I just have a couple of thoughts about the ongoing discussions about the unionization of public workers. One, I see folks saying “But why shouldn’t we taxpayers have a say in what they make?” Um, no. There is no “we-taxpayers” that does not also include “them-public workers.” When I see people setting up their point as “we-taxpayers” v. “them-public workers,” I automatically assume that whatever they’re about to say next is not well-considered.
Two, while it’s lovely to assume that people go into some jobs not because they want to get rich, but because they want to help humanity, I invite you to consider all the posts I’ve written about ministers and their families and all the ones I’ve linked to over the years and ask yourself whether we should begin or continue to import those same kinds of problematic dynamics into the secular world.
And three, while strong public sector unions could not probably have stopped the invention of the $60,000 a year unlisted part-time city job, don’t you think an administration that had to bargain with a large group of people who also might want $60,000 a year part-time jobs, since they apparently exist and get handed out, might make a mayor a little more wary of inventing and handing out said $60,000 a year jobs? Unions aren’t just a pain in the ass to Republican politicians.