What's wrong with this picture? Meet American No. 1, a captain of industry who keeps employee pay and benefits down by moving jobs to India. Heck, he even moved his corporate HQ to some tax-free island in the Caribbean. If trouble comes, no worries — Uncle Sam will bail him out.
American No. 2 is a public servant, solidly middle-class, who works to help society function — keeping the peace as a cop or teaching the next generation of citizens. She’s not getting rich, but it’s rewarding, crucial work.
So who is the red, white and blue all-American and who is the dark threat to democracy? Crazy as it might sound, in places like Idaho and Wisconsin, teachers are being blamed for our economic problems.
This all started last year with the Tea Party railing against government; then some of them got elected and, along with others already in office, they decided to try out their theories. So we have the spectacle of tens of thousands marching in Madison, Wisc., against the governor’s plan to kill public employee unions under cover of the economic crisis. And in Coeur d’Alene we have high school students decrying the state’s superintendent of schools’ plan to replace teachers with laptops.
What do these union-busters really want? To emulate Walmart and cut hours to shirk paying benefits? We have a moral duty to pay our public servants a livable wage that builds our middle class.
It’s a well-documented fact that the American middle class is struggling, with stagnant wages and lack of opportunity in the face of globalization. America is bravely adjusting to this new reality, but the fact is, public investment is a huge part of our American future. Just look around the Inland Northwest: Fairchild, public schools and colleges, government at all levels. (To take it further, consider life here without our hydroelectric dams, agricultural price subsidies or the interstate highway system.) This is the society we have built together, and it runs on fair pay to those who do all the things nobody but government can or will do — roads, police, fire protection, courts, education.
Having a great country isn’t free. Everyone in America knows that elections have consequences, and the democratically elected leaders in Idaho and Wisconsin are acting on their political beliefs. That’s how our system works.
But free speech is part of the system, too, and while 2010 may have been the year of the Tea Party, 2011 is looking like the year the middle class makes a stand.
Ted S. McGregor Jr. is the Editor and Publisher of The Inlander.
"The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.
All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.
Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that “under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government.” ~ FDR 1937
This was an awful article McGregor....... Feb 25, 2011 | Reply to this comment
When employees anywhere are hired, they are offered a wage and benefit package - this is a standard practice in most industries. While it is true that benefits packages have declined over time, they still technically count as part of wages, not some extra gift that taxpayers give them.
Public employees are people who place themselves in harm´s way - police, fire, and as recent events in Arizona have revealed, congresspeople. Teachers face a student population that has changed drastically in the last few years with far more school shootings, and a lot more pressure to "succeed" in spite of all the problems that exist for kids and their families. The NEA has a salary calculator for teachers that accounts for wages and benefits, but also accounts for the amount of time a teacher puts into one on one work with students, class preparation, and meeting with parents. I have an advanced degree, and when the term is done I make about $2.50 an hour.
What price can you place on a police officer´s life? Could you stand in front of a fireman after he or she delivers your child from a burning building and tell them -"thanks, but you make too much money".
I get why the Tea Party exists - what i hate to see is people denying that it is all about being grassroots when wealthy benefactors are behind the message - the Koch Brothers, Dick Armey - these people aren´t independent - they just don´t want to pay their fair share, and they know who to craft a message that sells. What also saddens me is that legislation is actually being proposed to take away the only power that employees have to negotiate. Without collective bargaining the corporations do not really have to negotiate with those of us who aren´t millionaires or billionaires already - we don´t have any power other than in numbers.
Union members aren´t getting rich. Just look at the disparity in income between the bottom 98 percent and the top 2 - and the gap keeps growing. Feb 28, 2011 | Reply to this comment