Should Law Enforcement be allowed to Unionized?

[Omaha Steve]

A comment from another post.

6 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	3 (50%)
	NO
	3 (50%)
	Other please explain
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. Sure, why not?/NT

[Telcontar]

2. I stand with FDR

Public servants should not be allowed to unionize. I think police unions are a big part of the problem with police these days.

[riversedge]

4. In WI-Gov Walker exempted firefighters and police from his union busting law.

[Telcontar]

7. So you want to stand with Walker?

Not sure what you're saying.

[riversedge]

26. Of course not. He gave them special status. I do like

that aspect. He killed the other public unions a few years ago and the private unions last week. sorry if I confused you.




stand with walker??

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

11. He was wrong, times have changed, etc.

[Telcontar]

12. I disagree

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

13. Welcome to America, you get to do that here.

But what I bet is FDR is not the reason you oppose public unions.

I bet the reason you do is you have heard or know from personal experience that many have awesome salaries and benefit packages and some may even have it too good especially if you include their collective bargaining rights, right?

[Telcontar]

17. Yeah, buddy you nailed it. I'm just envious

If only you knew me, then you would really hate me.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

18. Not a very good answer.

Why do you oppose public sector unions?

And

Do you support unions in general?

[Telcontar]

19. Your post didnt deserve a good answer

This one does.

I think private sector unions are, in general, just fine. I wish my wife was able to join a union (nurse), but there is no drive to unionize her hospital.

I oppose public sector unions as they are a onflict of interest.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

20. How are they a conflict of interest?

[Telcontar]

23. The union isnt dedicated to serving the public, only its members

Public servants are the interface most members of the public have with their government. When their interests are held hostage (striking police for example), that seems wrong.

[hrmjustin]

3. Yes.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

5. Yes, after they do away with ALL military equipment and 98% of their guns.

Otherwise we are protecting murderers.

Cant get rid of their guns you say because then only bad guys will have guns?

Guess what the solution to that is.

[Nye Bevan]

6. Unionize, yes. Strike, no. (nt)

[KamaAina]

9. A rare thread win for Nye.

[msongs]

8. benevolent brotherhood of criminals or criminal protection league nt

[closeupready]

10. I really don't know. I'd have to think about it.

Not that it matters, as this question is purely rhetorical - as far as I know, police have the same rights to unionize as any other wage-earners.

Two things give me great pause - 1) they lean heavily Republican; and 2) Ferguson and all the other examples of police brutality of late.

[Matterate]

14. Only if it benefits society more than it benefits LEOs.

And I haven't seen any evidence that it does.

They are public servants and anything they do should have a positive effect on the public first. The concerns of public servants should always come in second.

[Maedhros]

15. Two issues are being conflated: labor organizing, and police accountability.

They are not necessarily intertwined.

Of course police officers should be able to unionize. However, police departments need much, much, much better oversight and officers must be held accountable for wrongdoing.

Right now we have one, but not the other.

[MohRokTah]

16. Bust ALL cop unions

Cop unions protect bad cops, bust them all.

[Chan790]

21. Absolutely. Everybody should be allowed to unionize.

Unfortunately, my experience has been that the biggest impediment to organizing workers is often the lack of interest of existing unions to expanding into new sectors or being in any way supportive of anybody trying to organize workers they don't want to represent.

I used to work for a bank and I tried to unionize my fellow tellers...it failed because I got no support from organized labor; I couldn't find a union that would take us...so the bank picked us off (those of us trying to organize) one-by-one until we were all gone. That was the end of {redacted bank} unionization problem.

Why is organized labor so adamant against unionizing non-civil-service white-collar workers? Computer programmers, bank tellers, etc. You can't get a union to touch you if you want to organize your coworkers. You'd think with the slow-death of manufacturing and blue-collar work-sectors in the US they'd be jumping at the bit to organize the new workforce.

[Marrah_G]

22. Yes

All occupations should be allowed to unionize.

[Dawson Leery]

24. FDR and Coolidge where dead set against it.

So am I.

[hifiguy]

25. Nope.

For the same reason that the armed forces can't unionize.

[Warpy]

27. All workers deserve to unionize

because it's the only way they can begin to balance the power at the top.

I don't like what the police unions have become. I didn't like what the Teamsters became in Hoffa's day. Unions, like governments, need periodic cleanouts.

However, all workers need representation.