“The only problem with this God-damned Union
is its God-damned members.”
–a long-ago Connecticut union leader who shall remain nameless
Thanks to byzantine voting rules and petulant prison guards, Connecticut’s public sector unions have rejected the contract deal cut between their leaders and Democratic Governor Daniel Malloy, setting the stage for massive layoffs and a possible economic “lost decade” for the already struggling state of my birth.
A majority of union members actually supported the deal, but because of the bizarre voting rules of the 15-union State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition (SEBAC) — which is sort of like a modified supermajority Electoral College — the deal’s rejection by a single (large) union, AFSCME, dooms it to failure, even if the other 14 unions all vote “Yes.”
So now, barring some sort of unexpected last-minute heroics, Governor Malloy will need to lay off 7,500 state workers in order to close the state’s budget gap. Meanwhile, the sensible long-term reforms embodied in the rejected deal won’t go into effect. And of course, public hostility toward the public sector unions will only increase, making future deals more difficult to strike. All in all, this is a disaster. #PANIC!
Although the rejected agreement was not, from what I can tell, the “sweetheart deal” that has been portrayed by conservatives and some in the state media, it did seem to be, on balance, a pretty good deal for the unions, as well as for the state’s long-term fiscal health. But now it’s been scuttled by a powerful minority of state workers, who were tricked by propaganda and demagoguery into believing…
…into believing what? I’m not sure exactly. That the state’s fiscal crisis is fake, manufactured by evil Republicans? That all the problems can be solved by soaking the rich somehow? That there could somehow be a better deal waiting around the corner? I don’t know exactly what (the hell) they were thinking, but I’m not surprised, and I fear we’re going to see a lot more of this in the coming years, in various facets of our national life, as vocal reactionaries and vested interests of all sorts resist the hard choices that we’ll face when we finally begin to grapple with reality of living beyond our means. You threaten to move people’s cheese, and this is what happens. In a democracy, especially one that strongly values minority rights, it can lead very quickly to paralysis.
And if you doubt how far this sort of thing is capable of going, you need only look at Greece, which is so deep in the hole that it’s literally a completely insolvent country, incapable of paying its bills without the repeated charity of its neighboring nations — a national deadbeat on the world stage — and yet people are still taking to the streets in protest of mathematically necessary austerity measures, demanding “their” piece of a fiscal pie that’s simply way too small to give them what they insist is rightfully theirs.
Everybody thinks they’re a victim, and nobody wants to make the sacrifices necessary to right the ship. Tea Partiers aren’t the only puerile, petulant ones, nor are public-sector unions (or unions generally). This is not so much as political problem as a human nature problem, which is why I worry that the event horizon is inching closer and closer…
Its a crisis of Acropoliptic proportions! Olive these people should be ashamed of themselves.
“Tea Partiers aren’t the only puerile, petulant ones…” Nope, just the only ones you mention by name. Because, you know, “Tea Partiers’ were totally the ones who threw down at the Wisconsin Capitol…and Alderaan is a peaceful planet rather than a hotbed of rebellion. Don’t mind if you disagree with folks’ ideology but seriously, let’s not try to act like we’re being even handed here. That’s like some Southerner going “Black men aren’t the only people who rape white women…”.
Sorry, but the I have some sympathy for the average Greek. I think if we found out our government had flat out lied to us for five years followed by some external party saying, “Okay, so in order for us to bail you out (incidentally saving our own a**es), you have to suck down 5-7% more unemployment, 10-15% wage cuts for those of you still lucky enough to be employed, and if you were planning on retiring next year too d*mn bad, Grandpa. Oh, and no, we’re not giving you a reach around, and if you squeal too much about it my friend the Health Inspector here will show you that no matter how bad this feels now, it can always get worse…” there’d be some social upheaval. (Wait, did I say social upheaval? I meant bloody, bloody rebellion.)
@James – Brendan explained in his previous post why the Tea Party deserves the label, their behavior. The idea that all groups/opinions/etc should be granted equal credence regardless of the soundness of their beliefs is a fallacy. Not all opinions are equally accurate/valid. We all have the freedom to hold our opinions, yes but not all of them have merit.
Someone who has gone to medical school and spent years practicing medicine is given more credence than some guy off the street who tells you to wave a crystal over your kidney to cure your cancer for example. Particular when a group or person exhibits immature or dangerous behavior. Brendan makes the argument that the Tea Party position on the economy is immature and dangerous and he backs it up with sound reasoning. That doesn’t mean he is 100% right, but if you are going to disagree you should be able to defend it with something other than an accusation of being uneven in his dealing with the group.
Sooooo…..
The people who demand that we get our fiscal house in order, cut spending, lower taxes, and reduce the size and power of our government are puerile, petulant .
The people who want to ignore our fiscal problems, increase spending, raise taxes and increase the size and power of government are mature and tolerant.
Right?
By the way..compare the amount of violence, disruption, rudeness and litter of your average Tea Party gathering and your average Progressive gathering.
Um, guys? In this post, I am calling members of a labor union petulant. If you’re going to criticize me for being overly critical of the Tea Party, those comments really belong in the previous post. If you’re going to criticize me for never being critical of groups on the Left……you need to re-read this post.
My remarks were addressed to David K.
Brendan / David–Ah yes, dangerous and immature position to _follow the EFFIN’ law_. Just sayin’, that view is pretty much the definition of “elitist.” But, yes, wrong comment thread.
I don’t get why labor unions do stuff like this. I’m all about a safe workplace, reasonable hours, etc., etc. but at some point you have to realize that if you _do_ kill the goose that lays the golden eggs there will be much, much more momentum to crush you at a later date. There’s just not enough money–period.
James #8 – there was a time when unions performed a function valuable to their rank and file members … and then, as happens in may such situations, as the ‘wrongs’ were ‘righted’, the unions had less and less function as helping their rank and file and became more and more about exerting power … and that is where they are now … the unions’ leaders have found that they enjoy power, both in the sense of having it *and* in the sense of getting satisfaction/pleasure out of *exerting* power …
I have said for decades that, if the Auto Unions want to show that an auto company can be well-run they way they keep insisting existing auto companies (owned by other folk and run using other folks’ money) should be run, said unions should take their pension funds and strike funds and whatever other funds they control and start an auto company called something like “Union Automobiles” and run it the way they want existing companies run …
After all, such a company would leave the existing ones in the dust, wouldn’t it ? Their product would be better, faster, greener, more efficient, while paying their workers a fair wage for a fair day’s work, with no exploitation of anyone, right ?
“What a revoltin’ development this is!”
(Only my fellow Oldsters will remember that signature exclamation of the great Chester A. Riley but today I say: Truer words were never spoken.)
Brendan, I’m tardy in commenting but honestly I haven’t had the Heart to. / However, as the resident Union Goon on this here blog I suppose it’s me Duty ;> so here goes.
Rejection of the SEBAC deal is an unmitigated Disaster.
You’re right that it was not a Sweetheart deal — there was plenty of actual Shared Sacrifice (Gov. Malloy’s catchphrase) in it — but it was clearly the best of the collective-bargaining outcomes possible under the real-world circumstances. In evidence of which, it was much less harmful to workers than Malloy’s original hardass Proposals, from which our skilled & creative SEBAC negotiators bargained him Up (or Down, depending on your perspective) very considerably.
NOW, of course, we are going to get Slaughtered — all thanks to an obdurate & misguided Minority of the rank-&-file union membership. And that “we” means not only the many thousands of soon-to-be-jobless state workers (and their families, and the businesses they patronize, etc) but Also all the other Taxpayers of CT — whose local property taxes will spike as municipal aid from the State is slashed, while our state AND local services suffer from layoffs and program cuts.
Pending the final figures, it appears that at least 60% of the voting membership — across the 15 unions (covering 34 bargaining units) which constitute SEBAC (State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition) — voted Yes to the deal. I hope it’ll be at least Remembered that these supposedly “selfish & greedy” State Employees did vote, by what would be Landslide proportions in a popular-vote election, to Share in the Sacrifice for the common good. (Of course we, like the Other taxpayers, still get to share in the sacrifice of paying the higher state taxes — retroactively, in the case of the Income tax — already enacted by the legislature & the Governor, so I suppose that’s Some consolation, right? 🙂
SEBAC, and each of the15 consituent Unions in that coalition, campaigned very vigorously for ratification of this tentative agreement which they had hammered out with Malloy over months of negotiations. The failure is not due to lack of effort by the incumbent union leadership.
But (in addition to the Petulance of the Minority of my union sisters-&-brothers) (Solidarity Forever, that’s My motto 🙂 it IS due to the excessively high Bar set by the antiquated SEBAC bylaws, which were last amended 15 years ago, and which in effect Empowered that minority. (SEBAC itself goes back 25 years. Just FYI. 🙂 For the Detail Nerds ;} among you, the Rule (as interpreted & applied) — for Ratification of Revisions to an existing SEBAC contract Reopened during its Term, which is what this was — is:
– Not more than One of the 15 Unions may vote No; and
– The Unions voting Yes (numbering at least 14) must collectively comprise not less than 80% of the total membership of all 15 Unions.
Locally it’s been often misreported that the “80% rule” pertains to the aggregate “popular vote” count. It doesn’t. Theoretically, if the respective memberships of 14 of the unions each voted Yes by slim simple-majorities, and if those 14 unions together represented at least 80% of the Total membership in all of SEBAC, then the deal would be Approved — albeit supported by only a slim overall PV majority or even, conceivably, by a Minority in the extremely unlikely event that the “No” PV of one Holdout union overcame the aggregate “Yes” PV of all the others.
In practical terms, however, the 80% rule means that if AFSCME Council 4 — the Big Dog on the block, whose 9 bargaining units account for one-third of the total Union Members — votes No (as it did, by some 55%), the deal dies. / As it turned out a second Union, CT Employees Union Independent / SEIU (also a big one but less than 20% of the total; nobody but AFSCME exceeds or even Approaches that) also voted No, so the results actually fell short of Both requirements of the rule.
I’m pleased to report that MY Union (I’m a just a Retiree member but it’s still My Union :), A&R Employees Union Local 4200 AFT, voted Yes by 64% to 36% with an 84% turnout.
Cold comfort, though. / It’s like Riley said: just a Revoltin’ Development all the way around.
Alasdair, the unions still perform a function valuable to the rank & file members. / But this time, the rank & file — albeit a Minority thereof — Blew it.
Venerable Loy – ummm, respectfully, what is the “function valuable to the rank and file” that the unions still perform ? I hope there is still such function, but, recently, I haven’t seen any such …
What I have seen is such as the SEIU beating up those who dare to challenge them … I have seen a gift of an auto company to the unions … I have seen unions try to undo a very recent electoral result … I have seen unions sadly consistently vote to fight shared sacrifice in these current economic conditions … I have seen unions working hard to undo the secret ballot … bottom line – I have seen unions consistently fight to retain and/or gain power for their leadership, not their rank and file …
(Oh – and two individuals have testified that you and I have to meet some time ! (grin))
Which of those is valuable to the rank and file ?
as the resident Union Goon
Hey! I have been a building rep and served on my local’s executive board. Next year I will be an alternate building rep at my new school.
Venerable Loy – ummm, respectfully, what is the “function valuable to the rank and file” that the unions still perform ? I hope there is still such function, but, recently, I haven’t seen any such …
Actually I agree 100% with the Elder Loy on this one. The locals do serve a vital interest and protect rights. Now when you get to the state and national level unions..that is where the problems develop…..
Profoundest apologies, brother gahrie! / Yeah, I too served as a steward (as we called it) and on the local’s Representative Assembly (as we rather Haughtily named our executive board) (of course I suggested the name whilst chairing our Constitution Draft Committee waaay backintheday :). // “…alternate building rep at my new school.” Say, are you AFT by any chance?
and now, Laird Alasdair –
“(Oh – and two individuals have testified that you and I have to meet some time ! (grin))
“Which of those is valuable to the rank and file ?”
Me.
🙂
But no, I would surely enjoy that Meet. / Provided you don’t have in mind Pike vs Claymore on the banks o’ the Boyne or the shores of the fookin’ Firth of Forth or somesuch. ;} (Then again Finnegan, a propos of Famous meetings you’ll recall that though Benandonner was the bigger & stronger, Fionn mac Cumhaill still bested him by means of cunning, guile, & Spousal assistance so let’s not be martyrs in a glorious Causeway, shall we? 🙂
Say, are you AFT by any chance?
Actually we are California Teacher’s Association (CTA) and National Education Association (NEA). I have never understood why there are two different national teacher’s unions, since their positions and actions are virtually identical.
Venerable Loy – I didn’t realise, until *after* the comment posted – that the parenthetical insert had preceded the last question of the main thread …
I’m still curious as to which of the enumerated union actio ns that I have seen in the past few years are valuable to the rank and file …
At any rate, a get-together between us would be only Meet and Proper … well, Meet, anyway … our respective spouses would be more likely to need the assistance, rather than provide it … I suspect we would wax parent-heretical … and I could listen to you tell me about your grand-chickens …
Squire Alasdair – LOL! As always, the ex-cellence of your Pun-gency is un-surpassed. :> As for my darling Grandgirls: the cock may craw, the day may daw’, but Aye I’ll regale yez with their Superlativity even unto the Risin’ of the Moon. ;} However, in regards to the fambly Poultry, please recall kindly Uncle Joe Stalin’s dictum that in order to make an Omelet one must break some Eggs. ;]
Brother gahrie: Ah. CTA/NEA. Vurragood. / I think that Reputationally, my AFT is either (a) more Progressive, or (b) more Practical, or (c) (somehow) Both. But yeah, philosophically the real differences seem de minimus. Perhaps we should Reinstitute the previously-failed Merger negotiations. After all,
When the union’s inspiration through the workers’ blood shall run,
There can be no power greater anywhere beneath the sun;
Yet what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one,
But the union makes us strong.
🙂
Good piece on unions from Ramesh Ponnuru* in Bloomberg:
* Full disclosure: Ponnuru is a major honcho at National Review, so his dim views of unions are to be expected, however the salient points he raises are empirically based and difficult to refute.
Guess who donates the most money (almost all of which goes to Democrats) to politicians?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/270897/labor-unions-biggest-political-donors-veronique-de-rugy