 |  |  |
| 0:00 | -54:06 |
On today’s show, Jonah speaks to Manhattan Institute fellow and CCNY professor Daniel DiSalvo (an expert on public-sector unions and their history) to find out how the sausage really gets made in the intra-organizational politics of these public-sector unions, and how their influence is often the result of “the breakdown of machine politics – especially within the Democratic Party – in big cities.”
Show Notes:
- Dan’s page at the Manhattan Institute
- “The Trouble with Police Unions”
- Dan’s latest book, Government Against Itself
- The first work on the “New Class,” by Milovan Djilas
- Maya Wiley back by the SEIU in NYC
- DeBlasio was also endorsed by SEIU
- Terry Moe’s book on teachers unions
Jonah, I’ve been meaning to comment on this podcast for a few weeks now but I’ve been too busy with work to get a chance. One thing you guys never mentioned is how union political activity has ultimately reduced the the power or efficacy of the broader private sector union movement. By advocating for an ever higher minimum wage, restrictive use of independent contractors and generally activist groups and ongoing government intrusion into the private sector workplace through more and more statutory and regulatory enactments, unions REDUCE the need for individuals to unionize their workplace. By unilaterally imposing the terms and conditions of employment on all private workplaces, demand for unionization has plummeted. By advocating for top-down government control of the workplace, they kill the bottom-up union movement. Hence the steep decline in union membership over the last 50 years as government regulation of employment has increased. I think unions provide an important counterweight in the private labor market and I’d much rather see unionization flourish over an increased regulatory presence.
Thanks for a very illuminating discussion. Here in WA state the 50th percentile public school teacher salary is $63k, with the 90th percentile at $81.6k, according to salary.com. Not Westchester, but a decent living, and the COL in Westchester is probably a good deal higher. Teachers are pretty important, and I'd be open to increasing compensation for the best ones, provided it was easier to penalize the bad ones, up to and including termination.
("percentile" - the same phrasing as those standardized test results, so appropriate!)
I would've appreciated discussion about whether anyone is looking at phasing in 401(k) type plans to eventually replace standard pensions for the public unions. (I don't think you discussed although I was a bit distracted through part of it.) I'm very fortunate to have both 401(k) and standard pension plans. The new kids hiring on want just a 401(k), with any funds the company would otherwise invest for pension going to the 401(k) in the form of matching contributions. The portability and opportunity to self-direct your investments are quite attractive - I would think these would be attractive to rank and file union members also. Of course the company wants the pension as an anchor to keep employees around for a good long time, but funding primarily a 401(k) significantly limits its cost and risk. This might be a good topic for Scott L. - 401(k) versus standard pension plan from the organization's perspective, both public and private.