Unions Are Bad for Present Day America

At one time in this country, there were few workplace safety laws, few restraints on employers, and horrible working conditions that ranged from slavery, to share cropping, to putting children in dangerous working conditions. Unions deserve huge amounts of credit in their efforts of creating a level playing field for American workers. However, as the laws changed, there was less and less need for unions. Because of that, union membership shrank. In response, the unions became more explicitly involved in politics. Over time, they managed to virtually take over the Democratic Party, pull their strings, and rewrite our labor laws in their favor. "Power tends to corrupt" is a pretty common phrase, and one that has certainly been true for the unions. Unions have become selfish, extremely greedy, and even thuggish in their never-ending quest to take in as much as they can for themselves, at the expense of everyone who crosses their path. This essay will discuss some of the reasons why unions are bad for America.

Unions are severely damaging to whole industries. An example to prove this point took place not that long ago in the automobile industry. Prior to their bailout by the American taxpayers, GM paid all of the health insurance premiums of its employees, their survivors and GM retirees (Sloan). With most of these plans highly underfunded, the companies tried to provide retirement packages to older workers, and made agreements with the UAW to transfer pension obligations to an independent trust. The UAW sets the standards for their members so high in regards to wages and benefits that it was inevitable that GM would not be able to meet their obligations. Hence, the bailouts of the automobile industry, costing American taxpayers more than seventeen billion dollars (Skeel).

Unions, teachers’ unions in specific, are ruining public education. These unions continuously block the reforms needed to improve our nation’s schools; their focus seems to be on teachers rather than on the students they teach. A great example of this can be found in New York City. According to the Wall Street Journal, “there are a little more than 1,000 teachers who have lost their permanent assignments since 2006 but remain on the Department of Education payroll.” The teachers noted above are known as the Absent Teacher Reserve pool, or ATRs. The Wall Street Journal notes that “twenty-six of the ATRs who lost their jobs in 2006 earn more than $100,000 a year in salary, not counting about $30,000 in benefits. Seventy have been working in the school system for 26 or more years. Some could retire, but haven't.” The Department of Education spent $100 million on these teachers this school year, just in New York City. This is an incredible waste, and a gross misuse of money that could be used for our American schoolchildren.

Public sector unions are costing the American taxpayers billions of dollars. Government workers should not be allowed to unionize. Unionized government is a total and complete conflict of interest. The taxpayers pay their salaries. The taxpayers pay the majority of their health insurance. The taxpayers pay their retirement benefits. Therefore, the taxpayers should dictate how much, how many, and to whom. However, because of unions being so close with the Democratic Party, the entire process has been turned on its ear. Instead of looking out for the taxpayer’s interests, Democrats try to hire as many government workers as possible, pay them as much as possible, and give them benefits that are as generous as possible. All this, so that union workers will do more to get them re-elected. This is disgusting, immoral and unethical!

Public sector unions, or government unions, are bankrupting cities and states. Nationally, they have cost the taxpayers billions, but the damage they’re doing on the local level is even worse. We have cities and states all across the country so behind on their financial obligations, that there have been genuine discussions about bankruptcy. There are a lot of irresponsible financial policies that have helped contribute to that sorry state-of-affairs, but unquestionably, the biggest backbreakers can be directly traced back to the unions. As the Washington Times has reported, “Union pensions are crushing budgets all across the country. By 2013, the amount of retirement money promised to employees of these public entities will exceed cash on hand by more than a trillion dollars.”

Many union tactics can be labeled as bullying. During the fierce opposition against Governor Scott Walker’s plans to take away most collective bargaining rights from the government union employees, owner of Village Dollar in Union Grove, refused to put up a sign supporting AFSCME. From a business perspective, she wanted to remain neutral on the topic, so as not to alienate any of her customers. That wasn't good enough for AFSCME Union Rep. Jim Parrett, who sent her a letter that read in part, "We'd ask that you reconsider taking a sign and stance to support public employees in this community. Failure to do so will leave us no choice but to do a public boycott of your business." Unions do not necessarily represent the views of their local members. "The statements and threats made by Jim Parrett do not represent everyone in the local, we didn't support it," said Paul Baumester, a member of AFSCME, Local 3777. He and several other union members shook hands with the shop owner, and apologized to her and other businesses for the threats. They claim they were never consulted about the letters (Burke).

Unions really have done a great deal to help shape the American workforce. Early union leaders worked hard and fought hard for employee rights, safe workplace regulations, and fair hours for American workers. Unions played a significant role in shaping “work” as Americans know it. That being said, the role of unions has run its course. Abolishing unions, or at the very least, their collective bargaining rights can only benefit America and the dire straits of the present American economy. Americans should be paid based upon merit and qualifications rather than seniority and tenure. It is time to weed out the old way of doing things and bring America back to what she should be.

Education in America

My son's dad and I got a divorce when my son was about one and a half. At that point in time we did not have to take school arrangements into consideration concerning our placement arrangements. However, I always had that in the back of my mind.

A few years later we both had significant others in our lives who would play a role in our decision making process. My ex husband had someone in his life who was very involved in education, and who would ultimately work in the education system. She had very strong opinions about which schools would be best for T. As his "step-parent" one might think that her opinions might be selfish one's, but that definitely was not the case. Her opinions seemed to be based around class sizes, and programs offered at that school.

I also had very strong opinions about which school would be best for T. My opinions were based on research I had done on the three school districts we were considering enrolling T in. (We lived in different cities so we were considering my city, their city, and the city in between.) My research included district and school "report cards", graduation rates, and I am a little bit embarrassed to admit, minority levels.

My ex-husband and his now wife grew up in Wisconsin in areas that had little to no minorities.I grew up in Southern California, so our concerns and visions were different.

Let me start by saying that I went to school with a lot of Asians, Mexicans, and African Americans. One might even be able to argue that Caucasians were more of a minority than the rest listed, but it was probably pretty equal. I have some great friends that are from each of the races above. They are compassionate, smart, amazing people ad I would not be the same person I am today having not had their friendships.

Looking back on my education, I feel that it was lacking. My observations were that so much time was spent with the ESL (English as a 2nd Language) kids that those of us who spoke English were often swept under the rug. So much attention was spent on getting ESL kids to the point they needed to be, that those of us who were at the correct level, or even gifted, were not being challenged.

Also, many minorities, statistically, live in the poorer areas of cities, which is definitely the case in the town that I currently live in. The percentage of Mexicans and African Americans in our district, I would guesstimate at 2% combined. However we have a very high Hmong population. (Hmong people, an ethnic group originally from China, Laos, Thailand.)

Completely separate from the minority factor, the poorer areas of the city also house people on welfare. I am stereo-typing a bit here, but the stereo-typical welfare parent doesn't seem to care as much about their children's social behaviors because they seem to have a lot of other worries on their minds. Therefore, schools in the poorer areas tend to have more children who are acting out in class.

The schools that I mentioned above tend to have more funding for programs like SAGE, which is a wonderful program, and they tend to have lower class sizes as well. While that is wonderful, it seems to me that the reason behind SAGE and lower class sizes is because 1) these schools tend to have more ESL students, and 2) these schools tend to have more children who are acting out.

So at the time of our decision making I fought for my son's educational future. I wanted him to have every opportunity, and I did not want him held back because his teachers couldn't focus entirely on education. I knew that once in middle school and high school he would be in school with all members of our community, but for his elementary school education, I wanted him to have a great start with little distractions.

Ultimately, my ex-husband and his now wife made the self-less decision to move to the same city as me so that T could have healthy relationships with both of his parents and could get a great education.

I am currently in the house hunting process, and one of the things I am taking into consideration before making any offers, is which elementary school my daughter B will go to. T is now 11, and B is 2, so I am starting this whole process all over again!