Answer a few questions, due tonight, easy I supply other student answers
STUDENT ANSWER
(a) Wellington and Winter’s, “The Unions and the Cities,” deals with the concerns of private sector collective bargaining rights and if it should be granted to public sector workers. Wellington and Winter’s arguments against public sector employees are making cities less open to strikes, by reducing the political power of public employee unions. They go on to say that most public sector employee strikes don’t threaten public health or safety so they don’t need to force a complete ban on strikes.
(b) With the public and private sector competing, the public unions are much larger here in the U.S than private ones. Public unions have more power and greater benefits than their competitors. When it comes to raising wages, Wellington and Winter’s says that the public sector unions has greater power than private sector unions. Overall, I agree with their predictions and the test they used with the sanitation workers. Unions in the public sectors are more beneficial giving them an advantage over the private sector, especially when it comes to wages .
STUDENT ANSWER
(a) The increase in federal employment has allowed public employees to organize and engage in collective action, in order to gain control over employment regulations such as increase in wages and employment benefits. Through organized political representation, the increment of organization among the public sector has given place to bargaining power resulting from preassure over government officials. however, the social cost resulting from unequal bargaining power exceeds the cost of money the city can pay (from taxes). Even though unions restrain market-imposed unemployment, it does not limit demands of public employee unions. the impact of collective bargaining resulting in strike, hurts and negatively affects the city's economy, due to the fact that (opposed to private sector), the public sector intrinsic demand is inelastic.
(b) unfortunately, the Wellington and Winter's arguments are based on facts such as the undermined teacher's strike that took place on the eve of a municipal election in 1969. furthermore, the increased in taxes resulting from such settlement occurred then and are occurring now even when the negative effects of yesterday are taking place today, and, as the chain of events continues, today's unequal bargaining will negatively affect future generations making them liable for today's expenses.
STUDENT ANSWER
A. The authors argue that allowing public sector employees to strike will be damaging to a community as a whole because their services are too important and they will disrupt these important services tremendously. The disruption can cause major damage to the economy and the welfare of citizens will be impaired.
B. Now that 45 years have passed, I agree with their predictions. If teachers and police officers decide to go on strike to rally for better wages and working conditions, the state will be in disarray. These services are too important for any strike to be allowed by any interest group that represents them.
STUDENT ANSWER
A) Both Professors Wellington and Winter Jr. start by introducing a thesis that government is not just an industry. They state that the strike weapon would result in redistribution of political power in a community in a way where unions would divert public funds to themselves instead of allowing distribution through the normal political process to those public services that would require it the most. The powers to strike will eventually slow down the economy and result in unequal distribution of governmental funds and distort the normal political process. They both state that “their power may be so effective a means of redistributing income that they will have an institutionalized means of obtaining and maintaining a subsidy for union members.” Authors also criticize the “essentiality of services” as being unnecessary to be allowed to strike, since it can result in creating threat to public safety and health. Employees such as the firemen and policeman should not be allowed to strike since it can create an immediate emergency situation. Thus, public employee unions have a disproportionate capacity for power which could impact the normal political decision-making process.
B) I do agree with the authors’ predictions about disadvantage of bargaining power and how it can affect the local and federal government expenditures which can compromise the legitimate interests of the taxpayers. After almost half a century public employee unionism among employees of state and local governments has increased significantly. 45 years ago both authors proposed that experimentation and flexibility by local governments should be encouraged while the rigidity and uniformity of state or federal legislation should be discouraged. This would provide the potential for future legislation which would combine the best of all labor legislation, private and public.
STUDENT ANSWER
a. The authors’ argument against the public sector strike comes in two main parts: The first and less significant one is the traditional view that public sector services are so essential as to require anti-striking laws. The second, and the authors’ more substantial reason, is that the public sector strike has a unique ability to put a municipality’s political leader in such a weak political position as to compel the leader to make a decision that is disadvantageous to more people over a longer time in exchange for the expedience of ending the strike early. Such a powerful position on the part of the public sector union put all other interest groups, including everyday citizens, at such a permanent disadvantage as to merit anti-striking laws.
a. Using New York City as a model, I am not yet sure that I can make a proper prediction on the authors’ claims. In the last administration, the city saw municipal workers go on strike (illegally), but the union was not able to compel the mayor to make any unreasonable concessions (unlike Lindsay in 1969). Under the same mayor, almost all (if not all) of the city’s municipal union contracts expired, and no subsequent negotiations were made. Although the former would seem to contradict these predictions, the latter leaves some room to speculate. If those unions were to have the ability to strike, the mayor may have to make different concessions. One could also argue that Mayor Bloomberg was not a typical mayor (at least as far as his relationship with special interests), and any other mayor would have had to negotiate with the transit workers.
STUDENT ANSWER
Professor Wellington and Winter Jr. both state the same argument based around that allowing public sector employees to strike damages not only the company but the community as a whole. Certain services in certain communities are very important therefore as a result if these services are disrupted or completely shut down they can really hurt and damage a community. It does not only have to be economical damage, it can also vary to environmental and so on. The narrow sighted view which both authors argue against also bring up the fact that fire fighters and other local departments should not have the right to strike. These strikes create public safety and health hazards. As a result public employees have a disproportionate capacity for power which should be limited without question.
I would have to agree with both Professor Wellington and Winter Jr. with the predictions they made, if certain public officials go on strike it would lead to potential disarray in the state. The idea of allowing public organizations and departments like teachers, police officers, fire fighters and so on to strike over wages and working conditions should be considered illegal and or be put to a limit. Let’s not forget, in reality the tax payers should be picking their legislation not corporations and companies but with this bargaining it sways that in a different direction.
STUDENT ANSWER
The authors of the book The Unions and the Cities, Wellington and winter’s are for the public rights. They are conveying that if you provide fair wages and equal opportunity to the workers they will not strike. But even after prohibiting strikes and depriving the workers with compensation they will cross boundaries to get what they deserve. So instead of creating a fuss just keep everything systematic and fair. The authors emphasize on “workable solutions”, in case there is a strike work it out with your employees and do not try to suppress an upcoming storm because it will destroy everything in its path. The authors want the strike to be as settle as possible.
I agree with the predictions made by the authors if any form of workers whether teachers or social workers go on strike and demand for better wages the employers will have to bow down and form a workable solution. After 45 years some of wellington and winters prediction came into play with compensation of wages, most strikes happen due to low wages the authors said that if one is compensated with fair settlement of wages their would be a diminishment of strikes happening throughout. This is exactly that happened a month or two ago when McDonald fast food workers went on strike for higher wages and finally after striking year after year they earned a bit higher wages and they are now satisfied. The methods that are predicted to come into play when strikes occur or to prevent strikes do come in handy till this day and age.
STUDENT ANSWER
(a) Outline the authors' argument against allowing public sector employees the right to strike?
The author’s argue that by allowing public sector employees the right to strike they are opening the doors to a destructive community. This is done because while the employees are on strike it brings unbalance in the government from the issues of employment benefits and employment wages. The cost for the strike to occur puts everyone at risk. For example, if important officials were to go on strike and civilians were in a state of emergency they would have no one to turn to due to the fact that the workers are on strike and there are no temporary substitutes to take care of those that the workers usually serve. The community should always be placed first hand before even thinking about going on strike.
(b) Now that 45 years have passed, do you agree or disagree with their predictions?
In this day and age, I agree with the predictions that were made 45 years ago, the damage that strikes causes are more costly to the community than the workers themselves. When the workers are fighting for their rights for higher wages and better benefits they are placing the community at risk. If the NYPD were to go on strike there would be no higher authority to protect the citizens of the city. Before approaching a strike it is important to weigh the pros and the cons to see if it is beneficial to the majority of the people, but by going on strike those workers who are needed on a daily basis would not be available.
STUDENT ANSWER
(a) Outline the authors' argument against allowing public sector employees the right to strike?
Wellington and Winter both believe that government cannot be controlled by another power. When a union is allowed to strike they are being handed over a lot of control. In a community the elected government official would no longer have a say in the matter and the unions will have total control of it. The unions may only have their interests in mind and fund their own needs instead of allowing the normal political process to deliver outcomes. Striking can ultimately decelerate the economy and hurt the whole country one industry at a time.
(b) Now that 45 years have passed, do you agree or disagree with their predictions?
I agree with Wellington and Winter’s predictions. Union workers have enough leverage to put a halt to an entire industry and that can have a major effect on the local and federal government and our economy.
STUDENT ANSWER
(a) Outline the authors' argument against allowing public sector employees the right to strike?
The author explains that strikes in public employment cause disruption to important public services. Some of those services could be law enforcement, sanitation, public schooling, etc. A public sector strike can be detrimental the a city's economy as well as to the welfare of its citizens. There is also mention of disproportionate political power in favor of the union. A public employee strike is deemed to be a political weapon. The political unrest places a heavy burden on elected officials to make haste decisions; consequently, possibly having a negative impact in the long run.
(b) Now that 45 years have passed, do you agree or disagree with their predictions?
I agree with the author's predictions. Any long term disruption of public services will cause a rift in that municipality. In present times we know that strikes are rare and are illegal in New York State due to the Taylor Law. Unions are provided with alternative means of negotiation. While having experience working in the public sector, a strike would cripple customers that receive services from the agency. NYCHA provides low to moderate income housing as well as Section 8 subsidy payments for leased housing. NYCHA residents and Section 8 participants combined occupy about 12 percent of the city's rental apartments. Although a NYCHA strike would not be seen as monetary, it would have a serious economic and social impact that would affect the state. Unfortunately, this is where special interests groups will come into play and vie for a stronger political position.
STUDENT ANSWER
A. According to Wellington and Winter, public sector employees mostly work for governmental services. The demand for such kind of services is inelastic; it means that the disruption of these services can be painful for the citizens. Public sector employees know their power and use their strikes as “political weapon”. Also, the public strikes are less limited and disciplined then private ones, therefore they can influence on government workers and have power over them so much, that it can cause the “misallocation of recourses”, danger to health and safety, change in prices, and inconvenience of municipal voters. Through this sort of pressure, the public sector employees can benefit more then employees of private sector and do not give a chance for private sector employees to compete with them.
B. According to Wellington and Winter, the unions will lose their power in public sector because of taxpayer resistance and determination of municipal government. I think this is what happening now. As we see, there are fewer unions in the USA then it was in the past. People and the government realized the unlimited power of unions who influenced on the political power by frightening with strikes and subsidizing the “right” politicians. The model of public unions did come true, though it is not clear if the unions are less powerful then in the past.
STUDENT ANSWER
(A) The author’s argument regarding public sector employees the right to strike is that public sector employees such as teachers and police officers have valuable jobs and are relied upon by the public to provide safety and education. Therefore, politicians are compelled to give in to union demands in order to avoid losing votes. This gives unions an unfair advantage because they can threaten to strike knowing that government will eventually concede to their demands.
(B) Wellington and Winter’s argue that public sector unions have more power in increasing wages than private sector unions. This prediction does not hold true today. Currently in New York City several public sector unions (UFT, DC37, M.T.A.) are working without new contracts or increased wages and private sector unions are also experiencing similar distresses.