(03-11-2018 12:27 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote: (03-10-2018 09:56 PM)msm96wolf Wrote: And Pitt. But the problem or good thing depending on your perspective, you can't fire UNION people no matter how incompetent or corrupt without have to go through these headaches. Then again, I am from a right to work state. UCONN will have to publicly show the NCAA investigation which never goes well. You think someone would have read the contract to avoid such disclosures.
Yeah, ******* unions and their workers rights and fair pay! Who needs weekends anyway? Not me!
IMO, unions have done a lot of good in society. But, particularly in the public sector, they have been a negative influence, because the "bargaining" isn't balanced. The union has a strident interest in benefiting its members (as it should) but on the other side, unlike in the private sector, the public officials don't have the same incentive to bargain hard as well, because they are playing with other people's (taxpayer) money and they don't face the market pressure to make a profit.
The result, particularly up north, has been overly-generous pay and especially retirement packages for public workers that are out of touch with what is happening in the private sector. E.g., the economy tanks, and private sector works face pay cuts and layoffs, but public sector workers roll right along. This is why so many states across the country face huge public pension liabilities that are squeezing the state budgets.
And as UConn is about to experience with Ollie, it is often very hard to get rid of bad public employees. Merely being an unproductive worker isn't enough, there are layers of "due process" protections that have been negotiated that make firing a bad public worker onerous, time consuming and expensive, so the path of least resistance is to just not do it. Again, this is because public organizations don't face the same market profit-imperative that private firms do.
That's the reason Franklin Roosevelt opposed unions in the public sector. He basically said that since governments represent the people, a public employees union would be bargaining against the interests of "the people", and he was right.
Ironic, because these days, public sector unions like AFSCME and the NEA are arguably the staunchest backers of liberal democrat politicians. It's a very cozy relationship: Democrat politicians vote for cushy pay and benefits for public workers, and public unions donate big money to Democrat politician campaigns, and the taxpayer loses.