🇳🇱
@freemo unions for the win
@realcaseyrollins while i normally have no problem with unions (assuming they are voluntary).. in the case of police i dont think they should have a right to unionize
@freemo @realcaseyrollins Agreed. Taxpayers are the customers and the employers. We *are* the police union. Any union they form separately is in direct opposition to the general public they're meant to serve.
I wouldnt say thats the reason.. I mean im ok with govt employees like a mailman having a union.
I just dont think people who have qualified immunity should have access to unions that can protect them from proper scrutiny and disciplin.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins Uh, I don't want mailmen to have a union. Then my mailman can just start burning my mail and the union will protect him from being fired.
@LouisIngenthron @freemo The pro union talking point would be that then they can't fight for better pay and work accommodations (I'm not pro union btw, just sayin)
@realcaseyrollins @freemo But public employees have much more control via the levers of public pressure. You hear about teacher salaries all the time. That's better than trying to convince an unsympathetic CEO who gets richer the less he pays you.
That's why I think the public/private line is where the union line should also be drawn.
Not all govt employees have public pressure, really only elected ones.
I would be ok with elected officials not being able to unionize though.
I also might like the jdea of making all police in a city elected positions.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins But the elected ones set the budgets for the rest. So they're the only ones for whom pressure should matter anyway.
The point is that other public employees can mount campaigns to get the public on their side to pressure the politicians to increase their budgets. An appeal to the masses, as it were.
@LouisIngenthron
Your assuming unions are just about budgets, they arent.
@realcaseyrollins