Ohio is facing major budget shortfalls. In a referendum vote, union workers defeated John Kasich's attempt to close those shortfalls by changing laws surrounding unions.
The way I understand it, the law that was defeated by referendum prevented mandatory collection of union dues, made it necessary for workers to contribute to their own healthcare costs at a rate of 15%. This may be considered a "victory" for the union, but it may not be a victory for the worker.
Here's the question: if faced between having a job tomorrow and decreased wages, or no job at all, which would you choose? As a result of their inflexibility, unions which have priced workers out of the market will see their workers simply laid off. So, which would you rather have? High paying jobs for a few, or jobs for a greater number of workers? The leftists in our country are going to have to make some decisions very soon. There will be no money left to pay the workers their high-falutin' salaries and benefits that few in the private sector enjoy. The left can cry all it wants, but the goose that lays the golden eggs is just about dead. Thanks to the unions.
More on the topic:http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/11/09/hollow-victory-for-public-employee-unions/
Get informed about unions:http://www.unionfacts.com/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment