Quote Originally Posted by cstone View Post
Elect politicians who refuse to submit to collective bargaining.

Once collective bargaining is allowed, a bargaining unit is elected by the employees. The bargaining unit then can negotiate on behalf of the rank and file and does not have to represent the interest of the members. Bargaining unit leaders are elected, but like most elections, an active minority normally chooses who will be the leaders. If the leaders provide enough "bread and circuses" for their members, they will continue to be elected. The longer the leaders are in office, the less likely they will be opposed and they will operate almost with impunity until either the rank and file throw them out or politicians remove collective bargaining.

What private employers do regarding labor relations makes little difference to me. I find public sector unions absolutely abhorrent. The politicians already work for us (the owners). Why do we need another layer of protection for people employed by the People? Redundant, wasteful, and corrupt; that is my opinion of public sector unions. I would feel the same way regardless of where their union dues are going and who they support.
cstone hit the nail on the head. This Democratic in power BS all started back in the 60's when Kennedy gave Federal workers collective bargaining rights. It's a vicious cycle akin to entitlements. Public sector employees should not be allowed collective bargaining. Pay for performance like the private sector non-union jobs most of us have to work to keep.