controlled California, but one must be vigilant nonetheless.)
But in later paragraphs the directors took their appeal a bit farther. Too far, apparently, for many of their members. “As widely covered by the media in recent weeks,” they wrote, “Wisconsin’s Republican governor, Scott Walker, is moving to strip the majority of non-safety public employees of most of their collective bargaining rights. The shocking plan has prompted massive protests and a walkout by Democratic lawmakers there, and has led to increasingly large rallies across the nation.”
I must point out there is nothing particularly shocking about what Gov. Walker and the Republican majority in the Wisconsin legislature seek to accomplish, especially given that they campaigned and won election largely on their vow to curb state spending and close a looming deficit. They are merely trying to do as officeholders what they promised to do as candidates (which, on reflection, is shocking enough in itself). And it is troubling that we as police officers were being asked to endorse the lawless actions of the 14 Wisconsin state Senate Democrats who bugged out like a bunch of crooks with the cops at the door rather than allow the democratic process to unfold. Elections have consequences, I suppose, unless you can take it on the lam and prevent them.
The directors went on to express their condemnation for the growing campaign to deny collective bargaining rights to public sector employees, a position which, no doubt to a man, their members surely share. All of this would hardly have been worth comment had they stopped there.
There then came this paragraph:
At noon local time on Saturday, February 26, MoveOn.org will hold rallies in front of every statehouse and in every major city to stand in solidarity with the people of Wisconsin. Find a Rally to Save the American Dream near you by visiting the website and entering your zip code. You can also show your support by sending words of encouragement to Wisconsin’s workers via a special website created by the SEIU.
What? MoveOn.org? The SEIU? And they were asking cops to march in this parade? Surely this had to be some kind of elaborate Internet hoax.
And it got worse. If you dared to click on the link to find a rally, you learned that in addition to MoveOn.org and the SEIU, the events were to be sponsored by National People’s Action, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, USAction, the Daily Kos, Media Matters, and every other leftist fringe cabal this side of the Socialist Workers Party. The post concluded with a stirring exhortation: “Our brothers and sisters in Wisconsin are under attack. They need and deserve our support. The time to pull together is NOW.” They might have gone with something a bit punchier, like “Workers of the world, unite!”
It was no hoax. Would that it had been.
In the past, I have fully supported the police and their individual members as having a tough, dangerous, and mostly thankless job to do in protecting the public. However, as we move into the future, it appears that police are increasingly those who unquestioningly enforce the totalitarian nanny state now set in concrete by progressives.
So I ask you… please give me specific examples of how a public union helps you positively counteract problems with your management and city officials, and please respond point-by-point to the following list of reasons why public unions are a bad idea at the outset…
1. Public union members are represented twice, once at the bargaining table, and once as voters. Meanwhile, taxpayers only get one-man-one-vote; thus public unions are undemocratic at the outset.
2. The government is already required to follow all OSHA, EPA, etc. workplace regulations; therefore public unions have no reason to exist for any such related potential violations.
3. Government does not exist to make a profit, therefore there are no profits to be shared with workers. The only source of money is taxpayers’ money, which by definition should be spent sparingly, effectively, and efficiently.
4. The very politicians who are “negotiating” with the public unions are most often the ones who have been financed by those same unions.
5. There is no one at the bargaining table who actually has any stake in decreasing costs; thus the taxpayer has effectively no representation, and “bargaining” is a farce at the outset. There is no realistic way (and certainly no inherently repeatable way) to counteract unions’ ever greedier demands and insatiable appetite for more, especially including promises made for future benefits.
6. Since public unions are formulated on the shakiest of theoretical grounds, their members become wildly reactive when confronted and quickly revert to thuggery, i.e., corruption is intrinsic, endemic, and systemic.
7. If an individual government worker does well, then that person should be rewarded individually. However, productivity is anathema to government bureaucracies as a whole, such that public unions have little supporting productivity data and therefore no related justification to exist as a bargaining entity for any group of employees.
8. Before the advent of public unions, government employees were generally already provided with good benefits to offset the lower salaries then (but not now) in extent.
Public unions are therefore unjustifiable on any logical, moral, democratic basis; they should be eliminated and never again allowed to see the light of day.
One post to rule them all!
Very, very, well said.
The police endure unique pressures that make it reasonable for them to be able to maintain union membership in order to defend themselves.
Every moment on the job, they are monitored and threatened by organized groups ranging from the ACLU to the NAACP to many Soros-funded anti-incarceration activist cabals. Not only do they require legal defense against such organized and well-funded opposition, but such defense rarely comes from the largely far-left municipal leaders or from the police brass, which is by definition in bed with elected officials who pander to anti-police activists.
In other words, unlike any other group of public employees, police are employed by their adversaries. And their job consists of placing themselves squarely in the sights of people who are seeking to undermine the rule of law by accusing them, individually and as groups, of wrongdoing. In addition to the risk of injury or death, they risk career-ending lawsuits and even incarceration simply by showing up for work. No other public servants assume this risk.
I’m writing from Tampa Bay, by the way. Three cops gunned down this month. And when the last two brave officers were killed, Goliath Davis, the city manager — who had previous been Chief of Police — went to the killer’s funeral but not the officer’s funerals.
That’s why cops need unions. Do you need more reasons?
Curiosity has gripped me on your statement. First I want to send my condolences to the families of the most recent three officer gunned down while doing their job to protect we the people. I believe the individuals responsible should be hung in the city square for all to see when proven guilty of such a heinous crime. With that said I Being an ex police officer, am curious as to what the union could have done to prevent these horrible deaths and if there was something they could have done to stop it, why the hell didn’t they. The only way I see they can stop officers from being killed and hunted down is to pull them off the streets. And secondly, how many civilians will be killed and maimed when the Police Departments throughout the United States go on strike for what ever reason the Unions deem necessary? The job is dangerous and one knows that going in, so why take the job if you don’t like the possibility of danger. Third, the armed forces have no union and are facing the possibility of death, and destruction each and every minute, defending the United States of America. Do you advocate they join a Union and go on strike when ordered to go to foreign countries to defend our freedoms and that of the oppressed?
The armed forces generally do not operate in legal arenas where these activists hold power. They answer to an internal and unelected legal system, not one larded with politically motivated judges and other authorities who emerge from the ranks of anti-cop defense attorneys. Even DA’s are often less supportive of the police than you might expect — because they are elected, too.
I did not say that the murdered cops could have been saved by a police union. However, policing — not to mention being a citizen — becomes more dangerous when police are made less effective, as they are when the war on cops ties their hands and forces them to spend more and more time contemplating the consequences of aggressive law enforcement.
I’m not advocating bad or illegal policies here. But when police face the threat of lawsuit for virtually any action, the natural response is to do less to get criminals off the streets. Police unions — unlike other types of public sector unions — often provide the only defense for officers against unfair persecution by activists types.
None of this has anything to do with collective bargaining, by the way. Financial issues are another subject.
I certainly agree that the Political Correct policies that have been handed down by the Liberal politicians have the police at the mercy of the criminal but the Unions do not make the laws and I don’t advocate them breaking the law as is happening in WI at this time. The police Unions must lobby their individual governments and bring an understanding of what they are up against to these so called leaders and if nothing else, Invite them to ride along at least once a month and live the 8-12 hour shifts the police are working to protect the general public and certainly the liberals families as well. It was just on the News that in Seattle the DA has suggested the police not ticket the illegal minorities for minor infractions as it appears then they are being targeted because of their minority status. Thus, they advocate treating the illegals better then the citizens of the United States. Do you see as I do how that puts the Police department and the individual policeman in a vacuum as to what in the hell they are to do?
They have also proposed that illegals not be held in jail too long to prevent immigration from having the time to deport them.For the Unions to do any good they must confront these liberal lawmakers (breakers) in their plight to make a policeman’s life harder. It is hard enough each day he/she goes on duty and are called in, off duty when necessary.
Not sure what you’re on about, this noise of cops getting the short end of the stick. I’ve learned of a couple dozen real life situations in the past year or two where LEO have committed what appears to be heinous crimes against citizens, sometimes unarmed, certainly not dangerous…. investigations are conducted, trials sometimes held… and I cannot think of one such incident where the guilty LEO was punished. Had any private citizen acted as the LEO had done, and been caught, he’d be in prison for a LONG time. So, don’t feed me this pap about cops needing protection from their employers, superiors, etc. Nearly every time, the cop goes free…. worst case, it appears, there are at times backroom deals resulting in the officer in question suddenly finding himself no longer wishing to be in the employ of his current department. Often he will simply bove to another state, his “incident” bekng kept on the QT…..
Yes, LEO need to have the ability to function according to their job, and the need of their citizens. Far too often we learn of over-the-top reactions to what ends up being a non-incident…. and a citizen gets killed, beat up, denied his rights… why, just this past weekend in Atlanta, GA, there was video taken of street cops refusing to allow private citizens to proceed toward the government buildings because they were armed.. ALL in possession of legal carry permits, all had background checks to get them, all had legally carried weapons, PLUS copies of Georgia State Laws defining where one may/may not carry a weapon. The cops didn’t care…. they set themselves up above the written law, and the Second Ammendment. The citizens took down identifying information, had the video tapes with recorded audio, and I hope they sue the city and the individual officers. These cops were WRONG>…… in this case, though, I suspect the unions and their bosses will protect them, preventing justice being done. No news….. it is common.
Tina; I live in Texas. In Texas we have police officers, and we have crooked politicians, and we have criminals. What we don’t have is the Union. We are doing just fine so why can’t other states? Our officers face EVERY situation your officers do, exactly as your officers do. Why do your officers need a Union representative if ours do not? My nephew is a police officer so I know what I’m talking about.
The Armed Forces do not function within a legal arena like the rest of us? How about the soldiers who, being put into a kill-or-be-killed environment, are constantly worried about the implications of killing civilians who are put in place by the enemy combatants because they know Americans do not want to: kill non-combatants; or, wind up in court (with the UCMJ or the UN) for doing what they felt was right, necessary, and proper?
There is so much legalistic interference with the prosecution of military action that I am surprised our troops aren’t blithering from reveille to taps. It is also the reason we are still there; if this legal interference (which you appear to be denying the existence of) were eliminated, the war would have been over in two years.
The cops have a hard job – loving what they do, loving the people they do it for; worried that they may not make it home that night, and STILL getting into the uniform and facing the job as P.I.G.s: Pride, Integrity, and Guts (got that from my dad – San Mateo PD). They do not need a union to see that they are well-cared-for – they need the support and respect of the people they walk the line for. US.
There’s another point to consider….All cops have volunteered for the job. I know a lot of police officers and not one of them was frog-marched to a police station and forced to become a cop. It’s a choice that they made and made happily.
Police officers have (voluntarily) agreed to take risks and face danger on behalf of the public. However they are well-paid and well-compensated for this. They receive the best possible training and are provided with weapons, body armor and other equipment that serves to minimize their risks as much as possible. It is true that they are subject to excrutiating scrutiny by civil-rights groups but police unions also have their own powerful political clout and public relations systems to reach out and sway the public in their direction. I grieve for the police officers in Tampa but the harsh fact is that police unions have contributed to the fiscal crisis facing cities and counties across the U.S. as much as any other public sector union.
And your post does not answer any of his questions and simply apeals to emotion. I hope our taxpayer dollars will be spent using cool logic, but I expect fiery emotion. Hence, budget shortfalls because Cops and Teachers deserve more than the average joes and janes. Because its hard!
Unlike any other group of public employees, police are duly authorized to use potentially lethal force against the public. Police have an unique ability to threaten the public with anarchy and/or violence should their collective demands not be met. Since cops are only ever investigated and/or charged by other cops, local citizens have little recourse against police malfeasance unless they can persuade a distant federal government to open a civil rights complaint (which is a problematic issue of its own). That is reason enough to constrain police against organizing into unions.
Umm, because people can and do appeal to the feds endlessly regarding civil rights complaints, there are other ways to complain about cops than to other cops.
Yes, other public servants are restrained to merely robbing us.
I did not say that I support the protests in Wisconsin, nor unlimited rights for police to organize. I’m merely pointing out that they have unique reasons to defend themselves against even their own superiors — because they are vulnerable to certain types of legal action.
Absolutely, their unions should be using their resources to inform public debate on these subjects. But they’re up against quite a united front of activists, academicians, reporters, and pols.
Yes. I need more and much better reasons.
I am retired, with 42 years in 5 different law enforcement agencys and experience with everything from entry level to fifth level supervision.
Officers,( and I see everyone of them as my son; my grandson),have civil service protections, which preclude the need for unionization. The ultimate weapon of the union is the strike. Public employees must not be permitted to strike, since their services, especially police, are, ostensibly, indispensable. The courts are the proper resort of abused policemen. No city, county, state wants to spend its time, people and money in court, fighting myriad lawsuits filed by mistreated officers.
Even though the psychopathic politicos empowered by a lobotomized electorate act out in sociopathic modes, they still find themselves at the mercy of the thin blue line. They, too, must face the fact that those who fail the attitude test must deal with many unpleasant and troublesome difficulties. Difficulties which consume all of an individuals time and energies. Unpleasantness such as finding oneself in a 40 man cell with 39 gang members of a different race. And facing a veritable host of threatening circumstances from vicious, evil criminals and realizing that help will always be “on the way”; but will never arrive until after the fact.
Abused officers don’t need a union; just a little smarts and a lot of guts. That describes most of us pretty well.
YEAH, LISTEN ALL YOU public sevants:)
While teachers are under no pressure whatsoever.
Amen! I can’t think of anything to add.
Wonderful..You said it all and really well.
Excellent! I might add just a little.
Union members are actually represented three times- although some of them might not appreciate it when unions pay in to the PACs of whomever the leadership OF THE UNION wants to put in office. That simply cancels the individual’s vote IMO. (And mine as well). I don’t have their kind of money!
Secondly- (my spouse is an ex-cop and retired military, so I am definitely NOT a cop hater)- BUT, just like teachers, there are good ones and bad ones. ‘BAD’ doesn’t necessarily mean ‘rogue’ or ‘on the take’ or ‘evil’- sometimes it just means ineffective. Considering the success rate of the Unions at keeping bad teachers employed, I can’t imagine that they wouldn’t also have a hand in helping bad cops stay on the job too.
Lastly, cops manage to do their jobs in right-to-work states and other states that have no unions. I appreciate the author’s stance, but I’m not sure he is thinking clearly on this issue. He would be OK without a union and ‘We the People’ would be a lot better off with NO public unions AT ALL!!
AMEN there are people with BRAINS!
So the cops are commies too; commies acting like union thugs – surprise.
The cops are not the commies, Tim – it is the unions who are the socialist sympathizers. The only problem in this is that the unions have ingratiated themselves with the police officers – largely through pay, benefits, and pensions. Nobody in their right mind WANTS to lose these; the cops are not crazy about the idea of losing their ability to protect themselves and each other from corrupt politicians.
They have not, for some time, felt any respect or love from the people they are charged with caring for. They must love us and respect us, or they lose their jobs; we are frequently cruel and abusive – and apathetic – to them. If they seek solace in a greater wage and bene package, who can blame them?
If we want them to back away from the guaranteed Phat life, we are going to have to make it worth their while. They, in return for our love and respect to themward, shall be more happy with that love and respect – and for longer – than the money. Believe me.
The author writes, “True, on a typical work day we’re at little risk of a mine shaft cave-in, but we live with the fairly constant peril of getting the shaft from our bosses,” as a justification to police unions.
Sorry, buddy. Just about everyone with a job has or has had a tough time with a boss…it’s called employment.
So get in line if you want to complain. Or cry your sorrows off at a bar.
It’s called reality.
Complaints like that (about “bosses”) in the military were routinely responded to with the line:
Go see the Padre and have your ticket punched!
IOW, TFB, it’s all part of the job.
You are badly misinformed about what is happening in WI. It’s now about fiscal matters, and it’s not about fixing the budget of a state that is “broke”. When Walker took office, there was a surplus in the budget. He proceeded to give large tax breaks to corporations and other special constituecies (the ones who had contributed heavily to his campaign). That caused the deficit.
The state employees union had already agreed to Walker’s proposals to freeze their pay and increase their contribution to their pensions. This battle is strictly about breaking the union, nothing more. He actually exempted the police and firefighters because their unions had supported him during the campaign; the others had not. It’s about Politics, not state budgets, and it’s about a man who wants to be dictator and push his ideas through at any cost.
Unions created the Middle Class is this country by insisting on fair wages for work. Since Reagan broke the unions and the anti-union ideas took hold, the Middle Class has lost ground in wages which have not kept up with inflation. The top 1% of the wealthy have done very well and are now trying to solidify their stanglehold on the economy and our society.
The revolt and the demonstrations in WI are, hopefully, the beginning of a general uprising of a beaten-down middle class who are finally saying, “Enough”.
Well, Richard, glad to see the Administration line laid out so well. Facts are that Walker did, indeed, inherit a $3.6 billion deficit left by the preceding administration. After all, he has only been in office 10 weeks or so, so how has he given all these tax breaks in so short a time and how have they so miraculously resulted in this huge deficit? Not possible mate, and that is why your statements are false. Oh, and how well the top one percent of tax payers do in the U.S. is do mainly to their business skills and the fact that they made reasonably good choices growing up, something that all too many adults can’t say. Maybe that is why the bottom 50% of taxpayers are actually “tax receivers.” Yeah, that’s right, the bottom 50% are net recipients of various tax rebates and refunds so that they pay no Federal income taxes. Is that fair? How would they like a flat tax with no refunds? Now there is an idea for discussion.
The “surplus” in WI is the same nonsense spouted by those who insist Social Security has trillions in its “trust us” fund.
Liberals define words like “surplus”, and “cut” in a relative sense. So for instance, if spending is raised, but not as much as they proposed, this is called a “unconscionable cut” in spending on the program in question (which is generally one that does more harm than good by the time you get to “stage 2″ as Thomas Sowell calls it “Advanced Economics). Similarly, if the deficit is reduced, but not eliminated, this is called a “surplus”. A Progressive requires *progress*. Any attempt to slow or stall the progress toward bankruptcy is a “surplus”.
Hey spineonone,richard was at that bar he was slurring about and had his head in the toilet bowl when all this was discussed so you have to forgive him for his addleminded errors as he is true blue SEIU,shame that he has to resort to obamanistic lies,but we’re used to that now after 2years of “o” b/s
Oh STP with the surplus lie. He inherited a 3.3 billion deficit. You cannot have unemployment numbers that high and believe you have a surplus. What utter rot!
Also, it’s the middle class that is being squeazed out of existance by these unions that want ever more money – so they can turn around and loot their coffers to either line their own pockets or give as kickbacks to democrats.
We are tired of this – unions have GOT. TO. GO.
wrong!!!
unions want to demolish the middle class. Those poor plebs that want to live a life of their own and forge their own existence. Bastards. So let us establish a completely corrupt and infeasible system that steals from the middle class to pay for all those union workers not to work and lollygag in madison, to elect more yes men politicians that will push the union/communist agenda, etc…
and why is the only argument (or spasmodic reflex) that it is the uber wealthy that are the problem here? taxes that fund this outrageousness scam that gives union workers pay and benefits that are significantly higher than comparable free market/ private sector employees..
i truly sympathize with the useful idiot union panderers that are willfully supporting their own demise
“Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary.” -Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.)
“We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us.” -President Barack Hussein Obama
so much for democracy and being a true republic.
“You are badly misinformed…”
Keep reading MoveOn.org and Daily Kos if you wish to remain uninformed. It is your right. But to come here and spout off the same misinformation found on those websites will get you nothing but flames. In fact Walker entered office little more than a month ago facing a budget short-fall of over three billion dollars.
It is obvious you don’t you read the ‘real’ news?
“He proceeded to give large tax breaks….”
Translation: He had the gall to attack socialism.
How are we going to come to grips with and find a solution to our shared fiscal problems when so many – like Richard – are unwilling to make an honest assessment of our situation and all to willing to lie to continue our current broken system? It’s just nuts.
Richard, You are badly misinforming us. Politifact took a look at these claims that the exemption was “payback” to supporters. In fact, only two local unions supported Walker. The much larger state unions did not [http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/feb/21/donna-brazile/donna-brazile-says-unions-supported-scott-walker-a/]:
“During the campaign last November, leaders of the Milwaukee Professional Firefighters Association and Milwaukee Police Association appeared in an ad supporting Walker and blasting his opponent, Democrat Tom Barrett. Walker also won endorsements from the West Allis Professional Police Association and the Wisconsin Troopers Association
Walker didn’t get the endorsements of two statewide unions, the Wisconsin Professional Police Association and the Professional Fire Fighters of Wisconsin, which both backed Barrett.
For the record, the governor told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the charge that he was exempting police and firefighters was “ridiculous.” He said he didn’t recommend changing the rules for police officers and firefighters because he didn’t want public safety work disrupted.
We then contacted the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, the statewide union that endorsed Walker’s opponent last year. Executive director Jim Palmer said the statewide organization is much larger than the local Milwaukee police union that endorsed Walker. The state group has approximately 11,000 members versus Milwaukee’s roughly 1,400, he said.
Similarly, the state firefighters association has more than 3,000, compared with the Milwaukee union’s 875.
Belonging to a union doesn’t make you a better cop. Nor does it protect you from unwarranted law suits. The Police legal defense funds do that. So sorry, not buying the whining that police unions are needed to protect them from the very organizations (SEIU, and other far left wing groups) that the police unions seem to be locking arms with.
There are a number of states where law enforcement is not union. Does someone want to tell me that our non-union Texas Rangers are not the finest law enforcement officers in the nation? Please, do, I really need a laugh. Not all federal LE are union. Are they lesser quality than the pathetic union cops in Wisconsin that have refused to do their job, as ordered, and clear out the Capitol there?
When cops, like the ones in Wisconsin, start putting their union greed before their duty to uphold the law, we will see anarchy in the streets of every city in the nation.
You cannot be serious… When you give tax breaks to ANYONE, Richard, you are not paying them anything; you are simply not taking away as much money. That leaves them with more money – but that is a world of difference from PAYING them any money. This would NOT cause a deficit, because there was no money actually going out that would cause a deficit; look again and find out what REALLY caused the deficit.
Funny you should use this line of illogic, because it is the same fool thing the Democrats tried using to stop the extension of Bush’s tax cuts last year – they called it anything but what it was: a tax cut. Instead of calling it less money being pulled out of citizens’ pockets, they wailed that it would be less money in government coffers.
“It’s about Politics, not state budgets, and it’s about a man who wants to be dictator and push his ideas through at any cost.” Stay on topic, Richard; we were talking about Walker – not President Sputnik. Or had you forgotten how the pretender to the throne had pushed for his ruinous policies to be rammed through congress – and did nothing at all to discourage the closed-door activities carried on by his congressional stooges during the Lame Duck session, DESPITE HIS PROMISES THAT THIS WOULD BE THE MOST OPEN CONGRESS IN HISTORY?
Unions had a great role in history, but that role has long since run out of lines – the actor is simply standing on the stage and looking foolish. Everything they needed to do to protect workers, they did – and it was codified into law over the last several decades. In their zeal to fulfill their mandate, unions painted themselves up against the back door – and now the only thing to do is leave. Rather than leave gracefully, though, they are frantically running around looking for ways to protect their phony-baloney jobs (harrumph! harrumph! harrumph!).
The Government Union Experiment fails as an idea, not only obviously in practice; on a federal level there not way to justify any of the stupid ‘experiments’ we are being force to pay for. The game is not worth the candle.
Perhaps it is easier to see that not unlike many other government workers politicians already have a very very strong union: the governmet itself — living quite nicely off the taxpayer they can afford to ignore. That in itself is not too bad, but now with the growth of money launderng at all levels it has come to too much; but far worse now when added to the shrinking number and diminish wealth of taxpayers who see even Hamas getting billions from out sweat and struggles.
Jobs have benn driven out of major cities and small towns alike. Imposed scarcity and being punished with government swindles, bogus laws, all have squandered not only the dollars but also the trust of honest workers not seen before in 70+ years.
Certainly the above observations and questons are good ones — but those who should have to answer for them will not, as the only solution is to flush them from the system and much of the damage will go out with them.
Unlike the current crop of phonies, I don’t owe anyone anything; but as a good citizen it is my duty to make my gove4rnment shrink to an honest size and function. As it is, those in govt. will soon choose between ballots or bullets some with their own brand of death wish as we see getting so popular.
Gov Daniels of IN eliminated some collective bargaining “rights” for public employees a few years back by executive order w/hardly a peep. With the major losses suffered by Dems (I mean unions) in 2010, Walker should’ve seen unions (oops, Dems) would play hardball. Unless forbidden by WI law, the governor should’ve used executive order & it would’ve been over & done. Unions would probably have pulled the same thug tactics, but there would’ve been no reason for Dem senators to flee & WI might’ve stood a chance to get some new business.
“I must point out there is nothing particularly shocking about what Gov. Walker and the Republican majority in the Wisconsin legislature seek to accomplish, especially given that they campaigned and won election largely on their vow to curb state spending and close a looming deficit. They are merely trying to do as officeholders what they promised to do as candidates (which, on reflection, is shocking enough in itself).”
Did you evern notice that it takes a conservative to actually be honest with the public and follow through on his or her promises? Obama campaigned as a centrist and as a moderate who was not interested in “re-distributing wealth” (Joe the Plumber), didn’t have a clue who Bill Ayers was, never even heard of the “Reverand” Wright, wasn’t going to implement socialized medicine (you can keep your current insurance if you like it, remember that), wasn’t going to nationalize the auto makers (Government Motors), was actually going to make money with the AIG loan, was going to protect “all” the people under the law (the Black Panters Case), was going to “save” our economy with a nearly trillion dollar “stimulus” that was going to keep unemployment at 8% (it went up over 10% and is still at about 9%, if you believe the government’s numbers and not the millions of people who are actually out of work), the world was going to “adore” him through diplomacy and “smart power” (those Iranians sure did come to the bargaining table, didn’t they), his “brilliant” cabinet could handle any crisis (like the Gulf oil spill), and Obama was going to bring “civility” to the country and be the “post-partisan” president (after all the nasty things he and his minions had to say about the Tea Parties and ANYONE who disagreed with him).
You know, after all of what Obama “said” he was and was NOT going to do (and compared to what he eventually did), Scott Walker is starting to look like Abraham Lincoln to me. It’s refreshing to see politicians finally being honest with people who elected them and saying, “This is what I campaigned on and, if you elect me, this is what I’m going to do.” Go figure.
Here’s your SEIU and their friends;
http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2011/02/27/busted-anti-american-terrorism-supporters-in-chicago-an-update/
“Carl Horowitz writes at the National Policy and Legal Center that the investigation into Chicago’s SEIU Local 73 leaders, Joe Iosbaker and Tom Burke, chief steward and executive board member and former local board member-steward, respectively.”
Now the American Reds are starting their Marxist revolution and like all revolutionaries they need the power of brute force; hence they are recruiting the police. As our new civil war breaks out the cities will become the battlegrounds. Obama has accomplished his promise to fundamentally change what used to be America; now we live in the New American World State, a place where liberty and freedom are to be extinguished; maybe we will fight the good fight,maybe not. O tempora O mores
Wow, a little sanity in a sea of insanity.. Thank you and others who complained about SEIU/Moveon’s participation in this.
I use to donate to the police.( guilt that their job is dangerous and we should support them) However, over the past two years I have not donated a dime. This is just one more reason to only pay my taxes.
Not a good precedent: Screw the Constitution, I only do what my union rep and SEIU says– where’s my doughnut, shut up or bust you for resisting arrest! (And cops wonder why people don’t want to trust them today.)
I went to this and got some pictures of signs and some video.
http://www.bluecollarphilosophy.com/2011/02/union-protest-in-los-angeles-pictures-update-video-and-link-from-gateway-pundit.html
The conversations I overheard in the crowd were more troubling then what was said over the microphone. These people truly hate the opposition and look out if continues because there is a lot of video of violent attacks by unionists over this weekend.
Sorry Mr. ‘Dunphy’, you believe because you are a cop your exempt from the laws of economics. The average salary of a Nassau County cop on Long Island ,New York in 2009 was over $100,000. I call that extortion.I am sure you are doing quite well in L.A.
So tell me again why youre suprized?
The Unions are a left dominated “government worker” attack on Taxpaying Americans…
Cops = Unions
California is heavily left
So again…..whats the confusion?
Sorry Mr. Dunphy, but I have to disagree both with you and the LAPD officers who are demonstrating “solidarity” with the public unions in Wisconsin. I admire the police and have several friends who are cops. As individuals most cops are admirable, kindly and personable human beings with a strong sense of civic responsibility. However they they are far different when acting as a group.
When police take collective action in the form of their unions they are almost invariably selfish and greedy bullies whose motto is “I WANT MINE AND I WANT IT NOW!” I would argue that they are actually the most dangerous form of public sector union due to the following:
1) They have gigantic political clout – Police get to have it “both ways.” When it comes the average citizen the police are “heros.” The police assiduously cultivate the image of the selfless and self-sacrificing “cop”putting himself in harm’s way to protect the public. This applies to all police officers whether they are on the street or working in the Records Office (or are the full-time union rep.) At the same time they are hard-knuckled union operatives who wield their organizational clout like a giant club against local politicians. These same local politicians are terrified that the police will accuse them of being “soft on crime.” Local candidate cower in fear if there is a chance they won’t receive the police union endorsement. (If a city council candidate fails to get the support of say, the sanitation workers this is regrettable but not fatal.) Because we are conditioned by television and cinema to see all cops as “fighting crime with guns a’blazing” 24 hours a day ,we tend to forget that most police work is “down time” where the police wait reactively for calls.
2) Law enforcement accounts for anywhere from 40% to 70% of your average city or county budget. Overtime pay for cops is one of the biggest “black holes” in any local budget and police unions have done a virtuoso job of insuring that overtime is paid for any action that is “outside of the contract.” (Maybe you could tell me how much an LAPD officer is paid when he testifies in court when the hearing falls on his day-off or vacation. It’s probably either time-and-a-half or double-time.) Whenever a patrol officer calls off sick or is on vacation then his/her post MUST be filled by an officer on overtime. Many police ar ealso adept at arranging their scheduels in such a way that they pursue their real love – This would be lucrative off-duty security projects at stores, malls, fairgrounds and other venues.
3) Police unions generally cannot strike. However they can appeal to some form of State Arbitration Board where they win about eighty to ninety percent of the time. These boards are made up of political appointments and when they are Democrats they almost always favor the union position.
4) Police unions consciously and maliciously prey on public fear in a way no other organization can. The threat of an unauthorized strike or a “sick-out” leaves much of a community panic-striken and the police often cruelly tailor these tactics directly toward the elderly and the infirm.
5) The power of the collective bargaining agreement has left most of the command strucutre in any police department totally irrelevant. Nearly all decision making concerning line staff is done through the language of the contract. As a result most command officers from lieutenant to deputy chief simply rubber stamp decisions made for them and try to maximize their own pay in anticipation of their retirement.
Police unions are public sector unions no different than sanitation workers or street repair personnel. However they have many more “arrows in their quiver” to obtain their demands. Municipal budgets in many cities have become so bad that local officials are finally (much against their will) having to go after reductions in police salary and fringe benefits. The police reaction has overwhelmingly been “To Protect and To Serve” their own interests.
Wrong on this particular point. Good street cops [and that's what we're comparing here] on a national basis make more cases “on sight” – by discovery – than after to responding to a call.
I will concede part of what you say. Much depends on whether you add in traffic stops and arrests resulting from traffic stops. A large percentage of on-view arrests result from routine traffic stops where the resulting record check reveals the defendant to have an outstanding warrant for something unrelated to the stop. Since the probable cause for this arrest is provided by the traffic stop I consider it a “reactive” situation.
I will still argue that a great deal of police time is spent waiting for calls. And this only applies to patrol and investigating officers. What about those staff and command officers who haven’t made an arrest in years?
Jack:
It’s tough to wake up and find out that you’ve been sleeping with the devil. Those who help enforce the law ought not to be found on the side of the killers. If you don’t think the anarchists, socialists, communists, Islamists have murder in their hearts then you are still dreaming and still need to wake up. What you are going to find out is that there is no middle ground. If as you say and I agree, most cops are conservative then that is where you must stand, clearly. The services of cops and other law enforcement officials are going to be needed more than ever in the near future. Don’t you think your services will be highly valued? I do.
So it turns out that the liberal politicians were lying to get union money, promising lavish benefits with other people’s money. The union bosses should have used a calculator and the union members should have demanded reality instead of greed. So the greedy politians were kicked out by the voters. Now those who promise fiscal sanity are being made a scapegoat for those who committed the crime in the first place. Cop’s, don’t be duped by the fools who lied to you in the first place. The aforementioned evil dudes will be the first to turn on you in the end.
Society needs honest cops to help preserve the rule of law which is necessary to an ordered society, a place where families can grow and live in peace. The power of your office comes from the hands of the Almighty and not from the unions. That is why you do not need to associate with those who lie cheat and steal like the moveon.org types you despise who have no fear of God and will now pay the penalty.
Well said, just Like Christie in NJ, don’t hate the first guy to come and actually tell the truth..
Well said.
Good article. But, can you imagine if the US military was allowed to collectively bargain?? They to me, are like the police. They are suppose to protect everyone and therefore have no bargaining ability for pay or benefits. At least civilians can up and quit at a moments notice if the conditions are not up to their liking. The military can’t or they would be court martialed and sent to the brig.
Excellent point!
But, can you imagine if the US military was allowed to collectively bargain??
Did you know that there are some countries – including NATO allies like The Netherlands – whose soldiers are unionized?
I don’t pretend to know whether this union does collective bargaining and I don’t know if they have the right to strike. I shudder to think of any country’s army going on strike at some critical moment to serve a political agenda that is antithetical to the interests of the country as a whole….
The left is carrying on a perfect subversive plan, and we shouldn’t spend our time discussing the details of it.
What the (former democrats now openly) socialists are doing is simply fomenting and igniting class warfare, and violent rioting.
The sum of class warfare, debt, and foreign politics impotence will be, in the plans of the subversives, the demise of America.
Whoever cooperates with any of that is a friend of the totalitarian beast.
Period.
The GOP should wake up and call Americans to unite against the subversion.
The trouble is there are many Republicans (mostly RINOs) that see a place at the table of The New World Order (Progressive/Socialist term: American Dream).
I agree with your post – except for the ‘perfect subversive plan’. It is much less than perfect – but they are about to pull it off if Obama can get re-elected in 2012 – or find some excuse to delay (or cancel) the 2012 elections should the polls look gloomy. This guy is so full of himself that I wouldn’t put it past him to do such a thing – and to foment the needed crisis. Something big – like the burning of the Reichstag in 1933 – and blame it on GOP candidate Sarah Palin and/or elements of the Tea Party.
Can’t happen here? Just like so many never imagined any such thing could happen in 1933 Germany (they were so enlightened!) – few would suspect Obama could do such a thing. Well – almost nobody. But something on that scale may need to happen – and if it doesn’t then something will have to be manufactured – and I put nothing past this maniacal power-grabbing Soros tool.
I agree, there is the problem of some GOP elitists who are part of the SSoros plan.
Hopefully, the turn that is being announced in these months in Europe (by the public declarations against multiculturalism) is a hint to a change of understanding in the elitists’ circles, and maybe it will spread. The alliance that is trying to choke America is the CHIMERA, the sum of marxist subversives, elitists, and islamists. If the alliance shows any crack, our cultural and political opposition can force the crack open and destroy the monster.
It’s a race against time, of course.
A colossal provocation to win in 2012 and carry on the whole subversive plan is a possibility, but they know that they would risk their neck.
From what I’ve seen it’s a risk they are willing to take.
Keep your powder dry.
Obama has already over rode voters across the country…even told the gov. of Oklahoma that no law was “ABOVE” Shariah. If we lose our police officers it will kill my belief in the law entirely. The thing is I’ve been advocating, without being paid, on the behalf of the police departments around the country. They need protecting by “We The People”. You see, they are faced with something in their cities these days that will attack them quickly to take down anyone that would protect the citizens. As I’ve repeatedly reported, the police around America have been trained by the International World Police. They’ve been trained by FEMA and will be expected to “round-up” people when martial law is issued. It’s always been expected that the police will play a big part in the destruction of our American way of life.
I would like to offer this to you, ONLY IN DEMOCRAT counties did I expect it! America loves their police officers, fire fighters and emergency personnel. What you weren’t provided by the unions “We The People” helped you raise the money yourselves. How many times do little boys want to grow up to be a police officer? Fireman? How many girls swoon over the “men in uniform”. If you guys continue with SEIU and MOVEON.ORG you become apart of the Communist/Union/Socialist/Muslim Brotherhood attacks for world domination. Little boys will fear you and little girls will see you as monsters.
If you decide to remain American you must first reach back into memory when Americans locked ranks when attacked. Firefighters, if you needed help with a fire, we’d help. Police officers, you have more on your plates than you can handle, we’d have your backs. Military forces, WE LOVE YOU! You are our heroes, all of you!
I guess I will wait to see how this comes out….ya’ll watch your sixes if you stand against these thugs. If you stand, you won’t be standing alone…we’d never let you fly alone! You’ve never been alone. God Bless America, God Bless HER People!
Exactly.
They subvert in so many ways in so many places that it’s impossible to track no matter argue about the details.
Frankly, I think there is nothing they would welcome an argument about more than the issue of Police Unions, because that is probably the group they would like to get the most po’ed.
There’s always the National Guard. I recall with fondness the riots in Watts, the police were called in the Guard was called out, and after a sufficient number of vicious low lives and looters were shot dead, as in not breathing, peace was restored.
Liberals[?] were suitably outraged, Republicans were somehow blamed, the county had not received enough $aid, despite receiving more then any other county in the nation, the left if anything is more crazed & rabid now & Bats Brown is governor.
and the term “riots” was used to give credibility to a bunch of hooligans that need little more than an excuse to regress to mayhem—> much like the morons that riot in the streets after laker championships
there is nothing “patriotic” or “socially important” in these clear examples of lawlessness
what about the rodney king riots— the “result” of some “racist decision” against a “victim” was nothing more than a bunch of lawless hoods marauding and looting — attacking citizens, police, and firefighters with recklessness
as soon as these “protestors” damage one penny of private property the authenticity disappears and the cops and or national guard should act with no quarter
The most deceiving part of MoveOn’s plea is their wish to save ‘The American Dream’. I’m quite sure Soros’ idea of the American Dream and my idea of it are two diametrically opposed ideas. It is too bad that the useful idiots at places like MoveOn – Daily Kos et al do not know what is in store for us – and them – if Obama and Soros have their way with us.
The American Dream is code word for a progressive remake of this country – and for the world – to a one world government – with some ‘benevolent’ head of the world figure such as Soros. It is his dream – and he’s said as much on many occasions. What stands in their way is capitalism – and us.
What is more anti-capitalism than unions? Ergo – their support…for now. You fight the fight with whatever is at hand – and discard it when it (useful idiots) is no longer needed.
Are any progressives listening to him? Are they able to actually process what this really means for them should he/they be able to pull it off? They are very close to doing just that – and its the reason why Obama would step into a fight of a local nature. He knows that should he lose Wisconsin now – he’ll lose it again in 2012 – and HIS – and ‘their’ ‘American Dream’ might falter and fail.
I hope it does.
I was incredulous when I saw this ridiculous “call for unity.” The Left vilify police officers and while holding up cop killers as heroes.
Someone pointed out that the government unions essentially violate anti-trust laws. I’ve been saying that for years. If you’re not happy with your school, police, or fire department – tough.
Don’t cry about taking a job where your job is at risk. You don’t have to do it. Many of us have risked out lives for money. Most of us lived.
I still detest socialists/communists. I detest thugs who imagine they rule rather than serve. I will never sit down and shut up. I ain’t a’scairt. I don’t need state/Federal help to save me from anarchy. I know billionaires and I know some dirt poor gangsters. Live free and die free.
Here we go.
Soon we will be lawless, with those whose job it is to keep the peace instead marching with thugs who have been committing violence on their political opposition.
This was always the danger of public employee unions.
It will be a war against the general public, an attempt to intimidate the taxpayer into grudging silence and a return to the field, the office, the plant, the grindstone. Shut up and produce so the rest of us can get paid.
God help this country.
Good policemen everywhere, please do your jobs instead of the will of union thug bosses.
The idea of a public employee union is morally repugnant. Any union action is a war on the taxpayer. And the taxpayer is NOT at the table during ‘negotiations’, only the politicians who benefit from union help and the unions who benefit from allocations of tax money by politicians.
Pols give money to unions, unions give money and help to pols. The bill goes to the poor suckers who have no say in the matter.
God help us.
Soon we will be lawless? We have a POTUS whose in contempt of court and whoe DOJ picks and chooses which laws it will or won’t enforce. I’d say we’re already lawless.
And God will only help us if we repent as a nation. I don’t see that happening. We are being Judged.
Mr. Dunphy,
It would be one thing if you were collectively bargaining with bosses whose money was paying you. But it’s taxpayer money you’re getting, and the taxpayers are NOT CONSULTED or given a voice. Democrat politics sees to that. It is only because of public employee union support that Democrats run things in most places, and the taxpayers are assuredly NOT voting for the people who plan to pillage their wallets and bank accounts in favor of unions.
But the taxpayer, after voting, is left with NO REPRESENTATION! He is livestock, a cow to be milked dry and discarded.
The cows are kicking down the damned stalls and they’re about to go on a stampede. And the hands of the left are STILL grasping at the dry udders, dodging the kicks but refusing to let go.
Public unions will disappear soon enough simply because there will be no funding. I will be a frickin’ DIRT FARMER before I’ll let my money support any more public unions. The last voice we have will be to deliberately reduce our own incomes and thus the taxes we pay.
DOn’t think we won’t do it.
Obama’s loving this insurrection; It’s the only thing he’s got any experience at.
And by his silence (and ‘covert’ assistance through MoveOn.Org), he is displaying his wholehearted endorsement.
THE UNITED STATES IS HEADED IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE MIDDLE EAST.
I’m sorry, but public employee unions are merely a means to funnel money to Democrat politicians–and our TAX money, to boot. It works like this. Unions, by definition, demand more and more for doing less and less. In the case of private companies, meeting union demands means less profitability–which, up to a point, can be sustained. Meeting those demands means that shareholders just don’t see as large a return on their investment, something they can, again up to a point, live with. Public unions, however, while making the SAME demands for more and more for doing less and less, are dealing with a deck stacked in their favor. Their “employers”–those that actually PAY the bills–don’t have a seat at the bargaining table. Those that do, have a vested interest in seeing to it that the unions get what they ask for because (1) It’s not the politicians’ money, (2) politicians believe that there’s “always more where that came from” and (3) they know that a substantial amount of that additional money is going to be returned to THEM in the form of campaign help to keep them in office so they can vote even MORE taxpayer money to the unions the next time there’re contract negotiations. Naturally enough, the worst offenders are Democrat politicians, although Republicans aren’t immune to this temptation. The solution is simple. OUTLAW ANY public employee unions…period. At the very least, remove politicians from the bargaining table and replace them with actual taxpayers’ representation…that is, someone who has the taxpayer’s best interests at heart…not extorting union money in order to get elected.
Great points, dave. BTW isn’t it interesting to see the Communist Party USA – Oops, I meant MoveOn.org – but I repeat myself – wanting to align itself with real law enforcement officers? Whodaeverthunkit!
Just another way for the LAPD Union to ID who is on their side – as opposed to the honest, hard-working REAL police. THEY (yes the amorphous they)are lining up their ducks – while most of us are sitting by just trying to get thru another day. AWAKE AMERICA! This is our call to arms. The reason for the Wisconsin mess is that the protesters know they can’t win by legal means at the ballot box. Stop their whining – don’t support one iota of their commie-pinko-red BS. We ARE already in a civil war – we are just the only ones who are still CIVIL…
Aside from disiplinary action, public unions serve no purpose. I have been in a union representing federal law enforcement officers for 8 years, the rest of my career in federal law enforcement was in exempted positions where union membership was prohibited. I was even a shop steward for a while. But I had better treatment in the positions prohibited from union membership than that represented by unions.
Government worker unions serve no real purpose other than the corruption of the public sector worker as evidenced by most government unions like the AFSME, SEIU, etc.
A better solution for government workers is a professional assosication that aids the worker in the disiplinary process to ensure lawfulness.
Otherwise, I don’t see government unions either improving the workplace. Unions discourage good managers and good employees, allowing bad thugish managers to rise and lazy useless workers to be protected.
Fine, California, do what you have to do; it’s your right as a state. Just don’t come calling to me to pay for your leftist utopia, NO BAILOUTS!!!!!!!!!!!
I especially like the Orwellian way they are framing this, giving workers the right to not pay union dues is restricting worker’s rights. Collective bargaining in the public sector is a disaster just as it would be if I elected my boss and expected him to grease my wheels.
Just like the Stasi in East German!
Union dues are tax deductible. Unions are not taxed, and they’re not held to the financial standards we have for the local mom-and-pop store. The result is public-sector unions are engines for converting tax dollars into Democrat campaign dollars — and that’s why the left is going berserk in this fight.
It’s time to end the exemptions unions get from all manner of laws: RICO, taxes, anti-trust, Sarbanes-Oxley (and other), and make them understand we’re a nation of laws, not gangs.
Jack, excellent summary of the quandary today’s CA cops find themselves in. Decades ago when POST was first enacted there was a movement afoot to “professionalize” law enforcement in such a way as to provide oversight and in-ranks mediation for intradepartmenttal disciplinary and quasi-disciplinary disputes, IE: provide lower ranking cops some protection against the missteps and bullying of “suits”. But as I recall – and you’re not gonna like this – it was the LAPD, SFPD and SDPD rank-and-file that nixed that idea in favor of forming their own “unions”. In brief, they were “too good” to be associated with the rest of us.
Understanding the inherent conflict, unions were the very thing most LEOs in smaller departments did NOT want to join. But you guys had the numbers – and had been romanced into the notion by a couple of well-heeled promoters smelling their cut of pension and benefit monies – so the die was cast. I thought then it was a short-sighted move, but LA cops are reaping now what your older brothers [and a few sisters] planted.
Your comments re: the transmogrification of elected union reps from the ranks just proves the point. Cops and unions should never mix. Unless, of course, they are merely hourly workers going from job to job, city to city. IMO you need to bite that bullet, de-politicize the PO Standards and Training Commission, and turn it into the professional association it could have become. But that won’t happen.
You will not receive much sympathy or understanding on this site from commenters re: the unfairness and arbitrariness of “suits”. Most here will think it’s minor in nature and have no idea how insidiously debilitating a wild hair at the top can be to an entire agency. Sorry, it is just the nature of things.
I belong to CSEA. That’s the court officer’s/clerks union in NYS courts. In the past I have voted generally GOP/libertarian. I am a registered Conservative, life NRA member. My orientation started when, as a gun owner and a small businessman, which I was for a decade before I became a G man, the government at that time under Bill Clinton seemed rabidly after my guns and money. I was paying upwards of 40 plus percent of my small income to fund people who would not work and other special programs. So I was angry but I got even. I joined a union.
I needed to have many people with me to get what I was due. Just like the multinationals do with the mega law firms and pocket senators. Just like the old money do, with the same. Kennedys, Bushs, it doesn’t matter, like Lockheed or the Federal Reserve, they’re taken care of.
For those of us without trust funds or uncles who are senators; without our own Skadden Arps or any other big stick, a union is about the last way left standing to get a decent salary in America. Does that mean cheating? I don’t. Does that mean doing the same damn thing that the corporations and politicians do? Yup. Might makes right.
The big question for me is not why union, the big question is why not? Why is there not a Bloggers Guild? Why is there no organization amongst all the complainers? It’s legal. Why not?
I do not know the answer but all I can think of is that the complainers really don’t need money and power. They are content to simply complain and complain. They don’t want teachers living well. After all, it’s not enough to duck nut job parents and the board of ed and the administrators, all trying to blame you for the failure of the drug addled pigs you teach, you should do it for too little to live on, and have no time off. After all, people without masters degrees don’t get summers off, why should you? As for the cops, who do they think they are? Just because you have to call headquarters to get permission to take a leak at 1:15 a.m. because you’re on the side of the highway, and if you get caught, you’ll be disciplined, who cares? And just because you have to work midnight to eight, and give CPR to people who are covered in vomit, who cares? You should be replaced by an $8 a hr. loser.
I hate hippies with aluminum foil hats, but if it’s a choice of getting their support or getting crapped on by fat guys with Gasden flags, I’ll take the hippies. Hell, I’m in a union so I’ll take any support I can get. And finally, if the Democrats don’t go after my guns, which they SEEM not to be doing, I’ll go back to voting for them. Apparently, my votes for Republicans got me a pack of anti-labor activists who want to replace me with someone they sneak over the border. They have not stopped to even think about who is going to buy their mortgages or stocks when I’m out of work. It’s certainly not going to be the low bidders who replace us.
The anti-union kick that some Republicans are on now, mark my words, will tip the balance back to the Democrats in the next election cycle. Many, many court officers and other conservative guys, like me have been loyal to the GOP for years now. Now they want our jobs. That is not smart thinking.
RICK, NYS
Taking you at your word, and I do, I have three questions.
1. Do you believe it’s possible for NYS to eventually run too low on available funds and loan capacity to meet it’s current financial obligations to your union?
2. If yes, does your union have a responsibility to mitigate the underfunding effect on it’s members?
3. If #1 is yes, does your union also have a responsibility to mitigate the underfunding effect your union’s commitment has on NYS?
If your answer to #1 is “no” then we have no basis for further conversation. Otherwise, I’m curious how you see that potential dichotomy.
Btw, if you think it’s rank-and-file Republicans bringing in the illegals you are living in someone else’s world. It’s the Dems and a few RINO’s who support them and get all weepy-feely about those poor souls. I guarantee you most normal GOPers want the border fixed and illegals stopped BEFORE any further damage occurs. Only then should we begin the repair process. To work on “being fair” to illegals who are already here right now would be as smart as paving a highway in the middle of a hurricane during an earthquake.
Bill, in answer to your question, I do not believe NYS is out of money or nearly out of money. They have been basing their budget on projected increases in outlays for years. And NYS specifically has a unique portrait due to Wall Street. Right now, despite everyone’s suffering nationally, WS is humming along, and doing quite well.
I do not have any actual numbers on NYS or my union. I do know that we are suffering from under-utilization due to the fact that crime rates at least here are way, way down. What do courts do without murders? You got me. I’ve been in the court system since ’89 and was in the Bronx when Giuliani was mayor. There is one fifth as much work now as there was then. So the question is, do you keep a standing army of cops and court officers and court clerks when you vanquish crime or all the Baby Boomers die off or whatever is happening? Obviously, it is expensive to do so. The real problem is, do you stop taking medicine when the symptoms of the disease are in remission? I think not. Granted, I’m prejudiced and I want to keep my job.
I just feel between turning on AM radio and certain other media outlets that I’m being scapegoated. I mean, I spent 7 and-a-half years stepping over the carcasses of pit bulls who lost fights and dodging vomit and blood in the South Bronx on my way too and from work, and after all that I get told that I’m somehow spoiled because I get a pension when I’m 56, after 20 years. Well, at all my Class of ’81 reunions, I was browbeaten by classmates who all worked for Godlman Sachs and Citibank, and made 5 or 6 times as much as me. Now they’re out of work, and somehow, they’re angry at court clerks and garbage men. It just seems quite petty, and most importantly, destructive for Americans to fight one another instead of making sure we get our country back on track. I feel terrible that my wife bought a Japanese car. I should have been more insistent that she buy American. I want to help the economy but I feel that others are more interested in hurting union workers that helping bring back a vibrant economy.
Ciao
Look! A troll.
Only in your drug-induced nightmares, little child.
So, Rick NYS, what I got from what you said is, “It’s all about me”, “It’s all about my needs”, “It’s all about what I want and what I can get”. You are right, you did pay for more than your fair share in NY. Unions are draining us dry and as a member you are supporting every progressive agenda out there. Truly, you can’t stand with one foot on each side of the line and claim to be a conservative. Either you’ve seen how destructive the unions have gotten, $400 billion dollars given to Obama’s last campaign buys them clout….what does it buy you? Oh, wait, it help bring down America cities to the point of bankrupt and still demanding more from us.
We can’t fire a bad worker, regardless of what they do. Use to people worked and stood on principle, now they stand with the unions where they lie and distort facts. Yank your foot away from one side of that line..Personally, I’d rather have my guns right now.
CLUELESS!
Big government and police satte tyranny… the road to Hell is paved with gold-plated benefits (just ask Stalin, Saddam, etc. because it worked for them buying loyalty of thugs for their agendas).
Unionized police are already a Praetorian Guard that has to be appeased by larger settlements and exemptions from cutbacks on overtime etc. Look at them in Wisconsin. If not for the carveout, they’d be in the street with the mobs.
The politicians that signed collective bargaining into law for government workers have done more damage in a shorter time than anything else in US history. You are just starting to see it.
From what I can see in Madison, it looks as if the police there are definitely taking sides–and not on that of the community at large. Tell me–what is the working philosophy of cops when they have a strong interest in and committment to unions in general? Is it offset by a deep understanding of and allegiance to a representative democracy and its citizens, or is it ‘what’s in it for me”?
I was forcibly told by an old-timer LEO once, ‘I work for the PEOPLE!’
I wonder what percentage of unionized cops believe that today, and how they would respond in the crunch. Who are the good guys?
Am I worried? Yes.
Excellent comments, all, many thanks…
An uncommented upon aspect of the unionization of law enforcement has been the generalized corruption, cronyism and incompetence that accompanies it. Outdated and obsolete work rules surround most departments in my city and state; one can no become a cop after age 35, regardless of qualifications. Why? Union work rules. Affirmative action and “diversity” quotas apply to hiring; thus, high-quality (physically fit, motivated, well-educated)candidates are treated to the spectacle of obese, physically unfit, functionally illiterate cops whose sole claim to the job is they were born to a protected group, i.e., female, minority, etc. Most towns have so-called “Merit Boards” for selection of police officers; the name is a misnomer, because cronyism and favoratism are as common as ever. Political correctness, diversity, multiculturalism, affirmative action – these are the new watchwords. Merit and performance have little to do with it. The police unions, being de facto subsidiaries of the Democratic Party, have toed the line. Once public safety – law enforcement and fire protection/EMS – had been politicized, it was inevitable that sooner or later they would take sides in a dispute like that in WI. This is a very troubling development for a nation whose public servants have historically stayed out of such disputes. For this reason alone, public employee unions must be purged. Civil service rules already protect govt. employees anyway; they do not need unions.
For all of those who favor unionization of police and fire, do you favor unionization of the military, or perhaps medical professionals such as doctors and nurses? They are fundamentally no different than cops and firefighters, so why no unions? Some nurses have unionized, and it has been a disaster. One can only imagine physicians doing so, or the military.
Not even Franklin Roosevelt, the hero of the progressive movement, favored public employee unions. They were illegal until JFK signed an executive order legalizing them, in 1962. One of the first actions of the next GOP and/or TP president should be to reverse that order.
Historically, private-sector unions have done much to help create the middle class, but that work was done many decades ago. The truth of Eric Hoffer’s observation that “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket” has been proven. Most unions are now a racket. If they hope to recapture their past successes, they’d better reform how they do business – or risk becoming extinct.
Lastly, the left and the public unions may fight, yell epithets and otherwise struggle against the cold, hard truth, but reality won’t be denied. The money promised to them isn’t there, and absent a miracle, is not going to be in the foreseeable future. Their choice is to agree to cuts in benefits and limits on their power, or get nothing and perhaps be abolished at the stroke of a pen. At some point, even public employee unions are going to wise up and realize that their anger is misdirected at the taxpayers, rather than the corrupt pols who made promises to them that they had no possible way of honoring. The govt. lied to them, just as it has been lying to the rest of us. Welcome to the party…
The prospect of law enforcement agencies taking sides in labor disputes, and all that entails – is one more reason to support full exercise of second amendment rights. You are responsible for your protection, and that of your home and family.
Barrack Hussein Obama, July 2008 at Colorado Springs, Co.
And;
So, does this look like Obama’s master plan being put into motion?
The reason that we invest police powers in some citizens is that we have faith in their integrity, in their sense of justice, and in their ultimate impartiality as they perform their duties.
For me to continue to support that investment, police officers everywhere must demonstrate that they are worthy of the incredible trust that represents. We give them immense powers, not the least being the nearly exclusive right to legally employ deadly force in our society. Why give such power if the men and women we give them to betray out trust and their oaths?
If the public unionization of police forces across this nation leads them to become legally armed agents of the tyranny we, as Americans, have been schooled to distrust and to despise, then we should and will will strip them of that authority.
My gut tells me that the front line cop is not the problem here. But the union rabble rouser is and he is a tool of the politics of the left, the politics that would enrich it’s coffers from the mandatory union dues withheld from the members. As in Wisconsin, only one political party profits from public employee unions, because it expects those unions to give them money (outright bribes) for political campaigns in order to achieve favored status and thereby serve the rent seeking ends of the union officers.
Now, what political party might that be…….
Absolutely spot on. Great points.
The police have already chosen sides. They let union thugs beat up on Tea Partiers and they do nothing. They are assisting and supporting the union thugs who’ve taken over the capitol in Madison, WI.
The police have taken sides and it is not with the people, it’s with the bullies and the mobs AGAINST the people of this country.
in the end it will all ride with the military and with whom they will stand…they are sworn to defend the constitution…cops defend the status quo
It may be a small point, but [non-federal] cops generally are sworn to uphold the constitutions of the states in which they are accredited. And you may be right about some officers, but IMO even though it goes against their self-interest, most will not support the thugs. Jack Dunphy, here, has just expounded on that dilemma.
What happens when the police decide they don’t want to enforce the decisions of the legislature? When they decide that they will not support the voice of the people and their lawfully elected government? They already turn their backs and ignore union assaults on us.
What if the government has to call in the National Guard to enforce order? Are the “public employee” union-loving cops going to fire on them? It’s unlikely that we’re going to have a real shooting civil war in America but it’s not as unlikely as I’d prefer it to be.
You may be right about officers not “doing their duty” and protecting peaceful demonstrators against union thugs, but the videos of union “thuggery” I saw last fall on the internet, and more recently, are – on balance – do not support your claim. We didn’t see dead or bloodied victims, and the few shoving and shouting matches shown were short in duration and seemed to break up pretty quickly. The thugs were crude, rude and offensive. But officers charged with “keeping the peace” pretty well did their jobs by not allowing demonstrations to escalate into full-blown rioting. That is always an agency’s worst nightmare. So I believe your conclusion that local PD’s threw in with MoveOn.org and SEIU thugs is not based on reasonable expectations. I acknowledge the fear is there they might, but the evidence so far leads me to believe the risk they will is not high. Just saying.
And whoever said freedom equated with tranquility? Not too very likely.
If cops are beginning to put supporting unions above the public welfare, we are in deeper doo doo than even I think.
Nightmarish indeed, pro, but the anti-male ‘feminist’ laws that police also uphold are pretty scary too.
My husband is an “evil” federal employee (firefighter).
Federal employees do not have collective bargining or strike rights.
Federal pay much more towards retirement and health care then do the Wisconsin employees.
We also have a two year cost of living pay freeze, possibly five if ok’d by Congress.
And we still have it pretty good!
The public employee behavior in Wisconsin is embarassing.
This police official has now shown that he serves the union over the taxpayer. He has violated his oath of office and needs to be disciplined appropriately.
Police and Fire cannot serve two masters, so, the unions need to go.
I’m afraid I have nothing but contempt for the Police Union and more and more each day nothing but contempt for police who all appear to hold themselves above the law and free to kill anybody at all. Shoot their dog. Break down the door of the wrong home (which is so easy to check and verify prior to starting kill the surprised homeowner and his dog.) I find that San Jose is paying over $500,000 in retirement pay to the retired police chief. That’s egregious. And I have the same contempt nowadays for the Fire Fighter Unions. I come from back east where most of the Fire Fighters were Volunteers. Why is LA paying a fired dirtbag fire fighter over $200,000 a year who retired at age 35?
So now the cops are scrubbing toilets with the SEIU Union. Do they get hazard duty pay for that? I am a rank and file union member in the trades, we had to negotiate with our contractors. What the public sector union wants to do is negotiate for their benefits with people they help get elected into office so these politicians will give them more benefits and pay compared to the average non union workers who have to pay for the union workers benefits. Sweet deal the politicians will give the union anything it wants and the union pays the politicians millions of dollars in campaign funds. What the union does not want to face up to is the fact`s! We are broke and have no more to give!
Folks I tell you as a retired Police Officer this is very dangerous. Just equate this with the miltary organizing and it should open your eyes. For all of you who are unconcerned you had better wake up.Another point to ponder. Yesterday in New York they found teachers making over a $100,000.00 a year teaching one class a day and spending the rest of the day working at the Union Hall.The teacher was being paid and additional $50,000.00 a year for that by the union. On top of this the school had to pay a substitute to fill in for this teacher for the rest of the day. Your government unions are becoming dictators.
At the end of the day, the police are the enforcement arm of the State.
When the food riots hit the US in the next couple of years it will be plain to all whether the police are there to serve the public or enforce the diktats of the politicians.
The vicious cycle of looting and corruption then runs full circle. The police are bribed by the politicians who they help to elect and protect against the taxpayers who the politicians loot and the police repress. Nice work if you can get it.
Dunphy is correct in that the police are in competition with other looters of the taxpayer.
Jack, Jack, Jack….don’t get sucked into the argument about the fair price for your labor. There is no such thing. There is only the “market” price for your labor.
Your labor is only worth what the market is willing to pay for it.
I suspect public sector employees crossed that market rate threshhold a while ago. Stand by for an adjustment to your pay by the marketplace.
And yes, I am. 25 years and I’m still a hard working patrol dog. To be honest, looking around at my non-cop friends, I am paid much more than my worth to the market.
First of all the writer needs to be congratulated on an extremely well written argument. However, I am not sure that I agree with his views on the police need for a union. I haven’t seen evidence of unions fighting that hard for the rights of an individual member unless action against an individual member could be viewed as a precedent that could harm the union itself. But I salute the writer for his thought process and for communicating it so well.
Well said.
… almost parallels the very same methodology Adolf & company employed back in the 20′s & 30 in Germany… This IS A STANDARD MARXIST/SOCIALIST/FASCIST MANOEUVER employed to overcome public resistance: A “cop” IS the gov’t.! To ‘resist’ a policeman: means arrest; FEAR
Our ‘federal’ government in Di’Strict of Columbia IS a FORIEGN POLITICAL POWER…
… JUST AS KRUSCHEV PROCLAIMED WHEN HE STEPPED UPON AMERICAN SOIL FROM THAT 707:
“WE SHALL BURY YOU!” and at that- “WITHOUT EVER FIRING ONE SHOT!!”
Well, the ol’ USSR couldn’t do it… However, it’s ‘shadow’… DID!
That ‘shadow’ is Euro-Socialist Marxism- with the help of massively-rich *’Worlders!’
* The last chapter of “Animal Farm.”
You sure won’t see Obummer and his wife and kids marching in any of those parades – but sure do hear him go on and on in tune with all of those idiots that are out there embarrassing themselves by marching for the SEIU and Movin’ On crap – you best believe it. Destroy America is Obummer’s wish – I don’t want any part of his socialist party!
Reds of a feather stick together.
I would have no problem with public employee unions if they were forbidden to engage in electoral politics. That they give finacially and in-kind, makes them an enemy of the electorate, and incetusous. Bring back the Hatch act, I will have no trouble with public employee unions.
But, if they insist on being involved in electoral poltics, then the unions must be abolished.
it’s about time the taxpayer got sick of this nonsense. It cost’s us more and more everytime a “public” employee goes on an illegal strick or walk out simply because they want the taxpayer to fund their benefit package. Just take a drive around your own cities and towns and look to see what the “public” workers are actually doing to deserve their pay,(or your tax dollar), I could write a book on the waste, but who wants to read “FACT”, when fiction is much morre entertaining
You are to be commended and I thank you as well as all fellow officers that are willing to stand with you. Yes, there are certain jobs where a Union is needed but through the years the Unions are becoming too big, too political, too greedy and appear to be leading us towards socialism. I believe the majority of protesters in WI are not those being asked to give up collective bargaining but protesters bussed in from other states, by the Unions. Citizens of WI would know how bad their state is in financially and would rather keep it out of bankruptcy then add to their states financial problems. Should WI have to file bankruptcy then all too many WI employees will be looking at lay offs. Which is the lesser of two evils?
3 Serving
I’m not sure what part of Texas you live in, but most of the first responders in the state ARE unionized. Actually, very many municipalities have become Civil Service – which naysayers accuse as being union, but they’re not. Civil Service, in Texas, is governed by specific laws that protect police people and firefighters from being taken advantage of – which happens quite a bit within municipalities – but also prohibit first responders from being able to strike. Even those that are unionized (and I don’t know of any departments of any size that aren’t) are prohibited by Texas law from striking.
My dad was in the union (AFL-CIO, I’m switching tracks) most of my young years. I remember the strikes very well. After about 15 years, though, he quit the union and told others they should do the same because, in his mind, unions had served their purpose and were becoming more about keeping THEM (the union bosses) in tall cotton than working for their members. When they voted to strike for ridiculous terms, he couldn’t take anymore. “Don’t you people understand that the more you demand from the company, the higher costs go and the more likely they’ll be to find ways to replace you,” he asked. “If the company doesn’t make money YOU don’t make money! Don’t you get it?”
From the time he started work with Western Electric (later a division of AT&T) the company had steadily increased benefits to the point of being good for the employee and his family. From that point on the union become a totally different organization, in his eyes. That was over 30 years ago……..and it’s only gotten worse.
I have never been in a union, but my family enjoyed a decent standard of living because of one. In fact, my father is currently enjoying a great retirement too — one that he made a great contribution toward during his career. It was not something he got for free. That same union protected his job from ruthless project managers along the way who often wanted to fire him and replace him with a buddy — and not someone who was higher skilled.
I worked two non-union jobs, one in HR, at a huge entertainment company. I saw some of the worst employment practices behind the scenes. I witnessed a lot of favoritism and forms of nepotism in hiring, wage assignment, treatment, and advancement. I saw how males typically got paid higher than their equally or greater qualified female counterparts, and how men were given opportunities for career growth while women and minorities were often overlooked. How they would characteristically low ball a new hire in pay (even far below what the job was costed), so they could pay extra for another employee they perceived as being a star or who had the support of a key executive. How they manipulated potential hires using glamour and prestige as a factor of employment instead of paying the going rate in the community for most positions. These practices made me sick.
This company was known to have regular lay-offs and down-sizing too. I had outstanding performance evaluations during my four years of employment, and yet I was laid off twice (along with other personnel) as a result of bad business turns and/or poor management. Union jobs were often protected from firing. If their position was eliminated, I saw how the company worked to find another internal place for them while employees outside of the union got the shaft.
My sister-in-law doesn’t completely see the value of unions and resents having to pay her dues, but she has managed to remain with this same company for 12 years and counting. She gets cost of living raises and yearly performance reviews with raises. Non-union employees were lucky to get a single review, let alone a minimal pay raise even for excellent performance. Of course, while most departments would be held to 3% pay raises across the board in bad times, I still saw that they had a clandestine fund to pay additional monies to departmental favorites.
I also saw how unions protected the job of someone who taught at adult school. She was not tenured. When ever a new principal came in the school, they seemed to desire a regime change. They liked to be surrounded by familiar folks, and would bring in as many as they could for many key positions. In more than one case, I saw how the union bylaws made it impossible to fire an employee in good standing in favor of hiring a crony without special qualifications to do the same job.
I understand that what starts out as as good and essential in life often gets corrupted. However, we need UNION REFORM — not a forced removal of the entire system. As much as I hate California’s cushy retirement plan for ordinary city workers (police and fireman are exempt), I fear for the future of labor in this country. We have CEOs who make an obscene amount of money, while they have staff who are not offered living wages and forced into part-time status to keep from getting healthcare and other company benefits. The gap is only further widening between “the haves” (the top wealthy) and “the have-nots” (the populace). Big business wants the cheapest labor possible. They want to cut corners every way they can, and will often hire illegal aliens in order to make their bottom line. When a company gets caught, they usually walk away with a slap on the wrist. While the undocumented worker gets all the flack. I support legal immigration, but do not understand why the only criminal is the illegal worker.
Also, while I appreciate the desire to support fellow union members in WI, I think it would be appalling for the LAPD to partner with the SEIU and MoveOn.Org.
As the child of a teamster it’s interesting you would admit, “
when many locals of that union have reputations of being the most corrupt of the lot. Yes, unions can serve their members well. But public employees should never have the right to strike. It’s just wrong. And they should absolutely be forbidden to make joint contributions to politicians.
That is the issue here, and because those standards weren’t already in place, the future economic health of our public employees here in CA is on a precarious footing. Because unions bought the favor of politicians for years, and those politicians in return spurned their fiduciary duty to voters in favor of unduly rewarding their donors, we – including public employees – are in a terrible mess. Getting out of it is going to hurt. Unless, of course, we can win the lottery. Then all bets are off. Otherwise……
All public unions should be abolished, and made illegal. Simple as that. If you aren’t happy with your job, try the private sector. I don’t think this would lessen the number of qualified employees that the public would have. Retirements and benefits need to be in line with the budget of the municipality. If you are a good cop, you don’t need a union.