slug.com slug.com

5 4

There is a very simple solution to striking teachers. Make it illegal for government employees to join a union and illegal for them to strike. We already do this with our police, so why not all government employees? @fordnation

jakuboj 8 Jan 25
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

5 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

I would rather not see any public unions. Representatives should make their pay and healthcare a priority, and unions should be illegal to form for government workers. We should demand they get paid a decent wage

Government workers are well compensated and do not need Unions.

0

Declare them all to be essential services!

I know what you are saying, but I wouldn't want to inflate their delusional feelings of self worth even further by using the word essential.

2

I'm pretty sure that forbidding unionization for government employees is the only issue that I would be in agreement with FDR. Even he realized there was no one representing the taxpayer at the bargaining table. You have government employees on one side and politicians who are lobbied and endorsed by the unions on the other side.

1

There are many union jobs including that of police and nursing who are not allowed to strike.

No you are incorrect. Read the Police Services Act, police are not allowed to join a Union.

@jakuboj From what city in what country?

@jakuboj Ok, it turns out there are different laws in different countries.

@Facci all of Canada.

@jakuboj American police are unionized.

@Facci Not a good thing if they can strike. Police in Canada can create an association within their membership for representation, but they can not join a Union or strike.

@jakuboj as I said. They can't strike.

@Facci okay, well all I'm saying is it should be the same for all government employees at all levels.

@jakuboj it's not a problem here.

@Facci you are lucky then. Although if you are a Democrat I don't believe you.

1

I think that there is a fundamental problem at work that may not be obvious despite all the evidence that ought to expose this fundamental problem.

Will disobedient people become obedient if they are given yet another order to be obeyed obediently?

They will if they are held accountable for their actions with job loss or fines. We have Police Services Act that does that to police, so why not all government employees. A code of conduct with meaningful enforcement tools.

@jakuboj

I am going to back-up my answer with some data. The data I use to back-up my answer is the tip of the iceberg of data available for anyone who wants to judge my answer to your question for validity.

Your question:
"We have Police Services Act that does that to police, so why not all government employees."

People put into positions of arbitrary power - as a rule - make up their own rules. You do not. I do not. No one can do that for them. You propose to make rules for them here and now. That is absurd.

These people are members of arbitrary government, and one rule they have made is that you do not have any power over them, and that is a fact that matters.

You can see it, or you cannot see it.

If you disobey, then there is another rule for that event.

The evidence I will now present is specific to the topic of teachers. You can go on with your stated problem and your stated goal, as you wish, despite the evidence offered, and I wish you well.

@Josf-Kelley you are stating the obvious to me, but I don't see what relevance this has to what should happen. I never said the politicians would actually do what is needed. I have been telling people for years that our education system is nothing more than a left wing indoctrination system. So you message is worthy of sharing but not to me, as I am well aware and it needs to change, but it won't.

@jakuboj

Are your messages offered for a reason, and if so please explain that reasoning.

@Josf-Kelley to make people think outside the box. Change is usually a good thing in the big picture, as much as people resist it. The first step is planting the seeds.

@Josf-Kelley how about your reasons?

@jakuboj

My reason for engaging other people is for my own good. I know that my viewpoint is severely limited (a box) and so I need to find other ways to view all those things that help or harm me. Someone down the street may find something valuable or something harmful and so I'd like to get ahead of that stream of information.

If you think you can make people think outside the box, for example, then you have a viewpoint that I've heard already. I've heard that viewpoint a thousand times already, and it is a very familiar tune played inside a very familiar box, as far as I can see.

How does it work for you? How many people have you made so far?

@Josf-Kelley I'll make you a deal. Let's hold a binding national referendum on the question and I'll bet you $100 that I am of the majority opinion. Generally Union backers are very insecure in their personal skills and value in the workforce, so they want their wages guaranteed by political pressure against their employer. Proof that the pendulum has swung way too far to the left is in our massive deficits and businesses leaving Canada regularly. Only the leftists who shield themselves from seeing reality can not see the obvious.

@jakuboj

Let's.

@jakuboj I respectfully disagree with your assertion "change" is usually a good thing..."
Change for the sake of itself is NOT a good thing; at least it is not universally a good thing.
For change to be a good thing first you must identify faults or flaws in a given system. Then you absolutely must specifically define the changes you propose and ultimately demonstrate how and why your proposed change is good.

@iThink you really think there is no problem in Ontario, and across Canada for that matter, with striking government employees? You don't think compensation to government employees has skyrocketed compared to the private sector? You are either willfully blind or you are benefiting off the taxpayer purse.

@jakuboj
What I said has nothing to do with the issue you are talking about. I am taking issue with your gross generalization that "change is usually a good thing..."

That is a wholly unqualified unquantified statement.

"Change" may well be needed with regard to the problems you are attempting to address but that isn't what you said.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:72173
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.