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.