Interesting Article regarding trendy union bashing. Abner Sunday, May 15, 2005 Trashing unions: trendy but mistaken By CHRISTIAN P. MILORD Fullerton writer and educator It appears to be quite trendy these days to bash the unions, and our governor, Register editorialists and Sidney P. Anderson have joined the chorus of demonizers ["Unions: California's growing aristocracy," Letters, May 8]. What these folks fail to realize is that the unions are the employees and backbone of several crucial trades and professions. Most union members don't have much in the way of money or influence, in contrast to the "special interests" in business, the government or the media. Anderson uses hyperbole to describe the unions as a powerful aristocracy, instead of describing the merits of collective bargaining and organized labor. Certainly, we should examine and question pensions provided to firefighters and police officers, to see if they are exorbitant. However, these public servants daily risk their lives in order to prevent anarchy and promote law and order. Nurses and teachers receive pensions that aren't close to those awarded to the guardians of public security. Next, it is part of the libertarian credo to applaud rugged individualism and self-interest, so when some Register columnists rail against the unions, they are criticizing their own philosophy. Why don't they criticize corporations that seek bailouts, tax breaks and loopholes, or the organizations that prosper due to their tax-exempt status? Society would unravel if we didn't have professional firefighters, nurses, police officers or teachers. What made this pioneering country exceptional was the ideal of stubborn determination and self-improvement based on individual liberty. It's natural for human beings to possess self-interest and strive for productive success. A byproduct of hard work is the free exchange of goods and services. Both owners and workers are interested in business, prosperity and a better life for their communities. Sometimes these interests collide, but at other times they intersect for mutual harmony. Were it not for unions, workers in several occupations would still be laboring under atrocious conditions and have inferior benefits, and managers and owners could still trample all over their basic human rights. Libertarians might point out that employees in the private sector have little job security, and must compete ferociously to earn perks. However, that isn't quite true. Skilled employees in the business world often receive excellent compensation packages for their efforts. Semi-skilled or unskilled workers get less compensation, as they are easier to replace and turnover is high. Moreover, private sector employees can pursue upward mobility faster than their counterparts in government and organized labor. Granted, there are times when unions demand or request too much, but sometimes unions aim high in order to attain a compromise in the middle. Most would agree that compensation packages and pensions should be commensurate with rates of education, experience and productivity. Like workers in other sectors, union employees are also taxpayers and they don't want health benefits and pensions to go through the roof, because then it hurts everyone. Most union folks want government efficiency and balanced budgets. Unions are imperfect like any organization, and I disagree with some of their tactics, but on balance they have done positive things for our society. Instead of singling out unions, Anderson, the governor and the Register ought to blame excessive government regulation, spending and waste for the state's deficit problem.
