Should_Public_Sector_Employees_Be_Allowed_to_Strike

Should public-sector unionized employees be allowed to strike under any conditions' Public sector employees include police officers, fire fighters, federal employees , and teachers. First off a unionized employee is anyone who has joined a workers union. Everyone can join a union as long as he or she receives a salary from an employer. Public sector unionized employees are those employees who belong to an workers union. Even part-time, casual and temporary employees can also join a union. However employees who represent their employers in their dealings with the staff for example those acting at the management level, such as foremen and forewomen can not join workers union. This is because they are considered as employers. According to Wikipedia.com “A trade union (or labor union) is an organization of workers who have banded together to achieve common goals in key areas, such as working conditions. The trade union, through its leadership, bargains with the employer on behalf of union members (rank and file members) and negotiates labor contracts (Collective bargaining) with employers. This may include the negotiation of wages, work rules, complaint procedures, rules governing hiring, firing and promotion of workers, benefits, workplace safety and policies. The agreements negotiated by the union leaders are binding on the rank and file members and the employer and in some cases on other non-member workers. One may ask why a union is so important to public sector workers. A union is basically a tool that employees can rely on to improve their working conditions and to protect their rights. Do all public employees have a better pay, a paid leave or do they receive assured promotions' I wonder whether the answer is a resounding YES as to whether all these employees have a greater number of fringe benefits such as group insurance, retirement plan, sick leave, etc. If the answer is No does it mean that all public employees don’t need such things' I believe that since they are humans they should be able to access such things as those mentioned. The present situation is that these employees do not receive these necessary resources despite the overwhelming desire to have them. Subordinately these are what constitutes their rights, denial of their benefits is a denial of their rights. And people will stand in arms ready to defend there rights by any means. Public sector employees simply realize and utilize the strength that comes in unity. It’s an issue of leveraging themselves as a resource in order to lay claim of those resources denied them. One of the main reasons why employees join a union is to get respect from employers. Many workers join a union out of a simple desire to be treated with respect and dignity. Employees are also motivated to join workers union so that they can be protected from unfairness, favoritism and discrimination, and putting an end to employers’ arbitrary decisions concerning such issues as promotions, job vacancies, layoffs, dismissals, works schedules and vacation schedules. By the same token their working conditions are also protected. Employers do not have the right to alter any working conditions such as salary work schedules, job descriptions, and duties for their employees without the written consent of the union. In this essay I will look into the arguments that have been made in support of public employees need to resort to strike and the arguments against such a situation occurring. According to Bergren “The argument usually advanced in support of public employees' collective bargaining and right to strike is that government employees should have the same rights as employees in the private sector”. These arguments are not misleading since the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States guarantees everyone of equal protection under law. Additionally the Thirteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution is in place to guarantee against involuntary servitude, for that reason, I believe public employees have a right to protest working conditions that are imposed on them and seek to gain better arrangements and terms. The United States Constitution as well as the common law principles of freedom of association guarantee individual freedom in which public employees use to enable them to join in unions that engage in collective bargaining. This is their right and the landmark court ruling in the McLaughlin v. Tilendis case in July 1968 safeguards their interests. In this ruling the Court of Appeals reversed earlier decisions on the grounds that the right to join a union is protected by both the First and Fourteenth Amendments of your. This was the first federal court ruling that union membership is a constitutionally protected right for teachers . Oscar Weil the legislative director of the Illinois federation of Teachers affirms that as a result of this landmark ruling about 80 per cent of public school and community college teachers in Illinois are now represented by unions or associations in collective bargaining . Indeed the US constitution does not expressly give anyone the right to strike or even provide a requirement in the absence of a statute that such employees and their groups be recognized as bargaining agents for collective bargaining. Bergren states: “The common law that came to us from Great Britain prohibited strikes by citizens against the crown ... against the sovereign”. Illinois courts still enforce that common law and will outlaw public employee strikes if public employers have the political courage to seek such injunctions (City of Pana v. Crowe, Illinois Supreme Court 1974,). A strike by school employees has been found to be unlawful as against the public policy of the state (Board of Education v. Kankakee Federation of Teachers, 111. Sup. Ct. )”.(lib.niu.edu). A case in point is when 4,600 teachers in the New York City went on the biggest public servant strike in December of 2005. Circling 267 schools they crippled public schools leaving approximately 1,004,257 students staring at blank blackboards in unattended classrooms. The first teachers strike in the city's history was called by the United Federation of Teachers a part of A.F.L.-C.I.O., which claims about 25 per cent of the 39,000 teachers in the nation's biggest urban public school system. The union had many solid demands from sick pay to duty-free lunch periods but most of all it wanted collective bargaining rights. In that matter lay the real issue. As one of 39 organizations representing New York teachers the union sought to become the strongest of them all. The strike was illegal under New York State's Condon-Wadlin Act which was almost never used. New York State's Condon-Wadlin Act outlaws strikes by public employees on pain of dismissal, and rules public employee strikes illegal. But then School Superintendent John J. Theobald did not implement the law , but instead he suspended the strikers. The strike only lasted just one day. The state guaranteed no allowances but leaders of the teachers union rumbled that the end was only "an honorable truce." Whether prelude or epilogue the strike was a classic example of the dilemma facing U.S. teachers. To get needed gains in pay and treatment they now have two rival organizations, the 714,000-plus member National Education Association which is mostly dominated by school administrators, and the aggressive, 60,000-plus member American Federation of Teachers (A.F.L.-C.I.O). National labor leaders sensing the unpopularity of strikes which described the strikes as "against the children" are not much interested in supporting the teachers. From the research on the NYC Teacher’s Strike it is clear that the state denied the demands of the teachers from sick pay to duty-free lunch periods. The union was ready for negotiation with the state. However the state ignored this fact arguing that the strike was illegal under New York State's never used Condon-Wadlin Act. Instead of holding negotiation with the union, the strikers were suspended. This proves that the state despises the union. The strike only lasted just one day. The state guaranteed the teachers no allowances. This shows how disloyal the state is to the unions. The teachers had no option but to get back to wok due to fear of losing their jobs. This shows the dilemma U.S. teachers face. The teacher’s strikes are termed as being unpopular and are described as being against the children for those reasons teacher’s strikes lack public support. From investigating the records to date and the arguments advanced concerning the strike weapon for and against the public employee, I have learned that most public sector workers are denied their rights. These rights include the right to demand a better pay, right to paid leave and right to promotion. They are also denied the rights to a greater number of fringe benefits such as group insurance, retirement plan, sick leave, etc. that offer them better protection. Workers who were terminated unlawfully also have the right to be reinstated. They are usually treated without respect and dignity by their employers. They also face unfairness, favoritism and discrimination from the employers. They are usually sidelined in decision making concerning such issues as promotions, job vacancies, layoffs, dismissals, work schedules and vacation schedules. This gives the employer the powers to alter any working conditions such as salary work schedules, job descriptions, duties, etc. for their employees without the written consent between employer and employees. Labor unions aim at ensuring that unionized workers don’t face these problems. The workers elect leaders who would fight for their rights. However, these workers despite having a union and leaders that fight for them, still face these problems. Accordingly I recommend that the unionized workers elect aggressive and direct leaders who cannot and will not be intimidated under any circumstances. This is because the state threatens to discharge striking members, and since the leaders are apprehensive they call off the strike without having their demands met. The union leaders should not end a strike until the state agrees to negotiate with them about the issues at hand. Nevertheless the public sector unionized workers should not put down their tools not until the state agrees to hold talks with them. They should also be realistic in their demands and in that case, a strike should be legal. Reference A union to get respect http://www.csn.qc.ca/Pageshtml/OrgDepAng.html#art1 Finerty Jr., J. Levine, J. Baumbach, S. [une 23, 2004 Special to Wisconsin Law Journal http://www.wislawjournal.com/archive/2004/0623/finerty-0623.html Kennen, E. New York City Transit Strike http://labor.about.com/od/laboractivism/p/2005nycstrike.htm NYC Teacher’s Strike http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,874199,00.html The right to strike' Should teachers get or do they have it'http://www.lib.niu.edu/ipo/1977/ii770414.html [updated: April 1977] Wikipedia.com. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_union Worker Rights Consortium http://64.233.169.104/search'q=cache:uNr9VluoiIwJ:www.workersrights.org/ Zambia, Industrial and Labour Relations Act, 1993http://www.ilo.org/public/english/dialogue/ifpdial/llg/ch2/ex5.htm