Having lived in many developed countries,I have yet to come across a group as unfriendly as our own police officers.Clearly a generalization,but there is something hostile in their attitude to the public which may begin with the term "Law ENFORCEMENT".Rather than being seen as assisting and protecting the public,they appear to act as "overseers" of public behavior,ready to pounce at the first possible sign of "wrongdoing".Intimidation is clearly part of their M.O and it is easy to see how,coupled with machismo and apparent,typically abstract support of "tough" policing by the majority of the population,aggressive behavior and victimization can become all too common.That the Police union,made up of ex officers, is part of the issue is no surprise.Cultural change must start with respect rather than fear of police.The Union could play a role in such change but for that to happen,public condemnation of the status quo is a critical first step.
3
This article offers nothing by way of evidence to suggest that police unions are responsible in the slightest for the public's recent loss of confidence in policing across this country. The mission of the unions is to provide legal representation to its paying members, the same way you collect health insurance from your employer even if you are a smoker. If you wish to address the deeper problems associated with police brutality in this country, revisiting the mission of police might be a good place to start. They represent the communities they serve, first and foremost. We have ill-advisedly trained them to consider themselves as our last line of defense, so when a deranged man pulls out a knife in Times Square, the police fire 75 rounds at him, in the process wounding several bystanders. Protestors in Ferguson are greeted with armored tanks. This persistent and complete detachment from the community, this failure to operate to scale, and this lack of awareness of mission is precisely the source of the problem. To suggest that unions should somehow be held responsible for this myopia is just flat out inane.
3
Time for another Douthat conservative baby-with-the-bathwater oversimplified talking point memo.
Any human venture is subject to the vagaries of human behavior and avarice, unions are no different. It is unfortunate that being provided due process before termination (something that should a basic right of ANY worker) has been used to obfuscate legitimate investigations. Likewise, that many union leaders focus more on protecting they power base while making 4-5x what their members do is odious.
However, hardly unexpected given human nature.
But let's remember what it means to work without unions.
No protection from arbitrary termination. "Right to work" is another Frank Luntz approved propaganda phrase which actually means "right to work up until your employer decides you won't anymore." It also means "right to mooch off of the benefits of union representation without contributing anything to funding that benefit."
Do we really want public sector jobs to return to a being simply a pool for patronage? How about reviving loyalty oaths and watching entire municipal departments fired so they can be replaced by those beholden to the new mayor?
Or perhaps Douthat et al are eager to see public service employees become essentially the private workforce for the politically connected.
If unions are contributing to current problems then whatever is causing that problem should be fixed. But this "union = bad" mantra has gotten so predictable ... and tiring.
Any human venture is subject to the vagaries of human behavior and avarice, unions are no different. It is unfortunate that being provided due process before termination (something that should a basic right of ANY worker) has been used to obfuscate legitimate investigations. Likewise, that many union leaders focus more on protecting they power base while making 4-5x what their members do is odious.
However, hardly unexpected given human nature.
But let's remember what it means to work without unions.
No protection from arbitrary termination. "Right to work" is another Frank Luntz approved propaganda phrase which actually means "right to work up until your employer decides you won't anymore." It also means "right to mooch off of the benefits of union representation without contributing anything to funding that benefit."
Do we really want public sector jobs to return to a being simply a pool for patronage? How about reviving loyalty oaths and watching entire municipal departments fired so they can be replaced by those beholden to the new mayor?
Or perhaps Douthat et al are eager to see public service employees become essentially the private workforce for the politically connected.
If unions are contributing to current problems then whatever is causing that problem should be fixed. But this "union = bad" mantra has gotten so predictable ... and tiring.
4
I'm sure a private police organization would be much, much better serving the public than those union types.....Who needs unions anyway. We can have well trained responsible police at $8 an hour. Also, wealthy communities could have really good services, but the poorer places would ....deal with it somehow. This is where this article is going. Minimize government...minimize services. If the government services get too small then we'll hire private police forces...Good luck cleaning up corruption with this one.
20
Arguing that employees cannot unionize is violating the constitutional right to free association.
The issue of "strikes" is another very problematic issue -- unless you have drafted people and have the coercive power of being able to throw them into Leavenworth for going AWOL, you cannot prevent people from deciding to quit en masse.
When there is a work-stoppage the employer has the right to hire replacements (aka "scabs") ... Reagan effectively broke PATCO by simply not rehiring the striking controllers and hiring new.
The matter of salary and work-rule negotiation is another matter, but whining that the public employee unions are intrinsically "unfair" to the public because the political process cannot "get what it needs" is ridiculous. Craven politics is not an argument for abrogation of constitutional rights. You are heading down the path of "draft public servants into perpetual servitude."
One of the major issues you do not address is that a variety of public-service jobs involve difficult trade-offs for the individuals who might take them, about skills that have no other possible employer. Air traffic controllers are an obvious example -- breaking PATCO saved the public in the short run ... but the reality now is that anyone thinking about being an air-traffic controller knows the history. Rational economic theory thus argues that salaries will need to be higher to compensate for employee risk, with more turnover and less commitment.
The issue of "strikes" is another very problematic issue -- unless you have drafted people and have the coercive power of being able to throw them into Leavenworth for going AWOL, you cannot prevent people from deciding to quit en masse.
When there is a work-stoppage the employer has the right to hire replacements (aka "scabs") ... Reagan effectively broke PATCO by simply not rehiring the striking controllers and hiring new.
The matter of salary and work-rule negotiation is another matter, but whining that the public employee unions are intrinsically "unfair" to the public because the political process cannot "get what it needs" is ridiculous. Craven politics is not an argument for abrogation of constitutional rights. You are heading down the path of "draft public servants into perpetual servitude."
One of the major issues you do not address is that a variety of public-service jobs involve difficult trade-offs for the individuals who might take them, about skills that have no other possible employer. Air traffic controllers are an obvious example -- breaking PATCO saved the public in the short run ... but the reality now is that anyone thinking about being an air-traffic controller knows the history. Rational economic theory thus argues that salaries will need to be higher to compensate for employee risk, with more turnover and less commitment.
4
Yes, but. Union functions, public and private, could and probably should be limited to wages and working conditions for the general membership, and could and should be kept out of the discipline of individual members (short, of course, of retaliatory employer action due to individual advocacy of the union and of wages and working conditions).
But, yes, the corporates and conservatives of the "owner" elements of our society, have supported police and fire services and unions exceptionally; for the reason that these services protect the owners private property and persons, often to the point of ignoring similar lower class interests. Look up the unholy alliance organization called the "Footprinters" and their history; or even consider the recent "campaign contributor" Deputy Sheriff wannabe who used the wrong weapon and accidently killed the suspect.
These relationships, particularly with elected law enforcement leaders, is not uncommon in many U.S. jurisdictions. (From one who knows, with some 40 years of personal experience.) Business and law enforcement is a suspect and "unholy" alliance, that operates at the disadvantage of the general public.
But, yes, the corporates and conservatives of the "owner" elements of our society, have supported police and fire services and unions exceptionally; for the reason that these services protect the owners private property and persons, often to the point of ignoring similar lower class interests. Look up the unholy alliance organization called the "Footprinters" and their history; or even consider the recent "campaign contributor" Deputy Sheriff wannabe who used the wrong weapon and accidently killed the suspect.
These relationships, particularly with elected law enforcement leaders, is not uncommon in many U.S. jurisdictions. (From one who knows, with some 40 years of personal experience.) Business and law enforcement is a suspect and "unholy" alliance, that operates at the disadvantage of the general public.
4
Respondeat superior (Latin: "let the master answer"; plural: respondeant superiores) is a legal doctrine which states that, in many circumstances, an employer is responsible for the actions of employees performed within the course of their employment.
A fish rots from the head down. There is a certain culture that pervades. I'm sure it has nothing to do with race or right wing politics that prey on the fear of the "tough on crime" crowd. I'm sure unions are responsible for poor trianing and supervision, prosecutorial discretion and acquittals of those who have to experience a rare attempt at the justice system of holding a cop responsible for using excessive force.
A fish rots from the head down. There is a certain culture that pervades. I'm sure it has nothing to do with race or right wing politics that prey on the fear of the "tough on crime" crowd. I'm sure unions are responsible for poor trianing and supervision, prosecutorial discretion and acquittals of those who have to experience a rare attempt at the justice system of holding a cop responsible for using excessive force.
2
First, the general arguments that Douthat makes against public sector unions are bogus - as he notes they are ideological positions espoused by conservatives, but what he doesn't note is that the assumptions underlying the arguments are false.
Second, the failings of unions in protecting incompetent or dangerous workers are undeniable, but the solution is to make remediation of these problems part of the negotiating process. There are union leaders who have attained power by fear-mongering their membership, making the argument that the employers are their enemies. Surely the vast majority of good cops can see that protecting bad cops simply because they are cops, or protecting people who can not do the job properly because they are union members is, in the long run, bad most union members.
A possible solution is to renegotiate the articles of the employment agreement that prevent removal of failed police from the force, and to do it very publicly so that the union members can see that this is not an attack on the police or on their union, but a transparent adjustment that will allow for better policing.
Second, the failings of unions in protecting incompetent or dangerous workers are undeniable, but the solution is to make remediation of these problems part of the negotiating process. There are union leaders who have attained power by fear-mongering their membership, making the argument that the employers are their enemies. Surely the vast majority of good cops can see that protecting bad cops simply because they are cops, or protecting people who can not do the job properly because they are union members is, in the long run, bad most union members.
A possible solution is to renegotiate the articles of the employment agreement that prevent removal of failed police from the force, and to do it very publicly so that the union members can see that this is not an attack on the police or on their union, but a transparent adjustment that will allow for better policing.
3
Maybe police unions should tackle workload/caseload (understaffing) like nurses unions or like the old truckers unions limit the number of hours that police officers can work per week or insist that officers get paid for additional training. There are ways that police unions could be part of the solution. I refuse to believe that police unions are automatically the problem behind police brutality and excessive force. Maybe the real problem is the screening process or finding a better way to get rid of a few bad apples.
2
STOP THE PRESSES. Ross and I agree on something! As I see my children's teachers demoralized and my children's curricula stripped of creativity I've been wondering why everyone is happy to pile on the teachers, but no one suggests the same kind of metric-based, statewide, decontextualized, inflexible evaluations of police officers.
4
"In California over the last few decades, the correctional officers union first lobbied for a prison-building spree and then, well-entrenched, exercised veto power over criminal justice reform."
Bless you, sir, for reminding the world of this sad terrible fact. And let me open up as a liberal Democrat -- those prison guards even managed to buy MY party.
One big reason why Gray Davis lost his recall election was because Democrats who made less than 50k per year or didn't go to college refused to vote for him. Because of this prison issue. I remember that day very well. I remember that black churches were running phone trees to keep their parishioners home that day. Don't vote for Arnold. But don't vote for Davis either, they said.
Arnold was the first Governor we elected in 25 years whose campaign was not funded by the prison guards' treasure chest.
We need criminal justice reform in this country very badly. And we can't count on these unions to do anything but obstruct it.
We should start by taking a good hard look at the War on Drugs, which has convinced the police that their job is to make war and treat ordinary sinners and substance abusers like enemy insurgents who have to be controlled using violent means.
Bless you, sir, for reminding the world of this sad terrible fact. And let me open up as a liberal Democrat -- those prison guards even managed to buy MY party.
One big reason why Gray Davis lost his recall election was because Democrats who made less than 50k per year or didn't go to college refused to vote for him. Because of this prison issue. I remember that day very well. I remember that black churches were running phone trees to keep their parishioners home that day. Don't vote for Arnold. But don't vote for Davis either, they said.
Arnold was the first Governor we elected in 25 years whose campaign was not funded by the prison guards' treasure chest.
We need criminal justice reform in this country very badly. And we can't count on these unions to do anything but obstruct it.
We should start by taking a good hard look at the War on Drugs, which has convinced the police that their job is to make war and treat ordinary sinners and substance abusers like enemy insurgents who have to be controlled using violent means.
5
Thank you for an interesting article. I would like to disagree strongly on one key point. You conclude that policies like "broken windows policing" have driven down crime rates, and therefore ought to be continued. Yes, there are good data that support this idea. What I do not think that data support is that additional or even continued policing like this will be equally effective. The landscape has changed, partly because of these policies, and the intensity of policing needs to be reassessed in light of these changes. What may have made sense 20 years ago may well be ineffective or even counter-productive today.
Here in Seattle, the police guild is as bad as it gets. I couldnt agree more that police specifically should not have a union.
2
Is the problem really the concept of public-sector unions or the unwillingness of government to refuse to accept job protection in agreements? Unions can serve an important role in employee-employer relationships, such as preventing the kind of wage stagnation that has exacerbated economic inequity. The middle class of the mid 20th century included a lot of workers who were in unions.
The issue of protecting incompetence is quite another issue, and it is here that public-sector unions have made things worse, not better. There is no upside for workers, government and taxpayers when those who can't or won't do a good job can keep their them.
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
The issue of protecting incompetence is quite another issue, and it is here that public-sector unions have made things worse, not better. There is no upside for workers, government and taxpayers when those who can't or won't do a good job can keep their them.
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
1
"What we know so far about the officer who first pursued Mr. Gray (his history of mental health issues, in particular) suggests that he might have benefited from being eased into a different line of work."
I suspected mental health issues, or past gang membership, are involved in the extreme sensitivity regarding civilian eye contact with police officers. Thank you Ross for bringing this to your readers' attention.
I suspected mental health issues, or past gang membership, are involved in the extreme sensitivity regarding civilian eye contact with police officers. Thank you Ross for bringing this to your readers' attention.
1
I strongly support organized labor and collective bargaining.
Having said that, Police unions are doing a grave disservice by pointing the finger of blame everywhere but at their overzealous, overreacting, violence-escalating officers. You cannot obey an officer's order if he shoots you before you even have time to realize he's there and that he's barked an order at you. And nobody needs to be beaten, pepper-sprayed, tased, and/or shot for routine traffic stops or misdemeanor offenses.
Police brutality is made worse by police and prosecutors who defend it, who refuse to speak up, and seem to believe they have the right to use any means necessary to enforce their will.
Having said that, Police unions are doing a grave disservice by pointing the finger of blame everywhere but at their overzealous, overreacting, violence-escalating officers. You cannot obey an officer's order if he shoots you before you even have time to realize he's there and that he's barked an order at you. And nobody needs to be beaten, pepper-sprayed, tased, and/or shot for routine traffic stops or misdemeanor offenses.
Police brutality is made worse by police and prosecutors who defend it, who refuse to speak up, and seem to believe they have the right to use any means necessary to enforce their will.
10
Our Police Union Problem - is not a problem. The real problem is how Social Security benefits are severely cut for police, fire, and school teachers. Imagine, millionaires get more in Social Security benefits than I do, just because THEY WERE NOT TEACHERS!
Re: "Social Security benefits are severely cut for police, fire, and school teachers."
By and large, these groups historically have not contributed to Social Security other than Medicare but instead have had defined benefit retirement plans and alternative disability insurance far better than Social Security provides. In many cases, they are eligible for retirement with full benefits at an age 10 or 15 years younger than required of Social Security annuitants. Whining about their lack of SS benefits should be subject to public shaming.
By and large, these groups historically have not contributed to Social Security other than Medicare but instead have had defined benefit retirement plans and alternative disability insurance far better than Social Security provides. In many cases, they are eligible for retirement with full benefits at an age 10 or 15 years younger than required of Social Security annuitants. Whining about their lack of SS benefits should be subject to public shaming.
11
Same old canned response from a dolt like Douthat. He never considers the situation of monopsony, which is what a public sector employer is; single buyer of a service. If Douthat had been properly educated he would know that in monopsony the employer, facing a an unorganized employee group, will maximize benefits at a point which has lower wages and fewer employees hired than the free market outcome people like Douthut are addicted to. Please read Joan Robinson.
2
Many commenters in here seem to believe that public service unions are all that stands between employees and utterly unfair treatment, no due process or unjustified firings and discipline. Perhaps the case in the private sector (though many protections are now law and not dependent on a union) but people forget that civil service rules allow for layers of review and independent protection from unjust employer practices in most jurisdictions. It's not like the police or teachers in most places are left to founder for themselves.
2
Maybe with better teachers we'd have better cops. In the meantime, take away their guns.
3
Douthat argues everything for a "money" angle.
"Monopoly on vital services." We should privatize those services and then, while the cost remained the same, some CEO could make millions and the person doing the work makes far less.
"Government's money is not its own." That's because government is not people, while corporations are. Whatever happened to We the people and government of, by and for the people? Those ideas been turned on their heads.
"These negotiations drive up the cost of public service." As opposed to a private firm doing the job then raising prices or lobbying for a bigger chunk of taxes to up the CEO's salary. And of course, those working for the public should only get what the public wants to pay. Since poorer people resent what you get, and wealthy people don't want to pay those underlings, you should work for squat.
That, of course, is conservatism today. Money is their god and they will do anything to get more and the power that accompanies it. They don't tend to worry about people unless they can be used. You know like human resources instead of personnel department. They are emasculating labor in the private sector and they want to get those in the public next. Then the oligarchy will be complete.
As a retired teacher, I belonged to the union. While not nearly as powerful as those trying to get rid of them portray, they did have your back if administration turned against you, or more importantly, if a child accused you of something inappropriate.
"Monopoly on vital services." We should privatize those services and then, while the cost remained the same, some CEO could make millions and the person doing the work makes far less.
"Government's money is not its own." That's because government is not people, while corporations are. Whatever happened to We the people and government of, by and for the people? Those ideas been turned on their heads.
"These negotiations drive up the cost of public service." As opposed to a private firm doing the job then raising prices or lobbying for a bigger chunk of taxes to up the CEO's salary. And of course, those working for the public should only get what the public wants to pay. Since poorer people resent what you get, and wealthy people don't want to pay those underlings, you should work for squat.
That, of course, is conservatism today. Money is their god and they will do anything to get more and the power that accompanies it. They don't tend to worry about people unless they can be used. You know like human resources instead of personnel department. They are emasculating labor in the private sector and they want to get those in the public next. Then the oligarchy will be complete.
As a retired teacher, I belonged to the union. While not nearly as powerful as those trying to get rid of them portray, they did have your back if administration turned against you, or more importantly, if a child accused you of something inappropriate.
5
I'm not unbiased in this regard because one of my brothers works for a public employees' union.He often negotiates contracts,with the awareness that due to budgetary restraints he's not going to get for the employees everything they want.that's why what he does is called negotiating.Mr.Douthat neglects to point out that just like private sector employees,public employees ,too,are tax payers.He also leaves out of this article the fact that most conservatives are also opposed to private sector unions,which in many states they've weakened via Right to Work laws which when a work unit's workers on the losing side of vote to unionize have the right not join and not to pay dues,even the unions are obligated to represent the none dues payers as well as the dues payers.
But it is problem when police unions in effect defend police misconduct beyond their right to representation,by trying to shut down even prosecutions such this,for which there is much probable cause. Or as my brother put it Friday,police unions give unions in general a bad name,much like Jimmie Hoffa did in the 1950s and '60s.
But it is problem when police unions in effect defend police misconduct beyond their right to representation,by trying to shut down even prosecutions such this,for which there is much probable cause. Or as my brother put it Friday,police unions give unions in general a bad name,much like Jimmie Hoffa did in the 1950s and '60s.
2
While the unions come in for their fair share of the blame in resisting reform, it should be noted that legally, if the union does not make a good faith effort to defend a member in a disciplinary action, regardless of whether the union wishes to or not, then the member can successfully sue the union for failure to represent. Regardless of whether the member is guilty, or fired, or both. So the union ends up defending everybody who wants to be defended.
3
I thought this was going to make sense, but it turned into a silly defense of "Broken Windows," a failed police strategy. The reason crime has declined is because of broader economic, social, political and demographic factors, including Roe v. Wade (fewer unwanted babies, who tend to be neglected and abused and are more likely to grow up to be criminals), welfare reform (also resulting in fewer unwanted babies), skyrocketing real estate prices in New York City that have priced out the poor and working class, many of whom have left the city, and better schools (yes, schools have improved since the 1980s).
2
I can't agree with the "broken window" premise of policing. It's contrary to right to own and enjoy the property. One has a right to a lifestyle of sparsely furnished house and ona right
...... and one has a right to budget and prioritize repairs. The city officials may not ARBITRARILY assign a judgement against the occupants. If it creates any community concerns, it should start with some meaningful dialogue through appropriate social agencies before involving law enforcement personnel.
I am a supporter on Unions BUT: At the City level, negotiations are commonly led by a union rep (responsible to work for the members) the City Manager (who should represent the fiscal health of the City) The City Mayor (who should represent the needs of the Citizens) BUT: If the union gets a raise, the City Manager gets the same percentage to maintain parity. The Mayor gets to pay back for the Union's assistance in getting him/her elected. No one represents the residents of the City -- they just pay or lose services. This is common throughout the nation.
3
in the case of Police Unions, which as it is publicly known have a long history of physical abuse and lethal actions against civilians, I agree those Union needs to either be terminated or to at least have several of their privileges removed.
In the past police "officers" were possibly even worse and known to kill suspects who had their arms up because some of their gun shots went through their armpits.
In the past police "officers" were possibly even worse and known to kill suspects who had their arms up because some of their gun shots went through their armpits.
1
There are good and bad things about unions.
But the point of a union is to lobby on behalf of the membership with the full force of the membership. When they do a good job, members benefit. When they do a bad job, members get fired and the public doesn't care.
A police officers union is no different in that regard than any other union, maybe more so. Having your life depend on the whims of politicians who cater shamelessly to public opinion of the moment...I'd want a union in my corner too.
The cop in Ferguson - who was absolved by the Grand Jury and by the collective evidence...lost his job.
But the point of a union is to lobby on behalf of the membership with the full force of the membership. When they do a good job, members benefit. When they do a bad job, members get fired and the public doesn't care.
A police officers union is no different in that regard than any other union, maybe more so. Having your life depend on the whims of politicians who cater shamelessly to public opinion of the moment...I'd want a union in my corner too.
The cop in Ferguson - who was absolved by the Grand Jury and by the collective evidence...lost his job.
1
Officer Darren Wilson resigned from the Ferguson police force.
4
We have SOOOOO needed someone to articulate this issue & you have done it so well, plus no one can accuse you of being some misty-eyed leftie misfit. Thank you for a real public service. I've been working on police accountability issues in Syracuse on & off since the early 90s, & I can tell you that mayors & police chiefs may come & go, but the PBA abides. Regardless of how real reform efforts are from many quarters, we won't get there until the PBA death grip is loosened.
4
"the untimely death" of Freddie Gray has been declared a homicide.
1
This may be the Ross Douthat's only column that I agree with.
I consider myself a liberal. And, I do see on this board other fellow liberals comments people questioning his motives here because of his anti-union stances elsewhere (as they should). However, it would be unfair to simply dismiss Ross' comments simply for his motives.
A truthful consideration of basic facts would suggest his comments have plenty of validity. Police unions are most certainly part of 'this' problem. In fact, in most instances, their behavior has been atrocious and unprofessional (e.g. Pat Lynch and assorted fraternal orders against NY mayor Bill De Blasio). It is the freedom to act with near unprecedented impunity and near lack of ANY repercussions - enabled in no small measure by lobbying and bullying efforts of the unions - which is a major driver of this cycle of deaths, abuses and protests.
I consider myself a liberal. And, I do see on this board other fellow liberals comments people questioning his motives here because of his anti-union stances elsewhere (as they should). However, it would be unfair to simply dismiss Ross' comments simply for his motives.
A truthful consideration of basic facts would suggest his comments have plenty of validity. Police unions are most certainly part of 'this' problem. In fact, in most instances, their behavior has been atrocious and unprofessional (e.g. Pat Lynch and assorted fraternal orders against NY mayor Bill De Blasio). It is the freedom to act with near unprecedented impunity and near lack of ANY repercussions - enabled in no small measure by lobbying and bullying efforts of the unions - which is a major driver of this cycle of deaths, abuses and protests.
2
Bravo for applying principal across the board and not selectively.
Police (and fire which is less essential) have wrapped themselves around the flag and in some cases are like the mafia insurance people who say "you don't want a fire here..do you".. Many times when a politician has taken them on for financial pension /OT abuse they have found themselves pulled over or their businesses over-inspected for "violations". This is accepted because of slick marketing (schools have "touch a truck" and "fill the boot" and "officer steve" which makes it difficult to reign them in.
1
When the police officers who see and report bad behavior by other police officers are threatened and harassed it is hard to see how anything will change. There are people in every profession who shouldn't be there. But to keep allowing police officers to act badly without calling them out will just serve to further reduce trust in the law enforcement community. http://truthvoice.com/2015/05/if-you-snitch-your-career-is-done-baltimor...
2
No one is sympathetic toward the murderers(ok, maybe some kook), rapists, muggers, thieves and scammers. But, does anyone get the theme there? These are things that people do to others and their property. Those are not things that people voluntarily do to themselves and, thus, they are crimes. Those things actually violate our Constitutional and human rights, so we have the police to serve and protect us from those who would commit those acts. But, some have been asking the police to do much more than that. Some Americans have empowered the police to stop other Americans from engaging in consensual behaviors and using certain substances, but there is a very real push back against this and our society is suffering deeply from it. Further, those laws aren't actually stopping people from engaging in those activities. Those laws are actually facilitating the destruction of the relationship between the public and the police. Our ancestors recognized this and ended alcohol prohibition. Why can't this generation see what this is doing?
1
I'm glad to see Ross admit that police unions, long supported by Republicans, exempted from Republican union busting, and the force behind the Blue Wall of Silence, are a menace.
But this statement is nonsensical: "...the government's money is not its own." Of course it is. Just like I can't dictate that my taxes don't support our warmongering adventures and bloated Pentagon, wealthy conservatives (let's face it, this is who Ross is talking about) shouldn't feel empowered to control the workings of day-to-day government functions.
And "...their employees (who are also often their political supporters)..." shows how clueless Ross is about the workings of government. Does he really think my former coworkers at the Oklahoma Water Resources Board, the guys who go out every day and do water quality work for $30,000 a year, are newly appointed in some kind of patronage deal every time a new governor gets elected?
It's absurd how out of touch he is.
But this statement is nonsensical: "...the government's money is not its own." Of course it is. Just like I can't dictate that my taxes don't support our warmongering adventures and bloated Pentagon, wealthy conservatives (let's face it, this is who Ross is talking about) shouldn't feel empowered to control the workings of day-to-day government functions.
And "...their employees (who are also often their political supporters)..." shows how clueless Ross is about the workings of government. Does he really think my former coworkers at the Oklahoma Water Resources Board, the guys who go out every day and do water quality work for $30,000 a year, are newly appointed in some kind of patronage deal every time a new governor gets elected?
It's absurd how out of touch he is.
5
From all appearances, the police unions go to great and zealous lengths to "protect" their members involved in legally questionably actions. That type of posturing further erodes the public's trust of their profession, undermining the credibility of both individual cops and the unions themselves.
As a result of this failure of police unions to hold their members accountable to acceptable standards of performance renders them the equivalent to legalized gangs.
As a result of this failure of police unions to hold their members accountable to acceptable standards of performance renders them the equivalent to legalized gangs.
1
Russ, possibly you've never worked for any significant amount of time in a workplace where unions are needed. The case you make is fine from an intellectual standpoint but in real life it is too often the case that management(s) can't be trusted to make right and fair employment decisions. Despite the reasons presented, unions still have a place in public sector workplaces. There are ways to address every abuse or potential abuse presented without banning collective bargaining.
5
Aside from the public sector union issue, there is another issue that conservatives are going to have to grapple with if they are going to seriously address the deteriorating relations between police and the communities they serve: gun control.
As our society and streets become increasingly saturated with guns, cops are understandably more and more skittish for their own safety (e.g., see today's NYT headline about an officer shot in Queens). I certainly don't envy their situation. What cop isn't going to suffer from "mental health problems" while working daily in an environment where any sudden movement by a suspicious person might be the last sight he sees, yet any excessively forceful response to a perceived threat could land the cop in jail? This is a nearly impossible situation for police to exist in, and it is largely a consequence of the fact that guns are now EVERYWHERE in our country. Police officers in countries with sane gun control laws do not face this dilemma.
As guns increasingly permeate every nook and cranny of our society, we are heading towards a day when police officers are either going to be driven insane by their jobs, or will have to be insane to sign up for the academy in the first place.
As our society and streets become increasingly saturated with guns, cops are understandably more and more skittish for their own safety (e.g., see today's NYT headline about an officer shot in Queens). I certainly don't envy their situation. What cop isn't going to suffer from "mental health problems" while working daily in an environment where any sudden movement by a suspicious person might be the last sight he sees, yet any excessively forceful response to a perceived threat could land the cop in jail? This is a nearly impossible situation for police to exist in, and it is largely a consequence of the fact that guns are now EVERYWHERE in our country. Police officers in countries with sane gun control laws do not face this dilemma.
As guns increasingly permeate every nook and cranny of our society, we are heading towards a day when police officers are either going to be driven insane by their jobs, or will have to be insane to sign up for the academy in the first place.
1
By singling out California's prison workers as your example of public sector worker's union corruption, you conveniently skip past the fact that ALEC pushed through the egregious Three Strikes law which was drafted by CCA and others who profit from the privatization of prisons; which is the greater sin!
7
When I read some of these comments, I reflect that Scott Walker oozed by in large part because he cleverly set cops and firefighers against teachers and service workers. Now, of course, he's going after cops and firefighters.
Quel surprise, eh? folks, as long as you scream at yell at unions jist because they are unions, as long as you see yourselves as oppressed by the way that unions tend to get their people decent pay, benefits, workong condotions and protections, you too are going to get chopped up, set against each other, and progressively eaten alive.
Are there problems with unions? Sure are. But if you're so all-fired worried about public sector unions and their contracts, hold their admins and their legislatures accountable. Go demand contracts that do what you want them to do. Don't just scream and yell about there being any negotiations at all.
It's not just that it's stupid, and lazy. It's that it's being handed to you as a blindfold, so you don't think about why YOUR job isn't unionized, and YOU do think about why you don't have some real say in how things are run.
Quel surprise, eh? folks, as long as you scream at yell at unions jist because they are unions, as long as you see yourselves as oppressed by the way that unions tend to get their people decent pay, benefits, workong condotions and protections, you too are going to get chopped up, set against each other, and progressively eaten alive.
Are there problems with unions? Sure are. But if you're so all-fired worried about public sector unions and their contracts, hold their admins and their legislatures accountable. Go demand contracts that do what you want them to do. Don't just scream and yell about there being any negotiations at all.
It's not just that it's stupid, and lazy. It's that it's being handed to you as a blindfold, so you don't think about why YOUR job isn't unionized, and YOU do think about why you don't have some real say in how things are run.
6
The problem goes beyond the police. The criminal justice system is totally broken. There's little argument to be made that the system has reduced crime, but at what cost? The adversarial system puts an emphasis on conviction statistics rather than justice, and at the expense of the indigent. The system is stacked against the poor who are most susceptible to street crime and there is little in the way of counterbalance to maintain some form of equity in the distribution of justice. The result is a lot of people in jail, some quite deservedly and many who probably shouldn't.
It's really more of police state, gun-state, prison-state, military-state, authoritarian-state problem, Father Douhat, but go ahead and blame it on unions just for 'conservative' sport anyway.
Imagine if America had invested all the trillions it spends on war, guns, prisons and spying on its own citizens on education and helping the poor ?
It's a right-wing police and state authoritarian fascist problem.
But again, let's blame 'unions'.
Imagine if America had invested all the trillions it spends on war, guns, prisons and spying on its own citizens on education and helping the poor ?
It's a right-wing police and state authoritarian fascist problem.
But again, let's blame 'unions'.
7
It never ceases to amaze me how a guy like Douthat, that has never truly "worked" a day in his life, likes to try to dictate the conditions of the average working person. He and his ilk would like to do away with all unions so that his friends in the corporate suites can reduce pay& benefits down to a minimal level, maximizing their returns. "Unions had their place in the 30s" is a simplistic slogan. There isn't a corporation in the United States today that will gladly pay a fair and equitable wage. Just look at the plight of the fast food workers, the WalMart wage slaves, etc. Unions are the reason the average worker has a vacation at all. Unions are the reason you have a five day work week. Unions are the reason you know longer have child labor in this country. All of these advances were battled by the Ross Douthats of those days. Don't let him fool you, without public sector unions, the sanitation workers would be treated like pre-MLK Memphis' and the police and firefighters would be undermotivated and non responsive.
9
The column was about public service unions, not Wal-Mart unions. What do you think of the points he made regarding public service unions, specifically police unions? Can you point out the column where Mr Douthat argued against the unionization of Wal-Mart? I don't remember it.
Ross, do you really believe it's possible to repress nicely? If continuous petty harassment is criminal justice policy, it's going to invite resistance; in that event, it is unreasonable to expect that police are simply going to back away.
"Broken windows" or "zero-tolerance" policing is the problem; its abuses are inherent in it. You can't preserve it without putting the cops in the middle,
making them martyrs and thereby exacerbating the problem.
I don't think advocating gentler harassment in order to preserve the right to harass can work. We need to recognize that the idea of preventing crime (as opposed to deterring crime) conflicts with the presumption of innocence, and stop directing our police to act as an occupying army.
"Broken windows" or "zero-tolerance" policing is the problem; its abuses are inherent in it. You can't preserve it without putting the cops in the middle,
making them martyrs and thereby exacerbating the problem.
I don't think advocating gentler harassment in order to preserve the right to harass can work. We need to recognize that the idea of preventing crime (as opposed to deterring crime) conflicts with the presumption of innocence, and stop directing our police to act as an occupying army.
1
Douthat claims that "negotiations between politicians and their employees ...amount to a division of spoils rather than a sharing of profits." Yet, he sees no problem with politicians laying in bed with their employers soiling the sheets and laying spoil.
1
Douthat believes that unions are one more decadent expression of the welfare state; that the police union and privileges the union gets for members, caused the killing and violence that's occuring in Baltimore and other cities. Somehow, it's easier to believe it's the tragic outcome of misguided and extreme conservative law and order politics . . . the fruit of the poisonous tree.
3
When Gene Ryan, president of the Baltimore police union, stands along side an attorney representing the indicted offices who states, “We believe these officers will be vindicated as they have done nothing wrong.” he damages the credibility of all unions. Although I don't know if the officers deserved to be indicted, I do know that a healthy man was taken into custody and subsequently died from a nearly severed spine. Clearly something done by the officers was wrong.
I am pro-union for what they helped accomplish for the middle class, however, with examples like this, it is difficult for the public to believe that unions care about anything but their own self interest.
I am pro-union for what they helped accomplish for the middle class, however, with examples like this, it is difficult for the public to believe that unions care about anything but their own self interest.
2
Conservatives only believe in trickle down theories when it applies to the rich and their taxes. They don't like it when it applies to the common worker. Mr. Douthat, these strong unions are necessary so a little dignity can "trickle down" to the average worker. Even in non union shops and right to work states most employees only have to work 40 hours per week and receive extra compensation if forced to work longer,, get some vacation, and have some safety standards in place among other "perks". At least that "trickle down" theory does work, a little does trickle down, unlike your failed economic theory.
8
Wow! I had not read that about the Baltimore police lieutenant's mental health problem and hospitalization. I don't think that he could get a concealed carry permit here in Texas.
Between the illegal arrest, the negligence (not seat belting Gray), and this, I think Baltimore and BPD are goling to loose a monumental civil lawsuit regardless of the outcome of the criminal trials.
Between the illegal arrest, the negligence (not seat belting Gray), and this, I think Baltimore and BPD are goling to loose a monumental civil lawsuit regardless of the outcome of the criminal trials.
5
Not everyone is suited to be a police officer just as not everyone is suited to be a teacher, doctor, accountant, etc. That fact is ignored every time the police union fails to discipline bad apples in their midst. I can't understand the police union's failure to recognize the peril of refusing to police themselves. Not only does that slowly destroy the trust the community they serve has in them but also besmirches the excellent, honorable officers. To every criticism, the police appears to counter that with "you don't know what it's like to put your life on the line, etc." Well, that kind of stance doesn't give the police a blank check to do whatever they want to do and be immune to any kind of constructive criticism. Even though I am not black or Hispanic, I would be afraid to file a complaint against an officer because I fear I will be targeted. What if they don't respond when I call 911 or be ticketed for going 1 mile over the limit? I also imagine other police officers being afraid to file complaint against rogue colleagues. Their lives ARE on the line when they go to work; what if no one comes to back them up when they call for help? Not every fatal police shooting should be considered justifiable. It should be OK to second-guess such fatal shooting -- not necessarily to criticize the police officer but to learn from it. In order to do that, the police union must first stop being self-righteous and lecturing the community how dangerous the job is. We know.
4
It is an outrage that Douthat turns the tables here and takes advantage of a serious problem in order to pursue his conservative anti-union agenda. Sure - I'm no fan of any union that protects the incompetent. But I don't trust the wolves in the GOP and the racist right wing of this country to do any better. This article panders to the perception that public employees, often minorities in cities like Baltimore, have little or no rights. This columnist is just another part of the problem.
10
So, let me get this straight - because public employees provide public goods and their jobs are financed with tax money, they shouldn't have union protections? Public jobs can still be hazardous - Dr. King did, after all, die while in Memphis supporting a public sanitation worker strike in reaction to unsafe working conditions and low wages. Public, like private, employees' employers would rather pay them less - taxpayers don't want to pay them anything. Public employees are subject to the changing whims of elected officials and mob mentality politics - pluralism demands that they have a voice, too. Unions are nothing more than democracy and due process in the workplace - as American as apple pie.
6
Two points: "Public employees are subject to the changing whims of elected officials and mob mentality politics - pluralism demands that they have a voice, too."
This old "to the victor belongs the spoils" attitude is precisely why the civil service system was put in place, from the feds on down to municipalities. This has, in most cases, removed the undue influence in hiring, discipline, etc. that used to exist.
Secondly, these workers have the same voice as you and I - the ballot box. They are not entitled to more voice than we have.
This old "to the victor belongs the spoils" attitude is precisely why the civil service system was put in place, from the feds on down to municipalities. This has, in most cases, removed the undue influence in hiring, discipline, etc. that used to exist.
Secondly, these workers have the same voice as you and I - the ballot box. They are not entitled to more voice than we have.
Just because police unions are shameful does not mean that all unions are bad. Manufacturing unions can be a good thing if they give the workers a living wage, and a way to save for retirement. People who carry guns, tasers, and clubs should not be unionized.
2
He didn't say all unions are bad. To be fair, he said public service unions are bad, and then listed the reasons (specific to public service unions.)
It is predictable that NYT commentors, having no particular response to the points he made, will fall back on logical fallicies.
It is predictable that NYT commentors, having no particular response to the points he made, will fall back on logical fallicies.
Disappointing yet predictable. It appears that a man was arrested without cause, and killed by the police who then tried to cover it up, another chapter in an continuing story. A million words have been written about the societal underpinnings that led us here, with clear and obvious themes of racial inequality, economic inequality, flawed criminal justice policy and official corruption, and Douthat's angle is: "See? Unions are evil!" What a gross failure of the imagination and completely predictable waste of column inches.
8
The problem is not with police unions, although like any organization with power that power can be abused, but the fascist policies those officers are directed to implement. Police have always been pawns of the powerful and the rich, and it seem to make sense to restrain those that dictate policy, more so than the powerfuls' pawns.
5
Mr. Douthat's poor comparison of Educators to Police is disingenuous at best. The only commonality shared is collective bargaining. Teachers enlighten and inspire children; police maintain law and order.
5
They are different but their commonality is collective bargaining.
I think that was his point.
I think that was his point.
1
Mr. Douhat's comparison is quite apt. Bad cops make bad decisions, wrong force resulting in a tragedy. By the same token, bad teachers don't enlighten nor inspire children which leads to bad choices with no opportunities which also results in a wasted lives.
Unions created the middle class. OK, so there are excesses in some cases. Fix them, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Suppose one suggests shutting down a particular religion because of the faults of some of the leaders. Or (God forbid) they should pay taxes because otherwise they "do not serve the common good". What about the extensive benefits of retired military? You conservatives don't like unions, any unions because they are the foundation of the middle class.
8
The reason that Conservatives are loath to criticize Police unions and there activities shouldn't be hard to understand. The "Thin Blue Line" protects them from "The Others." But, as technology marches forward, they too will suffer with the rest. Think about the movie "Elyseum" with its robotic police force, security specialist protecting executives, and robot parole bureaucrats. After all, art tends to imitate, as well as foreshadow, life.
1
I think Douthat was feeling very proud of himself when the idea for this column came to him. He would show how standard political commitments come into conflict. He faults the cops (cheer from Liberals, groan from Conservatives) by faulting their unions (Conservative cheer, Liberal groan). Anyone who thinks cops in this country have got to change must see that their unions aren't going to want change. Anyone who thinks unions are always a good thing can't really believe that when they look at cops' unions...But does Ross really think that unions are the problem? I wonder if even he knows.
I believe in the premise of unions, as I believe in democracy, but both require conscious and systematic reforms, constant management, and flexibility. Unions should be about protecting and encouraging the growth of their members if they are to be worthwhile. When they become little more than corrupt engines of their leaders, they fail on all counts.
What's missing from both sides on this, is the recognition that each & every institutions main imperative is to protect itself . And the more power they can garner, the more that impulse will be abused.
Unions, governments, corporations have all done good for this country. But as each has become more powerful, the self interests of all these entities have overwhelmed the needs of their constituents.
Protecting those you are serving has diminished so much that it isn't even an afterthought anymore.
Unions, governments, corporations have all done good for this country. But as each has become more powerful, the self interests of all these entities have overwhelmed the needs of their constituents.
Protecting those you are serving has diminished so much that it isn't even an afterthought anymore.
1
The fault for bad employee behavior always lies with the boss. In the case of the Police that is us. We-the-people decided we want our police departments to enforce laws rather than serve the public. All we need to do is to change the mission of our police back to "protect and serve." Over time the culture and the actions of individual police officers will evolve.
Pogo was right, we have met the enemy, and he is us.
Pogo was right, we have met the enemy, and he is us.
2
Correctomundo, Mr. Douthat. Police unions create the same types of abuses as the teachers unions, and we need to get rid of both of them.
1
Let the union leaders ride in a speeding extradition van without seatbelts, with lots of sharp turns and jarring starts and stops for a few days, as I did in my bit.ly/ExtraditionRideFromHell and they'll understand the need for reform.
I give them just 24 hours and they will be begging for mercy, and then they can see what their protectionism is doing to encourage this type of inhumane and deadly behavior by bad cops.
I give them just 24 hours and they will be begging for mercy, and then they can see what their protectionism is doing to encourage this type of inhumane and deadly behavior by bad cops.
1
There could be a case made that police unions need more accountability but the Right's assault on unions of all kind is another cause of the demise of an upwardly mobile middle class. Amazingly, the very same people who would directly benefit from unions are manipulated by cynical politicians and their corporate patrons. But this is the operating principle of the GOP. The union is just another in a long list of bogeyman ("welfare queens", gays, imaginary Marxists, etc.) that the Right wing uses to polarize society and divide citizens against each other to win elections.
2
Well, I am stunned. As I read through Mr. Douthat's piece, I kept waiting for the inevitable punchline. I understood as I read further and further into the piece that this was going to have to be a truly bravura performance. How was he going to get from the the abuse of police unions to his eventual goal? When I got to the gratuitous attack on liberals in the final paragraph, I thought that I was near the punch line. But, no, it never came. Is there really no way to connect police unions to liberals' murderous support of abortion?
Your statement, " But after the untimely death of Freddie Gray, no issue looms larger than the need to discipline, suspend and fire police officers who don’t belong on the streets — and the obstacles their unions put up to that all-too-necessary process." goes right to the roots of the problems facing law enforcement and teachers.
Whether you agree with Mr. Douthat or not, rest assured there will be more police/citizen confrontations before a calming down begins and coming to terms with correcting the causes is going to be hugely difficult.
Unions are not a bad thing but tempering their reach is a necessary step that has to be taken soon.
Whether you agree with Mr. Douthat or not, rest assured there will be more police/citizen confrontations before a calming down begins and coming to terms with correcting the causes is going to be hugely difficult.
Unions are not a bad thing but tempering their reach is a necessary step that has to be taken soon.
1
The one time we could use thoughtful conservative critique of culture, police culture and that of the rioters, and this genius turns to union bashing. Is there anything that won't make his knee jerk?
4
Oh my, did I notice the implication that conservatives might be hypocritical? Say it isn't so.
3
Can you imagine what would happen if a teacher, in the process of disciplining a child, broke his neck?
Or suffocated a student to death? Or shot him in the back?
Of course not. When pundits rag on teachers for "poor performance" they mean the teachers' students don't do well on tests.
The equivalent measure for police officers would be something like number of summonses issued, or number of parking tickets written, or maybe number of noise complaints in that officer's work area.
There is a big moral difference between poor performance and actively victimizing the people you are meant to serve.
It is a sign of the perversely "conservative" public discourse, that we have made more real efforts to combat poor teacher performance, in the limited, technical sense, than we have to combat active, brutal wrongdoing by police.
And this perverse narrative is aided by the concept that these brutal police actions are somehow "part of the work." But if a man is carrying a pocket knife and you end up beating him to death; or if a man is selling cigarettes and you end up choking him to death; or if a man is behind on child support and you end up shooting him multiple times, that has nothing to do with police work at all.
And since it is NOT a work-performance issue, it does not fall under the jurisdiction of the unions. Let them protect their officers from unreasonable quotas, poor pay, bad hours, etc. Active wrongdoing is a matter for the public and for the courts.
Or suffocated a student to death? Or shot him in the back?
Of course not. When pundits rag on teachers for "poor performance" they mean the teachers' students don't do well on tests.
The equivalent measure for police officers would be something like number of summonses issued, or number of parking tickets written, or maybe number of noise complaints in that officer's work area.
There is a big moral difference between poor performance and actively victimizing the people you are meant to serve.
It is a sign of the perversely "conservative" public discourse, that we have made more real efforts to combat poor teacher performance, in the limited, technical sense, than we have to combat active, brutal wrongdoing by police.
And this perverse narrative is aided by the concept that these brutal police actions are somehow "part of the work." But if a man is carrying a pocket knife and you end up beating him to death; or if a man is selling cigarettes and you end up choking him to death; or if a man is behind on child support and you end up shooting him multiple times, that has nothing to do with police work at all.
And since it is NOT a work-performance issue, it does not fall under the jurisdiction of the unions. Let them protect their officers from unreasonable quotas, poor pay, bad hours, etc. Active wrongdoing is a matter for the public and for the courts.
5
As a Federal worker myself I can tell you from firsthand experience that union status, along with the fear of having a baseless EEO complaint filed against you as a manager, keeps scores of worthless employees in place just in my small-ish agency. Government-wide, it must be thousands. While I dislike the reflexive civil-service bashing by some on the right, I also dislike the reflexive defense of unions by nearly all on the left. And while many commenters cheer the conservative hypocrisy Douthat highlights (fair enough!), they don't see the equal but opposite liberal hypocrisy.
2
It's unionization's fault that cops lie, break laws, frustrate justice? It's state unions that eat the public's money merely because of the immense power union members supposedly gain when they group together to negotiate?
Mr. Douthat, you must have been sleepy because yyou just described American corporations, taking their gifts of government tax breaks (public money), colluding to control banking (the public's financial support), manipulating prices, quality, safety, and interest rates (ever read the news?), and fighting regulation of their workplaces, the safety of their workers (here and abroad), income tax (here and in their island retreats), inherited wealth, property taxes, and stock purchases and sales. So at last you too believe that we should have public regulation of corporate oligarchies that benefit from public funding and investment and destroy jobs?
Mr. Douthat, you must have been sleepy because yyou just described American corporations, taking their gifts of government tax breaks (public money), colluding to control banking (the public's financial support), manipulating prices, quality, safety, and interest rates (ever read the news?), and fighting regulation of their workplaces, the safety of their workers (here and abroad), income tax (here and in their island retreats), inherited wealth, property taxes, and stock purchases and sales. So at last you too believe that we should have public regulation of corporate oligarchies that benefit from public funding and investment and destroy jobs?
5
What do public service unions, specifically police unions that protect dirty cops, have to do with work place safety in private manufacturing sites? Can you point out the column where.Mr Douthat argued against union protections and safety requirements for private manufacturing? What do you think about unions that protect dirty cops?
Douthat is correct in his comparison between teachers unions and police unions. Unfortunately, the similarities are even more profound. In both cases, the members of unions provide vital service to the community but the unions fight not for high performing members but rather work to protect members who do wrong or are incompetent. This erodes public confidence and support and in the end diminishes the entire profession. When criticizing the union, one often is confront with the immediate accusation of not supporting either teachers or police. In fact, teachers and police would be far better off it their own membership held their behaviors to the highest standard rather than the lowest threshold of acceptable. I would have hoped that police in both leadership roles and the cop on the street would have come out loudly in support of a prosecution of police who do intentional harm.
This has nothing to do with empathy for the difficult job that police do every single day. It is time for public sector unions to see their job as raising the standard, holding their membership to the highest standard and not simply the defense attorney for the criminal and near criminal.
This has nothing to do with empathy for the difficult job that police do every single day. It is time for public sector unions to see their job as raising the standard, holding their membership to the highest standard and not simply the defense attorney for the criminal and near criminal.
1
I could take Mr. Douthat's arguments more seriously if I thought conservatives were truly invested in the common good instead of catering to the interests of the monied elites and the gun lobby. The loss of union bargaining power over the years is one of the reasons that the middle class is shrinking. It is a specious argument to say that by their very existence police and teachers' unions are holding the American public hostage.There are protocols in place in this sector to remove or discipline incompetent employees if the administrators have the will to use them. These are the people who set the tone and promote a culture within this workforce. would not take many examples for the rank and file to get the message.
1
The argument against public sector unions may be philosophical and practical (and their valid points ought to be heeded with appropriate reforms) but their real motivation is rooted in an antipathy toward the collective efforts of all unionization. The fundamental defect in modern American conservatism, more vividly illustrated by the anti government and anti Union "vandals" in the tea party than in the refined speculation and argumentation of Mr. Douthat, is a rejection of historically necessary trends toward centralization of power and function in both the private and public sector. From the establishment of a centralized currency in 1862 ( the conservative private banks in NY would not help a strapped Lincoln trying to fight the rebellion) to the vast majority of the disabled and very elderly being supported by Medicaid, collective, centralized power and function have become vital. So too for workers in the public sector and so too will private sector workers inevitably rediscover as the income gaps widen even more substantially in the future. Meanwhile, scuttling public sector unions is first on the agenda of conservatives, they're having substantially succeeded in the private sector. But reality will catch up with them and that reality is that the fundamental soundness of American resistance to distributionist philosophies had been carried too far to the detriment of humane economic justice.
2
The article did not state how Governor Kasich's reforms were defeated. It happened because of a voter back referendum. The citizens of Ohio overwhelmingly voted against the curbs placed on public sector unions.
The effort at this reform was purely political, but was framed as a way to help the state and municipalities recover economically from the crash of 2008. This was the case in many of the states that pushed these ideas, but the true goal seemed to be to destroy, or at the least severely weaken, the public sector unions.
Depending on what side of the issue someone is on the governor's insistence to include the police unions was either a mistake or a blessing. The governors, such as Scott Walker, who exempted the police unions had a much easier time making them stick, and if Kasich had followed the same blueprint he probably would have been more successful in that effort.
The reason that these reforms have been successful in other states has been the fact that it is easy to use the wedge of jealously between workers because of the assumption that teachers and so many other public service workers have it so great. The argument could be made that the primary reason that Ohio voters came out against it was because it included the police, although kudos to Governor Kasich for treating all public sector unions equally.
The effort at this reform was purely political, but was framed as a way to help the state and municipalities recover economically from the crash of 2008. This was the case in many of the states that pushed these ideas, but the true goal seemed to be to destroy, or at the least severely weaken, the public sector unions.
Depending on what side of the issue someone is on the governor's insistence to include the police unions was either a mistake or a blessing. The governors, such as Scott Walker, who exempted the police unions had a much easier time making them stick, and if Kasich had followed the same blueprint he probably would have been more successful in that effort.
The reason that these reforms have been successful in other states has been the fact that it is easy to use the wedge of jealously between workers because of the assumption that teachers and so many other public service workers have it so great. The argument could be made that the primary reason that Ohio voters came out against it was because it included the police, although kudos to Governor Kasich for treating all public sector unions equally.
2
Sadly, this is just another astonishing example of the party line:
First, dehumanize the workers in a union by refusing to acknowledge that unions, like government, are composed of citizens, agglomerations of real people with all the variety, needs and imperfections of any heterogeneous group. Second, use anecdotal individual evidence of wrongdoing to tar the mass. Third revoke the privileges and rights of the group based on the bad actions of the few.
Finally, trumpet the success in destroying those protections and parlay that success into further victories over more disenfranchised collectives. Scott Walker may ride his quashing of workers' rights to the White House, but only the oligarchs will be winners in the end.
By the way, attributing the overbuilding of prisons to the lobbying of unionized guards is a shameful rewriting of history.
First, dehumanize the workers in a union by refusing to acknowledge that unions, like government, are composed of citizens, agglomerations of real people with all the variety, needs and imperfections of any heterogeneous group. Second, use anecdotal individual evidence of wrongdoing to tar the mass. Third revoke the privileges and rights of the group based on the bad actions of the few.
Finally, trumpet the success in destroying those protections and parlay that success into further victories over more disenfranchised collectives. Scott Walker may ride his quashing of workers' rights to the White House, but only the oligarchs will be winners in the end.
By the way, attributing the overbuilding of prisons to the lobbying of unionized guards is a shameful rewriting of history.
2
At long last a Douthat column I fully support, FDR the great progressive was smart enough to be against public sector unions, he thought it was a conflict against the public at large and not in the interests of society.
A program Mr. Douthat has appeared on, Bill Mahers Real Time on HBO, this past Friday had an exchange between D.L. Hughley and republican strategist Dan Señor where D.L. quipped to Señor that it's a shame his party doesn't detest police unions as much as they do teachers unions.
I personally believe as a taxpayer there shouldn't be public sector unionization since I have no voice in the policies enacted at their behest for their best interests, unlike my ability to take my business elsewhere if I find a company or private sector union engaging in activities that offend me. As an aside I refuse to shop at Walmart for a myriad of reasons related to their corporate behavior.
I can't take credit for the following--but part of the answer to the rigid support of police unions may be financial responsibility on their part for civil judgements against police now borne exclusivity by the governments employing them. Not saying it should be on a 50/50 basis, but, if their union had to cough up money out of the "good" officers pockets maybe the "blue wall of silence" might start to crumble and dare I dream, if applied in some measure to other public unions could an actual pride in profession philosophy be engendered.
A program Mr. Douthat has appeared on, Bill Mahers Real Time on HBO, this past Friday had an exchange between D.L. Hughley and republican strategist Dan Señor where D.L. quipped to Señor that it's a shame his party doesn't detest police unions as much as they do teachers unions.
I personally believe as a taxpayer there shouldn't be public sector unionization since I have no voice in the policies enacted at their behest for their best interests, unlike my ability to take my business elsewhere if I find a company or private sector union engaging in activities that offend me. As an aside I refuse to shop at Walmart for a myriad of reasons related to their corporate behavior.
I can't take credit for the following--but part of the answer to the rigid support of police unions may be financial responsibility on their part for civil judgements against police now borne exclusivity by the governments employing them. Not saying it should be on a 50/50 basis, but, if their union had to cough up money out of the "good" officers pockets maybe the "blue wall of silence" might start to crumble and dare I dream, if applied in some measure to other public unions could an actual pride in profession philosophy be engendered.
1
(1) It is goverment's job to fire incompetent personnel. This is expensive and often protracted. It requires conscientious management throughout the warning process and full documentation. Tough beans. Weakening public employee unions is not the answer. They need livable income and benefits to attract and retain good officers.
(2) I agree the political power the California prison guards have is truly demented. But they would not have won their battles unless the dementia -- the rage for long sentences, zero tolerance and three strikes -- had infected our whole society. Let's hope that's changing.
(2) I agree the political power the California prison guards have is truly demented. But they would not have won their battles unless the dementia -- the rage for long sentences, zero tolerance and three strikes -- had infected our whole society. Let's hope that's changing.
1
Every worker, public sector and otherwise, should have the right to exercise some control over their work conditions. Some unions have undoubtedly hurt their own causes through intransigence and even corruption, but unions as a whole are needed now more than ever. The economic inequality we have recently "discovered" has long roots in the decline of unions, greatly assisted by the anti-union efforts of corporate America. Unions could benefit from reforming themselves along the lines of their European counterparts which seem to have adapted better and now favor partnership over confrontation without giving up their power. I wish more American workers were conscious of the power they could gain by working together in unions.
This column succinctly describes how our society is caught between criminals and police mafia-like unions, concerned about serving-their own interests and protecting-themselves. An additional comment: any attack on police officers is punished more severely as they are seen having grave responsibilities and public trust. By the same measure any criminal act by a police officer deserves an extra punishment (not a cover-up) since this is breaking this public trust.
As to the training: police officers (except those on permanent desk duty) should pass annual physicals including ability for physical activity requiring apprehending criminals. We have seen enough of videos of officers shooting suspects first thing, as they clearly cannot pursue them.
As to the training: police officers (except those on permanent desk duty) should pass annual physicals including ability for physical activity requiring apprehending criminals. We have seen enough of videos of officers shooting suspects first thing, as they clearly cannot pursue them.
2
Police unions seem like a unique thing to me. The inherent tension in the real conflict of interest between big business owners and paid workers seems clearly to require some form of unionism to protect worker rights in he face of the big business owner's power.
But the balance with police unions is way off, almost by design: prosecutors have to be in bed with cops to do their work, and no independent review boards of citizens seem to have any credibility or clout.
And that's the solution: not dismantling unions, but protecting the public's right to not live in a police state.
Why is it that in every other Western country the public's relation with police is healthier and police violence barely exists? And why don't conservatives - who should care about core freedoms by definition - fight for better protection of our freedom from police harassment and violence?
But the balance with police unions is way off, almost by design: prosecutors have to be in bed with cops to do their work, and no independent review boards of citizens seem to have any credibility or clout.
And that's the solution: not dismantling unions, but protecting the public's right to not live in a police state.
Why is it that in every other Western country the public's relation with police is healthier and police violence barely exists? And why don't conservatives - who should care about core freedoms by definition - fight for better protection of our freedom from police harassment and violence?
2
The Orwellian world of criminal justice is justice for all, but more justice for some than others.
I am not sure that the dangers of the job justify any leniency with respect to police conduct. If police are fearful and act out of fear, as if their first obligation is to "protect and serve" themselves, then they are in the wrong line of work.
I am quite sure that a police officer who gets shot at by one person on Monday is not entitled to administer "street justice" to another person on Tuesday. I am equally sure that the defenses that an officer thought that the victim had a weapon in his hand is as flimsy an excuse as there is. Anyone who knows about "testilying"--prosecutors and judges certainly do--should know that officers are no more honest, and often less so, than others under oath. Until public hero-worship is discredited, TV images of hearts-of-gold police officers are erased, and the legal protections which enable police abuse are removed, the police are never going to deliver "justice for all."
I am not sure that the dangers of the job justify any leniency with respect to police conduct. If police are fearful and act out of fear, as if their first obligation is to "protect and serve" themselves, then they are in the wrong line of work.
I am quite sure that a police officer who gets shot at by one person on Monday is not entitled to administer "street justice" to another person on Tuesday. I am equally sure that the defenses that an officer thought that the victim had a weapon in his hand is as flimsy an excuse as there is. Anyone who knows about "testilying"--prosecutors and judges certainly do--should know that officers are no more honest, and often less so, than others under oath. Until public hero-worship is discredited, TV images of hearts-of-gold police officers are erased, and the legal protections which enable police abuse are removed, the police are never going to deliver "justice for all."
1
Douthat makes the usual critique of public sector unions--that they prevent "accountability." This always begs the question as to who will hold them accountable, and how they will do this in the absence of due process protections for the public sector employee. Of course the answer is that politicians will be the ones enforcing this accountability, and does anyone believe that they will do this with complete regard for the individual employee's rights, rather than following the ideology ands prejudices of their political base? Of course not. This is why public sector employees need union protection as much if not more than employees of private businesses.
1
I agree with with you, Ross, partially. It is very true that the Unions have become a bane because of rotten apples in public services. As you mentioned the two Unions of Teachers and the Police have lead us down the garden path. Unions per se are not wrong in their ideals. But it falls way short when it does not separate the wheat from the chaff. Unions should also stand for quality of it's members with clear delineation of the paradigms. But that is not what's happening. And this causing havoc and tragedies. Unions in the private sector would be a great idea though. At this point in time, when the employees are being manipulated, resulting in them having to take up two or three jobs to put food on the table, living in constant dread of losing their job on the whim of the employer and sometimes having to turn to State largesse which also maybe denied because they are few millimeters above the poverty line. Yes, the 1% will cry foul but then Republicans should'nt mind because the State dole-out numbers will drop like a rock. But unfortunately they want to have their cake and eat it too!
3
This is a dexterous argument Mr. Douthat makes, and one of the best pieces I have read from him. What troubles me is that I fear the wholly legitimate complaints he registers here are a part of a broader attack on unions in our country. Public Sector unions are some of the last remaining vestiges of unionization in the US, and the decimation of labor unions is a contributing factor to the decline of American work-force. If we all agree that Police unions lead to unaccountability among the police, do we also take measures to buttress unions in non-public sectors of the economy where they stand to improve the lives of working Americans and provide a minimal fire-wall against the rapacious demands of a run-amok corporate elite? What about looking at ways to ensure cops and other public sector employees can organize and collectively bargain for fair working conditions and pay, but that don't prevent chain-of-command reigning in of bad behavior?
1
All the public sector unions are like this... the police are hardly exceptional.
It won't change though because Democrats need the public sector unions to hold on to power. In many states that is all that keeps them going. The unions organize for the party and funnel huge sums of money into the party coffers. Look at the fights we've had over whether the portion of the union dues that goes to political contributions is manditory. That is, many people in these unions have petitioned to only pay the portion of the dues that provides union services and not the portion that does political advocacy. In most cases, the workers are denied and forced to pay the full dues.
The democrats are addicted to this relationship and they can't stop. And I should further point out that the police are not going to be rattled by this talk. I have a family member in one of these unions and they're utterly fearless.
Republicans and democrats will have to unite to solve this problem... and I simply doubt the democrats have the moral courage to undermine their political power for a higher principle.
It won't change though because Democrats need the public sector unions to hold on to power. In many states that is all that keeps them going. The unions organize for the party and funnel huge sums of money into the party coffers. Look at the fights we've had over whether the portion of the union dues that goes to political contributions is manditory. That is, many people in these unions have petitioned to only pay the portion of the dues that provides union services and not the portion that does political advocacy. In most cases, the workers are denied and forced to pay the full dues.
The democrats are addicted to this relationship and they can't stop. And I should further point out that the police are not going to be rattled by this talk. I have a family member in one of these unions and they're utterly fearless.
Republicans and democrats will have to unite to solve this problem... and I simply doubt the democrats have the moral courage to undermine their political power for a higher principle.
1
It's not a firing issue as much as a hiring issue. The war on crime, the war on drugs and the political motivation to turn our cities into militarized encampments has increased the need for more police. Training and certification are expensive and take time. In order to fill the empty slots police forces hire cops that left another job because of bad behavior. It is cheaper and more expedient to hire an officer who is already certified.
The culture of militarization and aggression has been a recruiting billboard for the most aggressive and violent personalities. Unions do not do the hiring.
Ross argues that doing away with Broken Windows might catch the naive by surprise. I would argue that the believers of Broken Windows policies have been naive not to see what results these years of suppression of the black population would bring.
The culture of militarization and aggression has been a recruiting billboard for the most aggressive and violent personalities. Unions do not do the hiring.
Ross argues that doing away with Broken Windows might catch the naive by surprise. I would argue that the believers of Broken Windows policies have been naive not to see what results these years of suppression of the black population would bring.
The police and fire unions and the rank and file have mounted a non-stop propaganda campaign running on for decades that basically pushes a false premise: That police and fire work are extremely dangerous occupations.
Not true. Statistically both are extremely safe occupations. Practical Nurses, tree trimmers, open ocean fishing, and a host of other jobs are much more hazardous. This false premise is promoted to gain pay and benefits. It, like police honesty, is never questioned by the media, or as Mr Douthat correctly points out, most conservatives and most politicians of any stripe.
NYT readers should know that the AVERAGE San Francisco fire fighter takes home more than 300K per year in pay and benefits. They work 24 on 48 off, shop on public time, (taking their trucks with them), and manipulate their schedules to artificially generate excess overtime. The police are equally guilty of these manipulations.
Near retirement, both departments manipulate overtime to artificially engorge their very generous pensions. They can retire with full benefits at 55. They call this "spiking". We call it fraud. If anyone reading this behaved this way in the private sector, they would be fired and maybe sued for embezzlement. It really constitutes a felony as defined under the Rico Act.
Check the website Transparent California. For example, our chief of police took home $425,815.28 in 2013. One paramedic: $331,743.01, including $132,615.09 in overtime.
Not bad?
Not true. Statistically both are extremely safe occupations. Practical Nurses, tree trimmers, open ocean fishing, and a host of other jobs are much more hazardous. This false premise is promoted to gain pay and benefits. It, like police honesty, is never questioned by the media, or as Mr Douthat correctly points out, most conservatives and most politicians of any stripe.
NYT readers should know that the AVERAGE San Francisco fire fighter takes home more than 300K per year in pay and benefits. They work 24 on 48 off, shop on public time, (taking their trucks with them), and manipulate their schedules to artificially generate excess overtime. The police are equally guilty of these manipulations.
Near retirement, both departments manipulate overtime to artificially engorge their very generous pensions. They can retire with full benefits at 55. They call this "spiking". We call it fraud. If anyone reading this behaved this way in the private sector, they would be fired and maybe sued for embezzlement. It really constitutes a felony as defined under the Rico Act.
Check the website Transparent California. For example, our chief of police took home $425,815.28 in 2013. One paramedic: $331,743.01, including $132,615.09 in overtime.
Not bad?
5
I seldom agree with Mr D. but he's right about what has happened because of the prison guards unions influence in California, and I suspect the rest of these comments. There are two problems not addressed. First, the "broken windows" policing policies may have helped reduce crime, but they are unfairly applied and enforced in communities of color. White teen drug users, or misdemeanor violators, or rioting youth aren't arrested or convicted at the same rates, resulting in the "New Jim Crow". The numbers of black men incarcerated or with arrest records doesn't reflect the incidence of those crimes overall. It reflects that white men get probation and black men go to jail. Second, power centers need counterbalancing forces. Unions were, and are, a necessary voice for working people in the face of powerful capital and corporatist drivers to minimize cost and maximize profit (or the political need to pander to same). They have raised the boats of the middle class everywhere, and we need them if we aren't going to just take whatever the mega wealthy want to hand out. But, they have their own need for balance and blind protection of any member isn't the best stance for a public entity. It should more focus on insisting on due process.
the police union like all other unions are there to protect the interest of their members. As such their roles are not different from the roles of defense attorneys or advocates for the accused. I cannot fault them for that. What I can fault is the roles of prosecuting attorneys such as Donovan in Staten Island who develop a cozy hand in hand relationship with the police. These prosecutors should function also as public advocates and advocates for the truth regardless of whether it implicates police in wrongdoing.i also fault the excessive tribalism in our society. there is no doubt in my mind that in the upcoming trials of the Baltimore officers, the number one factor that will influence whether or not they are convicted, is the zip code where the trials are going to be held. if the defense attorneys succeed in getting a change of venue and the trials are held under all white juries exoneration of these officers is inevitable regardless of the evidence. the question is how did we get here to such an unjust system.
1
For once I actually agree with Ross. I am a firm believer in the rights of all employees to be able to negotiate the terms of their employment from a position of equal power - which means unions. But police officers hold a completely unique place in our society. They are the only people that we the public grant the power of life and death over ourselves and our fellow citizens. As such, the question when and how to use that power can never be considered a negotiable "bargaining position". Society cannot continue to permit police unions to interfere with the investigation and prosecution (when necessary) of police lawbreaking.
24
It is risible for man who defends the rights of corporations to rent legislators and buy judges to be upset that public sector unions defend their members. In fact, if the union did not defend the employees it represents it would be sued by those employees for failing to represent them.
Both federal and state law require unions to protect the contractual rights of all bargaining unit members, and that includes the right to due process when there are complaints against those employees. Union officials cannot even ask whether the people who are requesting their assistance are members of the union or people who enjoy the benefits the union provides without paying a dime of their own money.
The rules requiring unions to defend all bargaining union members without even examining the justice of their cases is one that was instituted by anti-union politicians. It is not even a tad ironic that Mr. Douthat and others of his partisan persuasion are using the laws they pushed politicians to write in order to beat up public sector unions for complying with those very laws.
Both federal and state law require unions to protect the contractual rights of all bargaining unit members, and that includes the right to due process when there are complaints against those employees. Union officials cannot even ask whether the people who are requesting their assistance are members of the union or people who enjoy the benefits the union provides without paying a dime of their own money.
The rules requiring unions to defend all bargaining union members without even examining the justice of their cases is one that was instituted by anti-union politicians. It is not even a tad ironic that Mr. Douthat and others of his partisan persuasion are using the laws they pushed politicians to write in order to beat up public sector unions for complying with those very laws.
Public sector unions (not their members) have proven themselves a cancer. Electing politicians who will give them what they want, resisting change, serving themselves first, wasting billions of dollars of the public's money. Shameful. One simply cannot draw up a list of what needs to change in America and not include them. We'll never get ahead without pointing fingers at the left and right.
Jidging by this nonsense, the "middle," is where the problem is.
The writer concludes with an "us" and "them" approach. No problem there, right?
1
Depending on what community or city, police unions are strong or weak but always corrupt.
I have witnessed all shades of cops misbehave (equally).
The problem is power! The more power one has the more it needs to be monitored, corrected, scrutinized, updated, etc.
Training is another issue and another problem. Like the military, this profession attracts certain types of personalities. Training has to address this.
Everything we are seeing today is not new. What is new is that technology has enabled the world to see everything with much alacrity!
I have witnessed all shades of cops misbehave (equally).
The problem is power! The more power one has the more it needs to be monitored, corrected, scrutinized, updated, etc.
Training is another issue and another problem. Like the military, this profession attracts certain types of personalities. Training has to address this.
Everything we are seeing today is not new. What is new is that technology has enabled the world to see everything with much alacrity!
1
The same argument applies to all the other public sector unions such as Teachers, Municipal workers and state government employees. The elected representative cannot effectively negotiate with organizations that helped them get elected in the first place. Because there is collusion between the elected representatives and the employee representatives that they are supposed to be negotiating with, a lot of what gets paid is hidden from public view in terms of early retirement benefits, double dipping and inflated pensions.
2
Thank you for addressing an obvious and growing problem with the rise of public sector unions. Something that even Franklin Roosevelt decried.
Fairness in the workplace is all about the balance of power. As you point out, public sector unions (including teachers) have little opposing them at the bargaining table - and that creates big problems. On the other side of the coin, the gain in bargaining power by management in the private sector has destroyed a large part of the "middle class dream" in America. "C-level" pay, in particular, is wildly out of control and needs to be reigned in, ideally by increasing stakeholder (not government) influence. Perhaps we should seriously consider adopting the German practice of having labor represented on all corporate boards.
Fairness in the workplace is all about the balance of power. As you point out, public sector unions (including teachers) have little opposing them at the bargaining table - and that creates big problems. On the other side of the coin, the gain in bargaining power by management in the private sector has destroyed a large part of the "middle class dream" in America. "C-level" pay, in particular, is wildly out of control and needs to be reigned in, ideally by increasing stakeholder (not government) influence. Perhaps we should seriously consider adopting the German practice of having labor represented on all corporate boards.
5
Union dues equals contributions for Democrat politicians. Are Democrats responsible for anything?
3
While there're some good points here (the prison construction in California was disgraceful, though it was pushed by PRIVATE companies as much as it was by a union), there's also a lot of error and, well, ignorance.
Want to know how you end up with lousy cops, and teachers for that matter? Lousy recruitment, lousy education, lousy hiring practices--none of which unions control. Look at the Cleveland rookie who killed the kid; how'd it escape the administration's notice that he'd been canned as completely unfit to be a cop elsewhere?
Want to know how lousy cops, and lousy teachers for that matter, keep their job? Bad evaluation practices, lazy documentation by administrators, administrators who can't be bothered to fill out the forms and take the action properly.
Then the hooraw starts, and the union is somehow the bad guy, because it sticks up for due process and the agreed-upon rules.
Sorry and all, and of course there are problems. But it has been my esperience that behind every lousy employee,nthere are a minimum of three administrators who dodn't want to do their job.
Want to know how you end up with lousy cops, and teachers for that matter? Lousy recruitment, lousy education, lousy hiring practices--none of which unions control. Look at the Cleveland rookie who killed the kid; how'd it escape the administration's notice that he'd been canned as completely unfit to be a cop elsewhere?
Want to know how lousy cops, and lousy teachers for that matter, keep their job? Bad evaluation practices, lazy documentation by administrators, administrators who can't be bothered to fill out the forms and take the action properly.
Then the hooraw starts, and the union is somehow the bad guy, because it sticks up for due process and the agreed-upon rules.
Sorry and all, and of course there are problems. But it has been my esperience that behind every lousy employee,nthere are a minimum of three administrators who dodn't want to do their job.
6
You actually make the case for unions. Yes, there is one part of statewide coffers from which allocations are made but imagine the lobbying forces not of the unions but the private sector demanding more of the budget be directed their clients interests.
We need to make the police, the teachers, the sanitation workers, etc., professions that will attract a forward looking group of men and women. Sure, I'm been appalled by what we have seen on TV but it doesn't speak to the systemic, underlying root cause. It starts from birth and until we have a lower class of citizens presented with the same opportunities others such as I had in child care and education we are simply "painting over rust," to use my own professional metaphor.
Our issuers are systemic. Visible calm will only improve when generations, this one or the next, or the one after that, realize that we need to BE a nation that asks what you may do for your country. Sure, I worked hard, I was successful, I'm in retirement. However, none of that would have been possible without having the opportunities of a white guy. It was a given for me.
Nope, we need unions to protect our professionals because you simply can't trust political appointees to treat them as they should.
Answer the question, "Why" do we have racial issues? The answer is not on the surface, it's far below and one tight ember.
We need to make the police, the teachers, the sanitation workers, etc., professions that will attract a forward looking group of men and women. Sure, I'm been appalled by what we have seen on TV but it doesn't speak to the systemic, underlying root cause. It starts from birth and until we have a lower class of citizens presented with the same opportunities others such as I had in child care and education we are simply "painting over rust," to use my own professional metaphor.
Our issuers are systemic. Visible calm will only improve when generations, this one or the next, or the one after that, realize that we need to BE a nation that asks what you may do for your country. Sure, I worked hard, I was successful, I'm in retirement. However, none of that would have been possible without having the opportunities of a white guy. It was a given for me.
Nope, we need unions to protect our professionals because you simply can't trust political appointees to treat them as they should.
Answer the question, "Why" do we have racial issues? The answer is not on the surface, it's far below and one tight ember.
3
Police unions are indeed a problem. Part of the snowballing imprisonment dynamic is because of police seeking to preserve their jobs. Example: In 1996, the people of California passed Referendum 215, which made medical marijuana legal for the first time since the 1930's. The main contributors to the forces seeking to block the Referendum? Not public health or safety groups. Instead it was the California police union, seeking to protect prison-guard jobs at the expense of suffering medical patients.
Unions in general do a lot of good by helping to offset the awesome power advantage large corporate employers have in worker contract negotiations. Police have 'way too much power as it is, though, and they definitely should not be able to gang up together and blackmail the public into yet more pro-prison policies.
Unions in general do a lot of good by helping to offset the awesome power advantage large corporate employers have in worker contract negotiations. Police have 'way too much power as it is, though, and they definitely should not be able to gang up together and blackmail the public into yet more pro-prison policies.
2
The problem with defense attorneys is that,no matter what their clients are accused of, they defend them. Unions are the defense attorneys of the workers.
Any workplace that does not have a union has a dictatorial government in place. All workers are entitled to collective bargaining. It is a flaw in our republic that all work places do not have collective bargaining so as to make real our form of government. Each worker has to have as much control of their workplace as does each citizen. Arguments against unions are all anti-democratic and pro-dictatorship style governance.
There are abuses in all governments and all unions. That is why participation in our government and your union is required for each to work. Corruption is always at the door and vigilance is essential to prevent abuse.
Douthat and other conservatives want to use the civil rights, and abuse of police power to attack the unions. They want us to imagine that it is the police unions rather than the Republican "southern strategy" that perpetuates racism in America. Thinly veiled attacks on our Black "Kenyan, Muslim, Foreign, Socialist" President is racist. That's right. Open season on Black men is re-enforced by high level disrespect, contempt, and scorn of our Black President. Most of us already know this, but the news is constantly spun to mean the fault is "unions, poor moral character, or laziness." Instead it is racist hatred, greed, and manipulative politicians and their pundits.
Any workplace that does not have a union has a dictatorial government in place. All workers are entitled to collective bargaining. It is a flaw in our republic that all work places do not have collective bargaining so as to make real our form of government. Each worker has to have as much control of their workplace as does each citizen. Arguments against unions are all anti-democratic and pro-dictatorship style governance.
There are abuses in all governments and all unions. That is why participation in our government and your union is required for each to work. Corruption is always at the door and vigilance is essential to prevent abuse.
Douthat and other conservatives want to use the civil rights, and abuse of police power to attack the unions. They want us to imagine that it is the police unions rather than the Republican "southern strategy" that perpetuates racism in America. Thinly veiled attacks on our Black "Kenyan, Muslim, Foreign, Socialist" President is racist. That's right. Open season on Black men is re-enforced by high level disrespect, contempt, and scorn of our Black President. Most of us already know this, but the news is constantly spun to mean the fault is "unions, poor moral character, or laziness." Instead it is racist hatred, greed, and manipulative politicians and their pundits.
5
There is a valid opposing view that claims unchecked, top-down power in the public sector leads to corporate abuses. Unionized workers serve as a check and balance to public sector "CEOs" that could get manipulated by for profit ideas that short-change the tax-payer at the expense of the citizen.
A good example is the push-back unionized teachers are giving to the standardized test regime. Corporate interests like that test regime because it makes them money. But is it good for students? Thank goodness teachers have some protection to strike and change this--if needed.
As far as police officers, unions hopefully ensure better pay, more job security, better retirement, and better equipment. These ensure that officers feel respected while risking their lives to serve us. Take those securities away, and who wants to risk their lives?
No, unions are essential for these public sector jobs that don't necessarily create direct profit, but add to the value of every community. Unionize these workers so they can check vested corporate interests that may want to take advantage at the expense of the worker, and, therefore, the tax-payer.
A good example is the push-back unionized teachers are giving to the standardized test regime. Corporate interests like that test regime because it makes them money. But is it good for students? Thank goodness teachers have some protection to strike and change this--if needed.
As far as police officers, unions hopefully ensure better pay, more job security, better retirement, and better equipment. These ensure that officers feel respected while risking their lives to serve us. Take those securities away, and who wants to risk their lives?
No, unions are essential for these public sector jobs that don't necessarily create direct profit, but add to the value of every community. Unionize these workers so they can check vested corporate interests that may want to take advantage at the expense of the worker, and, therefore, the tax-payer.
4
how can the cops even tell if the windows are broken if they can't be bothered to get out of their cars and walk the beat? also, let's subsidize homes/apartments within their precinct as part of cops' pay.
1
I was reading this week about the upcoming congressional election in Staten Island.It told me of a congressional district in the city of New York that was so overwhelmingly populated with police and firemen that it voted GOP in a city where many districts vote over 90% Democratic. I asked myself why and the only thing I could think of is Joseph Raymond McCarthy and Ronald Wilson Reagan.
There was a time when Reagan was a staunch liberal, where Reagan accepted a world where we respected differences in opinion , politics and culture. That Ronald Reagan understood that diversity was America's strength and that Reagan became the head of the screen Actors Guild.
Then along Joe and the country and world has never been the same. Today's GOP is the party of us and them. Just as Reagan was able to become a loyal member of the GOP and commit to expanding the Hollywood Blacklist, America suddenly became the country of us and them.
Inch by inch being American became more pigeon holing and less inclusive. Suddenly we could exclude Atheists and Agnostics as we added "under God" to the pledge. McCarthy and his friends had learned a lot from the first half of the 20th century but chief among the lessons were divide and conquer and how to threaten and bully.
Maybe it is time to get rid of McCarthy's GOP and get back the Republican Party of Jacob Javits before we Inherit the Wind. My people are not Eastern Liberal Intellectuals they are 100% Americans.
There was a time when Reagan was a staunch liberal, where Reagan accepted a world where we respected differences in opinion , politics and culture. That Ronald Reagan understood that diversity was America's strength and that Reagan became the head of the screen Actors Guild.
Then along Joe and the country and world has never been the same. Today's GOP is the party of us and them. Just as Reagan was able to become a loyal member of the GOP and commit to expanding the Hollywood Blacklist, America suddenly became the country of us and them.
Inch by inch being American became more pigeon holing and less inclusive. Suddenly we could exclude Atheists and Agnostics as we added "under God" to the pledge. McCarthy and his friends had learned a lot from the first half of the 20th century but chief among the lessons were divide and conquer and how to threaten and bully.
Maybe it is time to get rid of McCarthy's GOP and get back the Republican Party of Jacob Javits before we Inherit the Wind. My people are not Eastern Liberal Intellectuals they are 100% Americans.
5
"Aggressive policing is bad policing"
Aggressive policing is necessary policing. It - along with tough sentencing - is whwhat made it safe to walk down the street in America after dark again.
Aggressive policing is necessary policing. It - along with tough sentencing - is whwhat made it safe to walk down the street in America after dark again.
1
No it hasn't. It has created ghettos in the pre-WWII style, where an occupying force is sent in to quell and oppress a very select group of people. It has accomplished only institutional terror on a group of citizens. It has not created one job. It has not brought hope, it has brought the despair of the oppressed. "Random" stop and frisk is a method that has been used by bullies everywhere.
Unlike the private sector, all Americans own and have a stake in the public sector.
What public sector unions do thus represents the collective will of the people standing as a bulwark against the ultimate threat to American values and interests. The insidious incestuous infectious corrupt criminal crony capitalist cancerous corporate plutocrat oligarchs who wish to metastasize and graft themselves on and in to every nook and cranny and orifice and organ of Uncle Sam. Founding and forming government -industrial complexes everywhere all of the time they are white-boned demons.
What public sector unions do thus represents the collective will of the people standing as a bulwark against the ultimate threat to American values and interests. The insidious incestuous infectious corrupt criminal crony capitalist cancerous corporate plutocrat oligarchs who wish to metastasize and graft themselves on and in to every nook and cranny and orifice and organ of Uncle Sam. Founding and forming government -industrial complexes everywhere all of the time they are white-boned demons.
2
Any union that functions as a voice for workers is legitimate. Workers have access to no other organized voice speaking for a common cause among workers. In case it has not been generally recognized workers have lost wage growth, pensions, vacation time, sick leave, affordable health care, jobs etc. since the decline of unions began during the realm of Ronald Reagan. Republican politicians are interested in the specific welfare of wealthy and privileged citizens not the citizen workers who do work for wealthy and privileged. We elect leaders to provide for the general welfare of all citizens not a specific few who republicans claim are endowed with special assets that override the general welfare of all citizens including those who work and those who do not work or cannot work. Unions speak for all citizens even bad cops but then the wealthy and privileged are not all good as conservatives would have the rest of us believe.
2
Please explain to me how the right supports 'law and order'? The radical right is exactly that--radical--and eager to obliterate all kinds of law and order. Gun control? They had it in the old West, but not apparently for the 21st century when killing kids with automatic weapons is OK and carrying concealed weapons in bars and campuses is just grand. Police, by the way, oppose most of this dangerous and unwarranted 'freedoms'. Watch Fox News praise ranchers and companies who refuse to listen to judges, law enforcement or the IRS. Where is the law and order in all this? No, the right has abdicated any role in adult society and are completely in control of the sandbox. They are as dangerous as out-of-control police unions.
12
Is excessive use of force a function of unions? Or is it a domestic reflection of our excessive use of force in foreign policy? Although excessive and unaccountable use of force is a longer term problem, what have been the consequences of militarization of our police forces since 9/11/2001, not only in equipment but in tactics, training and doctrine (often supplied by our greatest democratic ally in the Middle East), as the Military Industrial Security Complex (Or M.I.S.C., otherwise known as "Whatever, Inc.") entrepreneurially discovered new domestic markets.
Brought to us with greatest enthusiasm by an ever more rogue and unaccountably financed public employees union, Douthat's Republican Party.
Brought to us with greatest enthusiasm by an ever more rogue and unaccountably financed public employees union, Douthat's Republican Party.
3
I am sure this has been said elsewhere but all other client oriented professions such as medicine, law, Accounting, teaching have processes of redress and delicensing. In Maryland it is law that a police officer cannot be removed or something of that nature. IT is not as if one cannot be replaced.
An American History professor of mine once said, "There's nothing inherently wrong with business, government or unions. The problem starts when you put 'big' in front of their name...big business, big government, big labor."
Undoubtably unions have overstepped but who looks out for the little guy when Big Business has bought Big Government? Unions are the last bastion of the middle class. It always bugs when Republicans rail, as Mr. Douthat has done, on the outsized voice of unions. At least that's a collective voice representing thousands. Sheldon Adleson and the Kochs have individual sound systems hotwired directly into Congress.
Undoubtably unions have overstepped but who looks out for the little guy when Big Business has bought Big Government? Unions are the last bastion of the middle class. It always bugs when Republicans rail, as Mr. Douthat has done, on the outsized voice of unions. At least that's a collective voice representing thousands. Sheldon Adleson and the Kochs have individual sound systems hotwired directly into Congress.
7
I worked over 30 years in the private sector with out the "protection" of a union. My job security was tied to the how much value I added to the organization I worked for. It all turned out fine in the end. It was not easy; I needed to continually learn new skills, go toe to toe with some bad managers, always adapting... always looking at the landscape and determining how I needed to change my approach. I had a successful 30 years. It was because of me, not a union threatening my employer! It's a great feeling of accomplishment on my part. If you are in a union, you don't get that level of accomplishment. You always had daddy (union) to run to your rescue. With that said, I have the utmost respect for our police forces. We need to treat them very well and pay them very well. They deserve it.
1
I'm happy that it 'turned out fine' for you John, and I agree with much of what you said. But it doesn't necessarily 'turn out fine' for everybody and there certainly isn't due process in the private sector. If I may share, in my case, I was able to get some satisfaction in court.
I am a civil servant and work with the homeless mentally ill. I chose that line of work because I believe in public mental health, even though I could have made a higher salary in the private sector. In exchange for spending a lifetime working in situations and with people others would avoid and walk by, I have good benefits and a pension. I would like to see Scott Walker work where I work.
About the police. We have given them the right to bear arms in order to protect us and enforce our laws. Police also do the job that no one else wants to do, but there are issues when we learn what individual and group savage acts they are capable of. Allegiance is to the uniform not to the law, so that when one officer starts something like an illegal choke hold, the rest jump in rather than stop him, as in the Garner case. The Tunnel to Towers organization donated money to cover the mortgages of the families of the two murdered police officers. Who is paying for the mortgage of Eric Garner who was supporting his family and was fine until his interaction with the police? What about his children?
The police get to delay being interrogated after an incident, and delay or avoid breathalyzer tests on the road, especially if stopped by someone who knows them, and get to build their pensions by working many extra shifts in their last years of employment. One has to wonder if some of the tragic shooting incidents with poor judgement are a result of lack of sleep.
About the police. We have given them the right to bear arms in order to protect us and enforce our laws. Police also do the job that no one else wants to do, but there are issues when we learn what individual and group savage acts they are capable of. Allegiance is to the uniform not to the law, so that when one officer starts something like an illegal choke hold, the rest jump in rather than stop him, as in the Garner case. The Tunnel to Towers organization donated money to cover the mortgages of the families of the two murdered police officers. Who is paying for the mortgage of Eric Garner who was supporting his family and was fine until his interaction with the police? What about his children?
The police get to delay being interrogated after an incident, and delay or avoid breathalyzer tests on the road, especially if stopped by someone who knows them, and get to build their pensions by working many extra shifts in their last years of employment. One has to wonder if some of the tragic shooting incidents with poor judgement are a result of lack of sleep.
6
Much of the conservative take against unions is basically making the obvious case that people with power often abuse it. Let's see how the argument goes if we replace "unions" with "banks".
1) Financial services are important. We can't afford to have them going out of business because of bad decisions.
2) Bank's profits belong to shareholders, not management. Negotiation with politicians amounts to division of spoils: Management gets to pay themselves what ever they want, gov makes it difficult for shareholders to do anything about it, and politicians get generous donations to their next campaign.
3) Bank lobbying power biases public-policy decisions toward the interests of bank employees. Regulations are bad when they get in the way of them deciding how big their leveraged bets should be or how deceptive their marketing. Regulations are good when they limit the ability of new entrants into the market.
These points add up to a strong argument that the rise of banks represents a decadent phase in the history of the welfare state, a case study in the warping influence of self-dealing and interest-group politics. That and based on a "power corrupts" argument you can make the case for banning everything.
1) Financial services are important. We can't afford to have them going out of business because of bad decisions.
2) Bank's profits belong to shareholders, not management. Negotiation with politicians amounts to division of spoils: Management gets to pay themselves what ever they want, gov makes it difficult for shareholders to do anything about it, and politicians get generous donations to their next campaign.
3) Bank lobbying power biases public-policy decisions toward the interests of bank employees. Regulations are bad when they get in the way of them deciding how big their leveraged bets should be or how deceptive their marketing. Regulations are good when they limit the ability of new entrants into the market.
These points add up to a strong argument that the rise of banks represents a decadent phase in the history of the welfare state, a case study in the warping influence of self-dealing and interest-group politics. That and based on a "power corrupts" argument you can make the case for banning everything.
8
Union dues mean union's do's.
3
Douthat credits the conservative position on public sector unions with intellectual integrity, but the conservative case against unions has nothing to do with whether unions "serve the common good." The conservative case against unions is pure power politics: unions favor labor, and conservatives favor capital. Not just that, but public sector unions are effective advocates - too effective for conservatives to beat on the merits alone, so unions must be gutted.
Police unions, on the other hand, are useful to conservatives. Police unions' pro-labor advocacy is mitigated by the unions' more conservative positions on law enforcement and related social issues. In short, police unions support conservative candidates and causes much more often than other public sector unions.
That and that alone is why conservatives exempt police unions from their demonization of public sector unions.
politicsbyeccehomo.wordpress.com
Police unions, on the other hand, are useful to conservatives. Police unions' pro-labor advocacy is mitigated by the unions' more conservative positions on law enforcement and related social issues. In short, police unions support conservative candidates and causes much more often than other public sector unions.
That and that alone is why conservatives exempt police unions from their demonization of public sector unions.
politicsbyeccehomo.wordpress.com
10
One of your better columns Mr. Douthat. You started off strongly, making solid points about how Police unions are a hindrance to holding police officers accountable. But you had to close it out with that supposition that unnecessary policing - usually waged only on poor urban minorities - reduced crimes. No! Would you welcome such policing in your backyard and around your kid?
As for unions, I iam in support of them. Workers - public and private - need a larger body to advocate for them against their employers who is usually more powerful. It is the employers that need to learn to hold their grounds when the union demands are unreasonable or imprudent. The unions are not the problem, the state governments are.
As for unions, I iam in support of them. Workers - public and private - need a larger body to advocate for them against their employers who is usually more powerful. It is the employers that need to learn to hold their grounds when the union demands are unreasonable or imprudent. The unions are not the problem, the state governments are.
1
If you think public employee unions are in any way useful, helpful or valuable in this country for anything other than fleecing taxpayers and lining the pockets of public employees, you really need to get a clue.
Do some research next time, here's a start:
http://www.amazon.com/Government-against-Itself-Public-Consequences/dp/0...
Do some research next time, here's a start:
http://www.amazon.com/Government-against-Itself-Public-Consequences/dp/0...
Who would be in charge of removing individual police officers from their jobs? The local police chief, I suspect. Perhaps a board of police personnel, or Internal Affairs. In any event, the police officer will likely have no voice in protecting himself. That is were Unions have a place in the world. The worker bees of the world are vulnerable to abuse. "Conservatives" (ie conservatives with money) believe that market forces always predict the best outcomes. (Like 50% or more of food expenditures go to restaurants?) Low labor cost and labor malleability is the variable that the market and conservatives seem always to preserve. Human nature is constant. Management shorts labor, labor forms Unions, Unions get powerful, watchdogs watch unions, politicians make rhetoric, pundits have to meet a deadline. Unions are not inherently a bad idea.
3
Id like to see Union bashing end its the only thing keeping the middle class afloat in this country. And I'd like you to point the finger at the responsible party for why poorly qualified employees stay employed-that's right it's administrations in police, fire, education, heck you can even add German airlines! Those people with their much larger salaries and matching 401k plans who don't do the job they were hired to do. And as for due process it's what separates our justice system from the far inferior systems of many other countries. Those at the top need to start working and stop blaming the workers...there is abuse in many systems but again those at the top are just as responsible as those in rank and file jobs-
2
It's interesting that conservative America loves the police until policemen want to be paid and treated fairly.
Public sector unions are NOT in place to serve the public good, but to advocate for their members.
What the union bashers will never acknowledge is that before unionization, being a policeman, or a fireman, or a teacher meant that you had a lousy job.
Public sector unions are NOT in place to serve the public good, but to advocate for their members.
What the union bashers will never acknowledge is that before unionization, being a policeman, or a fireman, or a teacher meant that you had a lousy job.
8
Uh, I am deeply conservative, and despise ALL public employee unions. If you and the other liberals had the slightest clue as as to how much damage they are doing to the tax base - how many billions they are literally stealing from budget items such as education and infrastructure - you'd be screaming louder against them than I am.
NYC is spending more on retired cops' pensions than it is on the current workforce. Its pension costs overall went from $1 BBN to $10 BBN in less than 10 years, and continues to exponentially rise - how long do you think that that is sustainable?
For some real information on public employees either Daniel DiSalvo, or this article by another outstanding source:
http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_2_california-unions.html
NYC is spending more on retired cops' pensions than it is on the current workforce. Its pension costs overall went from $1 BBN to $10 BBN in less than 10 years, and continues to exponentially rise - how long do you think that that is sustainable?
For some real information on public employees either Daniel DiSalvo, or this article by another outstanding source:
http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_2_california-unions.html
The behavior of policemen in relation to their circling of the wagons to protect each other has nothing to do with unions. My father was a policeman from the forties to the seventies, much of it pre-union, and I can assure you that policemen were insular when it came to dealing with the public. Everyone has an innate resistance to authority and no one likes to be pulled over by a policeman or told to move along etc. After a while policemen grow tired of being resented and quit associating with non-policemen. They circle the wagons and become quite insular. If you are always dealing with the underbelly of society and being resented by the rest you withdraw.
On the union issue, when my father was hired he got a badge and a gun. He had to buy everything else. He had to go to court on his own time and work six days a week. The only way to improve matters was organizing as the politicians weren't about to pay policemen more that factory workers (my dad took a pay cut to join the force).
Unions are for the members not the public and are only as strong as management is weak. Unions do not hire anyone and have a responsibility to represent their members. If we could count on fairness in the workplace no one would have conceived of unions.
On the union issue, when my father was hired he got a badge and a gun. He had to buy everything else. He had to go to court on his own time and work six days a week. The only way to improve matters was organizing as the politicians weren't about to pay policemen more that factory workers (my dad took a pay cut to join the force).
Unions are for the members not the public and are only as strong as management is weak. Unions do not hire anyone and have a responsibility to represent their members. If we could count on fairness in the workplace no one would have conceived of unions.
6
Next time you pass an accident on the highway look who is wearing high visibility gear. Everyone except the police. Why don't the police wear high visibility clothing like everyone else? Ask them.
1
In New York City, which has strong teachers' and police unions, unsatisfactory teachers who cannot be fired are sent to a "rubber room," a place where they sit for the length of the school day, not teaching, but they receive their pay and do no harm. Perhaps the same practice can protect the public from unsatisfactory police. The teachers' "rubber room" has outraged taxpayers (including flaming liberals such as me) and is an interim solution at best, but given the high threat to public (especially black public) safety by armed but unaccountable civil servants, it is something to try.
4
There is one large difference between the situations that affect members of police unions, compared to teachers' unions: the huge differential between the frequency of coming across "good" students and the frequency of coming across "good" criminals.
What this article lacks - as do many that analyze the situation - is the attribution of responsibility for the situation that involve the police: if criminals would stop being "bad", it would greatly reduce the friction points between police and criminals.
What this article lacks - as do many that analyze the situation - is the attribution of responsibility for the situation that involve the police: if criminals would stop being "bad", it would greatly reduce the friction points between police and criminals.
2
Indeed, let's start breaking the power of public employee unions.
Starting with Republicans and Democrats.
Starting with Republicans and Democrats.
5
If you don't believe the riots in Baltimore influenced the decision to prosecute six psychopathic cops you're delusional. Peaceful protest only works when there is violence or the threat of violence behind it or associated with it. MLK's march over the Edmund Pettus Bridge would have gone unnoticed if it wasn't for the actions of Bull Conner and the Alabama state police. Black author Walther Moseley said the watershed moment in American civil rights was the Watts riots in 1965. If those cops aren't convicted, expect Baltimore to burn to the ground.
1
Douthat: "the government’s money is not its own". True. The government's money comes from taxpayers and bond-holders.
But also true: A corporation's money is not its own. A corporation's money comes from customers and stock- and bond-holders.
A customer might choose not to buy a product, and similarly a citizen might choose not to pay taxes: as Mitt Romney famously pointed out, simply hold your taxable income below a certain amount (e.g. by making sufficient charitable donations) and your income tax will be zero.
In other words, the situation with governments and corporations is exactly the same. Why, then, do conservatives denigrate the government and exalt the corporation?
But also true: A corporation's money is not its own. A corporation's money comes from customers and stock- and bond-holders.
A customer might choose not to buy a product, and similarly a citizen might choose not to pay taxes: as Mitt Romney famously pointed out, simply hold your taxable income below a certain amount (e.g. by making sufficient charitable donations) and your income tax will be zero.
In other words, the situation with governments and corporations is exactly the same. Why, then, do conservatives denigrate the government and exalt the corporation?
6
You do not understand economics, which is why you think a taxing government is somehow equivalent to a corporation. As a consumer. I can choose to shop elsewhere, and few employees have the ability to reduce their income to survive, pay bills, and thereby "reduce" their taxable income. What a .01%-er like Mitt Romney does is not applicable to the other 99.95% of the workforce.
That said, as a taxpayer, I cannot choose a different sanitation department, subway system, or police force, so i am stuck with what the government offers, and it has a responsibility to use as little of my tax dollars as possible for those services, which public employees work against.
That said, as a taxpayer, I cannot choose a different sanitation department, subway system, or police force, so i am stuck with what the government offers, and it has a responsibility to use as little of my tax dollars as possible for those services, which public employees work against.
Congratulations, Mr Dothan: in four short paragraphs you have summarized one of the most pressing crises to confront our society since Al Shanker shut down the New York school system in 1968.
And yet, where is the will, let alone the votes, to end this system of formalized ransoming of the republic and where are your fellow NYT columnists carrying this same banner?
My grandfather was one of the founders of the pressmen's union in the early twentieth century when pressroom fatalities were commonplace and work rules nonexistent. Unions served as a counterweight to the power of unbridled capitalism, and private sector unions have done much to civilize the work place. There is a place for unions, but the public sector, where issues of this nature are settled at the ballot box, is not one of them.
Thank you for a inestimable public service.
And yet, where is the will, let alone the votes, to end this system of formalized ransoming of the republic and where are your fellow NYT columnists carrying this same banner?
My grandfather was one of the founders of the pressmen's union in the early twentieth century when pressroom fatalities were commonplace and work rules nonexistent. Unions served as a counterweight to the power of unbridled capitalism, and private sector unions have done much to civilize the work place. There is a place for unions, but the public sector, where issues of this nature are settled at the ballot box, is not one of them.
Thank you for a inestimable public service.
6
The right needs the support of the police to enforce the protection of privilege and the maintenance of inequality. It doesn't need the support of teachers. In fact the weakening of the educational system serves their ends by keeping large numbers of people from forming a political group that can reason.
7
What we have to remember---and forget at our peril--is the idea that the government's money is our money.
The old adage about getting what you pay for applies here.
If you want excellent public service employees, then show them the money!
If you want to attract the best people to educate your children and protect you from bad people, then put your money where your mouth is.
Don't get trapped in this left vs. right, union vs. right-to-work, circular firing squad argument.
The old adage about getting what you pay for applies here.
If you want excellent public service employees, then show them the money!
If you want to attract the best people to educate your children and protect you from bad people, then put your money where your mouth is.
Don't get trapped in this left vs. right, union vs. right-to-work, circular firing squad argument.
7
Mark Sumner on dailykos: "Trying to use this situation to prove that unions are bad, is like saying that insulin is a bad idea because it prolonged bin Laden's life, or that clean water is a mistake, because ISIS also drinks it. Ah, six cups of heavy affirming the consequent, spiced with a dash of circular reasoning, and layered with inductive fallacies. That's the recipe for a classic Douthat column."
13
"...serve the common good"?
I think the "common good" in this case really means serving the individual's "good", i.e. his reluctance to pay, for the common good.
You know, they say you get what you pay for.
I think the "common good" in this case really means serving the individual's "good", i.e. his reluctance to pay, for the common good.
You know, they say you get what you pay for.
2
While I don't agree with Douthat's take on union's (who have miniscule leverage compared to corporate/business interests), I do like that he has pointed out the irony of how some on the right's feelings about public sector unions depends on if they support the same political candidates.
4
But the exact same thing applies to the Left, in reverse.
Public Sector unions are no different than the American Medical Associatiother the ABA. They look after thei members and avoid disciplining them for all but the worst infractions. And politicians kowtow to them for the same reasons, too. What is more interesting is how few police officers are convicted of abuse, as compared to how many teachers are jailed for misconduct. Once such matters reach the courts, things turn out rather differently.
2
I would agree that Republican leadership at the local and state level have difficulty with law enforcement unions so I find that "negotiations between politicians and their employees (who are also often their political supporters)" is clearly a problem for Republicans. However I would point out that overall union membership among public sector workers at the federal, state and local level is less than 36 percent and for federal employees, even less. The highest percentage of public sector union workers is local governments mostly teachers. The issue with teachers is that their negotiations are very local and some are better than others. In our local district, union negotiations are cordial, have never reached a deadlock or a walkout and the pension system is fully funded. Others may have a different experience but who is the problem? Those elected officials who did the negotiating or the union? As to driving up the cost, most teachers across the US are among the lowest paid college graduates. Again, this may be different where you live.
3
Mr Douthat does not like the positions the public service unions take, so his solution is to get rid of them. What happens when people don't like the positions you take, Mr Douthat?
The air traffic controllers had a union, and look where that got them.
Unions often lose. In fact, they mostly lose in the long run. The police unions will lose, and the positions the police unions take will actually hasten the process of correcting the problems in America's police forces. They defend the indefensible in a highly public manner, they draw attention to the situation, they will force a correction, and it will come more quickly because of the union actions.
The prosecution in Baltimore has hit the nail on the head. "A callous disregard for human life" is exactly the expression which best describes the attitude of far too many police officers in the US. So let the Baltimore police union get in there and defend the officers who have been charged, make it a fair trial, let's see what happens. Perhaps the accused should not be convicted. Most of them seem like good people. Perhaps their behaviour merely reflects the attitudes of the force. They ran Freddie Gray down, they trussed him up and threw him in the paddy wagon, and they ignored him, because that's how the police treat people like Freddie Gray. He was a like a piece of meat. But he died. That is what happened whether or not anybody gets convicted, and everyone will see that, and that will be the catalyst for change.
The air traffic controllers had a union, and look where that got them.
Unions often lose. In fact, they mostly lose in the long run. The police unions will lose, and the positions the police unions take will actually hasten the process of correcting the problems in America's police forces. They defend the indefensible in a highly public manner, they draw attention to the situation, they will force a correction, and it will come more quickly because of the union actions.
The prosecution in Baltimore has hit the nail on the head. "A callous disregard for human life" is exactly the expression which best describes the attitude of far too many police officers in the US. So let the Baltimore police union get in there and defend the officers who have been charged, make it a fair trial, let's see what happens. Perhaps the accused should not be convicted. Most of them seem like good people. Perhaps their behaviour merely reflects the attitudes of the force. They ran Freddie Gray down, they trussed him up and threw him in the paddy wagon, and they ignored him, because that's how the police treat people like Freddie Gray. He was a like a piece of meat. But he died. That is what happened whether or not anybody gets convicted, and everyone will see that, and that will be the catalyst for change.
3
Mr. Douthat has finally cracked the journalistic equivalent of the Voynich manuscript: a "Times" opinion piece constructed in such a fashion as to negate any attempt by his readers to offer a rational rebuttal!
Who knew all that was needed was to take the standard republican strategy, one which he and Mr. Brooks use weekly, of basing arguments on “personal facts” and then taking it to the absolute extreme. How, in 1500 characters, do you refute an opinion in which every sentence written is false? It would be like trying to have a debate with a delusional person that thinks they live in a world other than this. Perhaps I should review President Obama’s dealings with congress over the past 6 years for pointers before continuing here.
Who knew all that was needed was to take the standard republican strategy, one which he and Mr. Brooks use weekly, of basing arguments on “personal facts” and then taking it to the absolute extreme. How, in 1500 characters, do you refute an opinion in which every sentence written is false? It would be like trying to have a debate with a delusional person that thinks they live in a world other than this. Perhaps I should review President Obama’s dealings with congress over the past 6 years for pointers before continuing here.
8
Unions are unnecessary. They are third party intermediary who just rack up costs for the taxpayers to support themselves. Take retirement for an example or the salary of tenured police. (notice what a chief of police costs?). This country cannot afford police unions whether they realize it or not.
3
I am amazed at responses that unions only exist to serve their members' interests, and not wider considerations.
Unions fail completely when they do not set impeccable standards for their own members, and when they fail to understand their symbiotic relationship with their employers. Protecting incompetent workers (whether teachers, police or plumbers) destroys bargaining power and reduces trust.
Not recognizing the importance of their employer's interests (and survival) to their own is short-sighted and self-destructive.
Douhat's conservative critique identifies real problems with public-service and private unions. However, it ignores the historical antecedents and modern correlates that spur organizing efforts. With even Republicans decrying inequality and the demise of the middle class, it is surprising that Douhat is so sanguine that unions no longer have a role to play.
Unions fail completely when they do not set impeccable standards for their own members, and when they fail to understand their symbiotic relationship with their employers. Protecting incompetent workers (whether teachers, police or plumbers) destroys bargaining power and reduces trust.
Not recognizing the importance of their employer's interests (and survival) to their own is short-sighted and self-destructive.
Douhat's conservative critique identifies real problems with public-service and private unions. However, it ignores the historical antecedents and modern correlates that spur organizing efforts. With even Republicans decrying inequality and the demise of the middle class, it is surprising that Douhat is so sanguine that unions no longer have a role to play.
3
You confuse "protecting incompetent workers" with ensuring due process.
Firefighters and EMTs ain't no slouches either when it comes to riding the same gravy train.
3
This column hits the nail on the head. "Public sector unions do not serve the common good." I agree. Policing would be vastly improved if police unions did not exist. But this issue is related to two other situations: benefits as compensation and overall economic policy.
All workers and employers would be better served if compensation were limited to wages. This is also more transparent. It is easier to compare careers when the only compensation variable is the wage rate. This should apply to everyone in the private and public sectors, including the military. We should eliminate all pensions, "delayed compensation", and health care related to employment. Of course, wages would necessarily rise, and it would not hurt to increase Social Security pension benefits.
We also need policies which favor workers, such as more progressive taxation and higher tariffs on imports. This would also drive up wages.
With weakened or non-existent unions, it would be easier to fire public workers who are not competent, including teachers and police. This would benefit the country at large.
All workers and employers would be better served if compensation were limited to wages. This is also more transparent. It is easier to compare careers when the only compensation variable is the wage rate. This should apply to everyone in the private and public sectors, including the military. We should eliminate all pensions, "delayed compensation", and health care related to employment. Of course, wages would necessarily rise, and it would not hurt to increase Social Security pension benefits.
We also need policies which favor workers, such as more progressive taxation and higher tariffs on imports. This would also drive up wages.
With weakened or non-existent unions, it would be easier to fire public workers who are not competent, including teachers and police. This would benefit the country at large.
3
Why do you think wages would rise? Corporations would just keep the extra money as profit or return to their shareholders or executive bonuses. Corporate profits are already at record levels while real income lags.
1
Thank you, Mr. Douthat! Public employee unions are very powerful in New York State. Few people know that these public employees would have due process protections and property rights to their permanent appointments without unions. It takes about a year and one half, hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to terminate an insubordinate public employee in New York today.
It has been about 50 years, since enactment of New York's Taylor Law, which empowered the public employee unions. The incremental expansion of labor contract work rules and conditions is driving up local governmental taxes to a point where it hurts the economy. It's the restrictive work rules as much as the salaries.
It's past time for reform, but because of the power of these unions, it wouldn't happen.
It has been about 50 years, since enactment of New York's Taylor Law, which empowered the public employee unions. The incremental expansion of labor contract work rules and conditions is driving up local governmental taxes to a point where it hurts the economy. It's the restrictive work rules as much as the salaries.
It's past time for reform, but because of the power of these unions, it wouldn't happen.
4
Ralph, Wherever:
"It takes about a year and one half, hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to terminate an insubordinate public employee in New York today."
*****
People rail against Kochs' influence but ignore the profound impact unions have on our daily lives. They directly affect our children in schools, our safety and every single interaction with government.
And, yet, they are allowed to buy political influence and protect themselves from changing for the better.
"It takes about a year and one half, hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to terminate an insubordinate public employee in New York today."
*****
People rail against Kochs' influence but ignore the profound impact unions have on our daily lives. They directly affect our children in schools, our safety and every single interaction with government.
And, yet, they are allowed to buy political influence and protect themselves from changing for the better.
4
Is there a way so that the Police Union only negotiates salaries, benefits and working conditions? I'm not sure why they are involved with disciplinary actions and hiring/firing.
3
It's surprising what exists in those police union contracts, everything from refusals to report police crimes (ex., shootings) to the 10-day response period, to which the Baltimore PD was entitled.
1
The right supports police unions because they support the evolution of Amerika into a Nazi state.
1
I am troubled by Mr. Douthat's frequent tendency to try to assign blame for unfortunate situations like the one in Baltimore. It is fine to raise questions, but to make assumptions about causes is dangerous. Maybe the system is flawed, but the number of variables that enter into the choice and training for a profession are so numerous that to posit a causal relationship between union power and poor results seems like an overreach.
It is impossible to find perfectly trained professionals in any line of work, and it is nearly impossible to screen the totally desirable person for any job. We have to trust the professionals who train our police, as well as our educators. It is often a long and complicated process to enter a field, and try as we might to get only 100% appropriate people for the job, we are often limited by the pool of applicants who express interest in a field, the training institutions that certify them, and the individual experiences that can cause burnout and job performance deficiencies.
In addition, we often do not know enough about the specifics of a situation from a perspective of the police on the streets. What motivated these officers to behave badly, if, in fact, they crossed lines of professionalism in multiple instances? Was it pressures of the union to hire irresponsibly, or were there other factors that were more serious? Without having substantive answers to these types of questions we are just guessing about solutions.
It is impossible to find perfectly trained professionals in any line of work, and it is nearly impossible to screen the totally desirable person for any job. We have to trust the professionals who train our police, as well as our educators. It is often a long and complicated process to enter a field, and try as we might to get only 100% appropriate people for the job, we are often limited by the pool of applicants who express interest in a field, the training institutions that certify them, and the individual experiences that can cause burnout and job performance deficiencies.
In addition, we often do not know enough about the specifics of a situation from a perspective of the police on the streets. What motivated these officers to behave badly, if, in fact, they crossed lines of professionalism in multiple instances? Was it pressures of the union to hire irresponsibly, or were there other factors that were more serious? Without having substantive answers to these types of questions we are just guessing about solutions.
1
Douthat is regurgitating the same bilge that the right wing promotes in this country, that unions protect "bad" workers at the expense of the public. The Republican dream, or course, is no protection for the workers; the party has been working on dismantling the New Deal and worker protections for decades.
Let me suggest regulations are to non-unionized sectors as unions are to workers. What about our financial sector that almost destroyed our economy? Not only did they not go to jail, most still hold the same positions in which they acted with the utmost irresponsibility. Do they have unions I don't know about?
Police and teachers are fired every day. It irks the right wingers that they must be given cause and undergo due process; they would prefer that they clean out their desks at once.
The right is killing labor; it's already shipped our industrial base abroad. There is a conservative jihad now going on to take away what protections workers have gained over the years. Union-busting is now in vogue. American workers are working as hard as ever; productivity is up, but where have all the gains gone the last few decades? To the owners of capital, not to labor. The wealth being generated in this country is not being shared, but there are many who want it that way, and they have their cheerleaders like Douthat.
Let me suggest regulations are to non-unionized sectors as unions are to workers. What about our financial sector that almost destroyed our economy? Not only did they not go to jail, most still hold the same positions in which they acted with the utmost irresponsibility. Do they have unions I don't know about?
Police and teachers are fired every day. It irks the right wingers that they must be given cause and undergo due process; they would prefer that they clean out their desks at once.
The right is killing labor; it's already shipped our industrial base abroad. There is a conservative jihad now going on to take away what protections workers have gained over the years. Union-busting is now in vogue. American workers are working as hard as ever; productivity is up, but where have all the gains gone the last few decades? To the owners of capital, not to labor. The wealth being generated in this country is not being shared, but there are many who want it that way, and they have their cheerleaders like Douthat.
11
Really Douthat! Unions are to blame for dirty cops. Liberals are dangerously naive? Could be . Douthat is simply stupid!
1
Mr. Douthat rightly identifies the biggest problem people have with unions, that they are "insulated from any real pressure to reform".
No reasonable person believes an incompetent person should remain in a job, a poorly performing person should be richly rewarded or a person with poor judgment should become a danger to citizens.
Protecting one becomes the protection of all, good and bad, whether deserving or not. It's offends the sensibility of any thinking person.
No reasonable person believes an incompetent person should remain in a job, a poorly performing person should be richly rewarded or a person with poor judgment should become a danger to citizens.
Protecting one becomes the protection of all, good and bad, whether deserving or not. It's offends the sensibility of any thinking person.
4
In the USA "unions" have been blamed for every management error from poorly designed automobiles to underfunded schools to bankrupt governments, until now where we have reached the point where union membership is at an all time low and everyone is scratching their heads wondering why hard working people have to collect welfare to feed their kids.
Organized, well represented workers do NOT equal "work slowdowns." Having contractual obligations to your workers does NOT mean you can't fire poorly performing personnel, unless poor management has somehow given up this essential function of management through poor contract negotiations, in which case management should be fired.
Do not blame our police state on the police or the police unions. WE have created these repressive laws and hired police to enforce them. WE have allowed police to confiscate goods without due process and encouraged them to keep our privately owned and very profitable prisons full. WE have created a climate of fear and allowed the NRA to encourage more and more weaponry available to more and more people.
Unions have always been a force for POSITIVE change, everything from safety to apprentice programs have been traditionally sponsored by unions. Union members want their employers to succeed, why would they want otherwise? Do you really think that police want to walk around and be hated by the people they have to protect and that their union has something to do with this?
Organized, well represented workers do NOT equal "work slowdowns." Having contractual obligations to your workers does NOT mean you can't fire poorly performing personnel, unless poor management has somehow given up this essential function of management through poor contract negotiations, in which case management should be fired.
Do not blame our police state on the police or the police unions. WE have created these repressive laws and hired police to enforce them. WE have allowed police to confiscate goods without due process and encouraged them to keep our privately owned and very profitable prisons full. WE have created a climate of fear and allowed the NRA to encourage more and more weaponry available to more and more people.
Unions have always been a force for POSITIVE change, everything from safety to apprentice programs have been traditionally sponsored by unions. Union members want their employers to succeed, why would they want otherwise? Do you really think that police want to walk around and be hated by the people they have to protect and that their union has something to do with this?
105
Please. Many unions care first and foremost about their financial (dues) and political clout than they do their individual members of the greater good. The days o Samuel Gompers is long dead, buried by the likes of Hoffa and the union involvement in politics.
I didn't expect this column to be a diatribe against all public unions, I should have known better. So rather than go on and on in defense of them, as you have gone on and on against, I will just agree that YES, the cops are out of hand, over the top, and we need to reign them in.
5
Union or non-union, the death of Freddie Gray is haunting. You wonder at
the lack of humanity shown by his treatment and you wonder at the
mental health of the police persons involved. Then you saw the Police
commissioner stand up and defend his people and once again injustice
looms on the tv screen. None of this meshes - the actions of the police in
this case - obviously guilty of crimes - and their defense by that unfortunate
blue line concept that defies reality. Surely we need police reform in this
country and that's just the tip of it.
the lack of humanity shown by his treatment and you wonder at the
mental health of the police persons involved. Then you saw the Police
commissioner stand up and defend his people and once again injustice
looms on the tv screen. None of this meshes - the actions of the police in
this case - obviously guilty of crimes - and their defense by that unfortunate
blue line concept that defies reality. Surely we need police reform in this
country and that's just the tip of it.
6
Which union does not support its members?
Isn't that part and parcel of their job?
Isn't that part and parcel of their job?
5
Aggressive policing is bad policing. It is attacking, and ruling by fear. iIt is creating a "kings army" mentality in the midst of our greatest cities, and making entire groups of people both angry and hostile.
This is not a police union problem, or even a police problem. It is a structural problem caused by an economic free market that must have an ever lowering bottom to support an ever rising top. Our middle class is sinking and our lower classes are dipping ever further. It isn't the police who have failed.
This is not a police union problem, or even a police problem. It is a structural problem caused by an economic free market that must have an ever lowering bottom to support an ever rising top. Our middle class is sinking and our lower classes are dipping ever further. It isn't the police who have failed.
4
The right has now decided to use the execrable behavior of some police unions to attack all public sector unions, such as teacher unions. But police unions have a problematic history of opposing democratic control and defending the use of violence and coercion often against poor communities. Teachers on the whole are trying to empower all students in the interests of democratic citizenship and purposeful lives. All workers, including those in the public sector, have a right to a voice in workplaces and terms and inconditions of their employment.
7
Excellent commentary.
7
From the title, I wanted to like this piece, but I couldn't get 3 paragraphs in before the nonsense reached an offensive level. If there even are any political appointees represented by unions (i.e. said political supporters dividing said "spoils"), they are proportionally an irrelevant minority in the overall government workforce. Career civil servants, even those represented by unions, are real people, who do not engage in spoil division, but rather work hard to serve the people of this country. Military service always gets respect from conservatives, but civil service always gets a sneer.
No wonder it's taken you this long to look harder at police unions.
No wonder it's taken you this long to look harder at police unions.
6
The problem, of course, is not unionization. Government (in collaboration with corporate interests) can break any union in existence. The fault lies with government and those business interests. They have carefully exempted police (and fire) unions from the recent wave of benefit reductions to ensure that they will continually ride herd on the public and function as shock troops when the inevitable rioting occurs. They are,in effect, a sort of imperial guard who owe allegiance to the state rather than to their fellow citizens. The point of this being that the police would be treated with great generosity--and leniency in the case of obvious wrongdoing--whether they were unionized or not. To repeat the obvious: They are there to serve the interests of the corporate state. And the more we pat them on the head and tell them what brave little heroes they are the worse their behavior will become.
1
This is a good one, Dems/Libs never criticize unions and in fact promote them as a social good but now they criticize Republicans for not criticizing Police Unions enough. Incredibly hypocritical.
3
An employer/employee relationship is a contractual arrangement. The 9th amendment - Bill of Rights US Constitution, confers "Equal Protection Under The Law" and guarantees my right as wage earner to be represented in contract arrangements with the same verve and vigor available to any corporate citizen.
Labor (wage earners) constitutes one pillar of the means of production. 'Ownership of labor' is the equivalence of 'Slaveholder'. Each wage earner has the right to negotiate contracts for service rendered - and be represented in the process. Period.
Douthat is rationalizing - offering invalid justifications based on neo-feudal principles. I find the aristocratic posture offensive.
Labor (wage earners) constitutes one pillar of the means of production. 'Ownership of labor' is the equivalence of 'Slaveholder'. Each wage earner has the right to negotiate contracts for service rendered - and be represented in the process. Period.
Douthat is rationalizing - offering invalid justifications based on neo-feudal principles. I find the aristocratic posture offensive.
2
Police unions are like marriage. Sometimes good and sometimes bad. But that is pretty much life.
Wait a minute, after twenty years of your writing pro union columns, you have seen the light? Unions are not good for and serve their members interest? Please call it what it is, that being a 'all unions problem'. Think about it, unions have chased the high paying industrial jobs out of American. Can't but think the Baltimore lack of good paying jobs could be traced back to a unionized flight. After all, lack of good paying jobs will put you in poverty. If the Baltimore police force has gotten out of control it is because the politicians failed the public interest in making it so via the contract negotiation process. What will now happen is a long slog of about ten years when the police union will provide 'pay back' for the political acts of Mosby. It will result in less policing, higher crime rates, further white flight, higher wages for all Baltimore public employee unions. Lastly, the police force will see more and more disability claims for 'stress', both medical and political caused.
2
UNIONS have chased high-paying industrial jobs out of the US? Unions are the only reason there were high-paying industrial jobs in the first place.
47
Wow for once I agree with Douhat. Police public sector unions are no different from teachers or other public employees. They occupy a monopoly position and like most monopolies they abuse their power.
4
To be honest, Mr. Douthat, the rightwing is against all unions and not just public unions or perhaps you never heard of the "right to exploit laws" common in many rightwing controlled states euphemistically referred to by the rightwing as "right to work laws". And when it comes to the rightwing's inconsistency regarding police unions the word you are searching for to describe the rightwing is called "hypocrisy".
Just for curiosity, just who do you expect will look out for the rights of public employees without a union, rightwing politicians and bureaucrats? Good luck on that one. Funny how the rightwing believes the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms has no limits but the first amendment right to peacefully assemble or the 7th Amendment right to a jury of your peers are free to be ignored. Apparently in the rightwing way of thinking people are free to shoot someone but not free to meet about it or sue them for it.
Just for curiosity, just who do you expect will look out for the rights of public employees without a union, rightwing politicians and bureaucrats? Good luck on that one. Funny how the rightwing believes the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms has no limits but the first amendment right to peacefully assemble or the 7th Amendment right to a jury of your peers are free to be ignored. Apparently in the rightwing way of thinking people are free to shoot someone but not free to meet about it or sue them for it.
4
Today's column demonstrates how far the Right has travelled down the road to Extremism. There is hardly a Republican incumbent officeholder that does not the endorsement of a police union or FOP; most law enforcement officers routinely vote Republican and willingly serve as props in Republican ads.
Yet, Douthat, being the mouthpiece for the Kochs et al, have laid the issue out rather plainly: we love you, we love your suppression of the poor and minorities; we can turn a blind eye to every misdeed, but we can no longer tolerate anything about a law enforcement officer who belongs to a union.
And who knows, maybe the Right's gambit will work. Police unions do not consider themselves part of the broader union movement and maybe they would break with the other public sector unions and dissolve themselves. I'm sure the Right would not turn against a non-union police force. It's not like they have a record of doing thus (sarcasm).
Yet, Douthat, being the mouthpiece for the Kochs et al, have laid the issue out rather plainly: we love you, we love your suppression of the poor and minorities; we can turn a blind eye to every misdeed, but we can no longer tolerate anything about a law enforcement officer who belongs to a union.
And who knows, maybe the Right's gambit will work. Police unions do not consider themselves part of the broader union movement and maybe they would break with the other public sector unions and dissolve themselves. I'm sure the Right would not turn against a non-union police force. It's not like they have a record of doing thus (sarcasm).
Well done, Mr Dothan. i think you have nailed one of the causes of the impasse of the last year. On almost every occasion that has been in the news, the police has been exonerated, even while research has shown that the police departments have a history of aggression towards black people.
The police unions will eventually come around to authorizing body cameras because now they know that everyone else will have cameras trained on them. Unless of course a law is passed to protect the privacy of police officers and forbid photographing them, but that would never happen, right?
The police unions will eventually come around to authorizing body cameras because now they know that everyone else will have cameras trained on them. Unless of course a law is passed to protect the privacy of police officers and forbid photographing them, but that would never happen, right?
3
I am sick of conservatives like Ross blaming unions for every ill. The problem in Baltimore and elsewhere is not the unions but rather the culture of government that allows the powerful whether they be 5 Star generals, bankers heads of the CIA to avoid personal responsibility for anything they do. Add to that spirit of one law for the powerful and one law for the rest of us, the almost unilateral and complete control police officers on the street have over citizens and you have a disaster of the ones we are now seeing across the nation. The unions have little to do with it. As far as I know CIA directors, heads of the NSA, bankers or 5 star generals don't belong to unions and never did.
So Ross enough of the union bashing as predictable as it is; how about we talk about what is really happening here.
So Ross enough of the union bashing as predictable as it is; how about we talk about what is really happening here.
1
Seriously, RD reaches new lows with this article. He uses a real challenge with the police and their treatment of black people for his own political ends. Is nothing sacred? A man died and all Ross can talk about is how terrible unions are for America. Another example of how in Tea Party land everything gets twisted to support their drive to impoverish everyone bar the very wealthy. The irony of course is that the decimation of unions has contributed to the lowering of wages for manual and unskilled labour and hence made life harder in black communities than it otherwise would have been.
1
Police officers should be paid well and have a decent pension, too. They should also be held to a very simple standard: obey the law, stop killing people, and stop regarding the citizens of this country as the enemy. They are paid to protect us. Act like it.
6
Mr. Douthat states that some people like himself "believe" that aggressive police tactics have reduced crime over the years. Whether a complex tactic or strategy works in the actual world is not a matter of "belief." It takes informed, disciplined, disinterested study to determine whether a particular strategy or action works; whether two events just happen to coincide with each other or whether one caused the other.
Mr. Douthat has chosen to believe in police aggression because it fits his ideology and world view, and because of his complete lack of knowledge of crime, poverty, and racism.
People who don't think that police aggression works usually rely upon several studies that explain why it doesn't work.
It takes time and effort to learn and think about complex matters. It's much easier and quicker to believe the world conforms itself to the thoughts within your head.
Mr. Douthat has chosen to believe in police aggression because it fits his ideology and world view, and because of his complete lack of knowledge of crime, poverty, and racism.
People who don't think that police aggression works usually rely upon several studies that explain why it doesn't work.
It takes time and effort to learn and think about complex matters. It's much easier and quicker to believe the world conforms itself to the thoughts within your head.
3
At least some of the reduction in crime is due to the aging of the population. People settle down as they get older. There are plenty of upstanding citizens who will admit to having done stupid things when they were young. Most of the "quality of life" and "broken windows" problems are misdemeanors committed by kids being stupid. You had the Baby Boomers in their youth in the '60s to the early '80s, and surprise, crime started to fall as the last of those boomers got into their 30s.
3
What a lazy, Fox News-y column. Amazing conflation and sleights of hand. And callous.
3
Very convincingly argued. Thanks for that-
3
Suggestions, Mr Douthat? I don't entirely disagree with you here. It would be nice to have a system in place to more effectively deal with bad employees. But when you make this statement: "Finally, union lobbying power can bias public-policy decisions toward the interests of state employees." It reminds me of why unions developed so strongly to begin with. Who else has excessively strong lobbying power that Republicans don't seem to be whining about? Corporations and big business owners. And this continues to corrupt. So, sure, let's reform broke systems: tax codes, campaign finance, and yes, unions. Maybe, the ironic support the Republicans have for police unions in the face of the current problems will enlighten change. But they also need to look up and out of the pocket of the oligarchs and aspiring oligarchs who so easily stuff them in there. So, let's not just focus on unions, Mr Douthat. That's short sighted.
53
When police unions protect illegal behavior by cops and resist public accountability, the police unions and their union officials need to be be prosecuted as corrupt organizations under RICO laws, 96 U.S.C. 1961 et seq.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/96
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/96
2
When my dad was in the NY Senate back in the 70's he was the go-to Senator for the N.Y.C. police union as well as the NYC firefighter's union... His large suite of offices provided space to both unions when the legislature was in session. It was a love affair that went both ways.
Stranger than fiction, Al Shanker's Teacher's Union also supported the most reactionary member of the legislature because my dad hired Al's socially challenged nephew as a counsel to one of the committees he headed up.
Stranger than fiction, Al Shanker's Teacher's Union also supported the most reactionary member of the legislature because my dad hired Al's socially challenged nephew as a counsel to one of the committees he headed up.
1
Agree absolutely with Ross. Have presented Police at the bargaining table; moderation of demands even as it is, is important in winning reform beneficial to the officers, such as sustainable pensions and health benefits, not to speak of rational and fair discipline.
1
There is a definite need for public unions to protect employees against arbitrary action by politicians, whose motivations may vary from selfless to venal. Nevertheless, I have seen the power of police unions have bad effects on local and state policies. In California, for example, police unions pressured the Legislature into making police personnel records confidential, significantly hampering the work of citizen police-review commissions in identifying out-of-control officers. At some point, public unions and their supporters have to allow some reforms, or we will get more elected officials like Scott Walker.
37
The fact that many conservatives are against unions, except police unions, tells me they don't care one way or the other about unions, they just don't like unions which don't lean conservative.
This conflict between words and deeds is understandable, but transparently dishonest. Kudos to Ross D. for pointing it out.
This conflict between words and deeds is understandable, but transparently dishonest. Kudos to Ross D. for pointing it out.
69
But it also points out the corresponding dishonesty on the Left.
I spent eight years in the public sector and can testify the truth of Douthat's observations. Regardless of their past role in improving working conditions and compensation, the primary purpose of today's public sector unions is to protect members from the consequences of accountability and change.
A few years ago, the problem in New York City was the Rubber Room, that place where public school teachers were kept on full salary for months while awaiting arbitration slowed by their union contracts. In my native Chicago, municipal employees are justly held in contempt by many of the city's citizens with the test performance of the public school students and the crime rate being matters of embarrassment. Even in the Wisconsin that succored the Robert Lafollette's progressive movement, the public has become so frustrated with union conduct that they elected Scott Walker as their governor and rejected the recall movement that sought to remove him from office.
And yes, those of us who call ourselves conservatives can also oppose corporate abuses of power. Please remember that the greatest trust-buster of them all was a Republican: Teddy Roosevelt.
A few years ago, the problem in New York City was the Rubber Room, that place where public school teachers were kept on full salary for months while awaiting arbitration slowed by their union contracts. In my native Chicago, municipal employees are justly held in contempt by many of the city's citizens with the test performance of the public school students and the crime rate being matters of embarrassment. Even in the Wisconsin that succored the Robert Lafollette's progressive movement, the public has become so frustrated with union conduct that they elected Scott Walker as their governor and rejected the recall movement that sought to remove him from office.
And yes, those of us who call ourselves conservatives can also oppose corporate abuses of power. Please remember that the greatest trust-buster of them all was a Republican: Teddy Roosevelt.
28
For every stupid union rule that set up a rubber room, there was management agreement to the rule. A New York City Board of Education collective bargaining agreement provided for many years that "excessive lateness" consisted of at least 60 latenesses a year; therefore an employee who showed up late only 59 times in a year couldn't be touched. I'm not totally sure you can blame the union for asking for such a rule, but I'm dead sure you can blame management for agreeing to it.
politicsbyeccehomo.wordpress.com
politicsbyeccehomo.wordpress.com
1
As a thought experiment.....as it has been said, with great power, comes great responsibility.....and, perhaps, accountability. Given that the police are one mechanism through which the state exercises it monopoly over the (legitimized) use of violence, why not remove the presumption of innocence when a officer commits one of these actions we've been seeing recently. Instead, the burden of proof will be on the officer to prove they did not commit the action. Do you suppose they might be less inclined to violate and betray the trust we've placed in them?
Excellent column. It's ashamed that some can't step away from their mandated ideology for a moment to consider the basic truths it contains. No, unions did not cause the death of Mr. Grey but the public union structure inhibits public safety and governance in a way unrelated to the private sector variant which too many lump together as one and the same. His comments about California corrections unions are especially spot on, for they have fought so many safety and reform calls that their defenders are placed in the position of defending the union simply because it is a union, while at the same time rightly wringing their hands at the corrosive and often inhumane California prison system.
We need many reforms in these areas. Douthat is corect that most cops, teachers, etc. are decent people who really want to do right - and most do It in ways we don't see or read about on a daily bases. Citing teachers in this discussion, however, is NOT, as some instantly assert, bashing all teachers, anymore than citing the six accused officers is bashing everyone in blue. Until people are willing to stop being so ideological and knee jerking to these points we won't be able to enact needed reforms in these public professions.
We need many reforms in these areas. Douthat is corect that most cops, teachers, etc. are decent people who really want to do right - and most do It in ways we don't see or read about on a daily bases. Citing teachers in this discussion, however, is NOT, as some instantly assert, bashing all teachers, anymore than citing the six accused officers is bashing everyone in blue. Until people are willing to stop being so ideological and knee jerking to these points we won't be able to enact needed reforms in these public professions.
36
I thought I disliked Ross Douthat just as much as it was possible for a person to dislike an opinion writer, but even I'm stunned by the vitriol directed towards him on this occasion by all the unmoderated Green Ticks.
Folks, the venom you are spitting at Mr Douthat here is inappropriate and unacceptable. You should all have your Green Ticks rescinded immediately. It's this sort of malicious and spiteful vindictive that give so-called liberals a bad name. Who needs enemies with friends like these?
Here in Queensland, the power of the Queensland Police Union is the primary reason why white cops never get prosecuted for killing black men. Ditto for every other Australian state and the respective police union that runs it. The Queensland Police Union and its hard-faced white men helped keep Joh Bjelke-Petersen in power for decades. But, of course, in the Land of the Free, you're different aren't you? When it suits, it seems that so-called 'liberals' play just the same American Exceptionalism card as do their supposed foes on the conservative right. No wonder the USA is so messed up. No sense of fair play. Guess that comes from not playing cricket.
Folks, the venom you are spitting at Mr Douthat here is inappropriate and unacceptable. You should all have your Green Ticks rescinded immediately. It's this sort of malicious and spiteful vindictive that give so-called liberals a bad name. Who needs enemies with friends like these?
Here in Queensland, the power of the Queensland Police Union is the primary reason why white cops never get prosecuted for killing black men. Ditto for every other Australian state and the respective police union that runs it. The Queensland Police Union and its hard-faced white men helped keep Joh Bjelke-Petersen in power for decades. But, of course, in the Land of the Free, you're different aren't you? When it suits, it seems that so-called 'liberals' play just the same American Exceptionalism card as do their supposed foes on the conservative right. No wonder the USA is so messed up. No sense of fair play. Guess that comes from not playing cricket.
5
Just remember... Most police unions are not comprised of liberals, progressives or Democrats. They more easily toe the conservative GOP line. Just ask Scott Walker, who gave the police unions in Wisconsin a free pass while he declared war on other unions. Or Bill deBlasio, who ran into such disgraceful opposition from NYC police unions.
Most of us in the private sector unions who see the actions of police unions just grind our teeth as they get negative press from the very news outlets and politicians they support, and we get folded right in with them.
C'mon Ross, you know what you're doing here, and you're not stupid. It's a willful attempt to confuse the public into thinking police unions are the same as other categories of unions. No way. They're conservatives.
Most of us in the private sector unions who see the actions of police unions just grind our teeth as they get negative press from the very news outlets and politicians they support, and we get folded right in with them.
C'mon Ross, you know what you're doing here, and you're not stupid. It's a willful attempt to confuse the public into thinking police unions are the same as other categories of unions. No way. They're conservatives.
128
I don't think that there is any question that powerful unions play a significant role in having people retained in their positions that should not be there. It gets especially dicey with critical public interest issues such as policing and teaching. Mr. Douthat states the obvious but it needs to said in the current context of policing and the knee jerk dogmatism of some of these comments is not helpful. The unions perform a positive function of protecting employees from abuse but that power can also have a negative effect of protecting people who should be gone rather than sheltered. In Baltimore, the ranking officer should have been in uniform with his mental issues. Even his own partner, who is also a police officer, notified authorities.
17
In Baltimore, the ranking officer should ***not*** have been in uniform with his mental issues. [Apologies]
The union is not there to manage the workforce for the employer, it is there to protect employees from arbitrary action by the employer. Anyone can be fired for just cause but it takes competent management to do it, something that is in short supply these days.
I think that you're leaving out one important part of the equation, that the unions don't hire these policemen with mental issues, the city does, and thus should be more thorough in their vetting of potential hires.
1
Very good read.
2
Public sector, civil service unions are not causing the problems. In fact, government unions prevent the public sector from being stacked with unqualified political hacks, often delegated to perform political work on the public payroll, who are pressured to remain silent regarding graft and corruption. Not perfect, but most government agencies perform better when unionized. The faults with police forces are mainly caused by poor leadership who are generally allowed to select supervisors and commanders at their choosing,the along with creating the policies and procedures. The rank and fille, front line workers, have little or no say regarding workplace rules, hiring, and promotions. Conservatives .
2
Are police unions part of the problem or a very imperfect attempt to solve the problem? In general there is bad management , a lack of respect for law and order, and an reluctance on the part of the public to pay for a professional adequately supported police service. In general people do what is expected, by their superiors, their peers, and the people they serve. The Milgram obedience experiments and the Zimbardo prison experiment are directly relevant and key to understanding the behavior of people in uniform.
1
So Douthat offers a misdirection pn a favorite "conservative" hobby horse, unions, and public unions. No causal evidence of course such as kill rates in union versus non union jurisdictions, just "conservative" ideology.
My comment gives a quote from a founder of modern fascism and significant catholic thinker that, if applied, predicts Douthat's opinions.
Ma y approve.
And it gets stricken?
Trash is trash.
My comment gives a quote from a founder of modern fascism and significant catholic thinker that, if applied, predicts Douthat's opinions.
Ma y approve.
And it gets stricken?
Trash is trash.
4
Mr. Douthat cannot resist twisting a murder perpetuated by a group of power crazed cops into a tirade against unions. How creative and how predictable.
32
@Mike
"murder by power-crazed cops"
The alleged murderer was Black, as was the ranking officer on the scene (also a woman).
I think it is time for everyone to exhale here. The speed with which Mosby filed charges will need to be offset by a higher expectation for the judicial process which must follow. Turning street justice into politician justice falls short of what we need: real justice and real change.
Cops do awful work. And most of us would never take the job. In quiet suburban towns, 20% of the calls are to intervene in domestic violence altercations. Police exist because citizens either cannot police themselves or restrain their neighbors (or relatives). We all want things put right. But I don't think people go into policing so that they can kill Freddie Gray perpetrators.
But I also believe that Black cops find it to be beyond tragic to see the behavior of the people they must police (and supposedly protect). The Black cop must have a unique view on his/her job as they apprehend some of the broken and unrepentant men in their precincts. The reason that we don't hear about middle age White men resisting arrest is because, quite logically, they probably don't do that in meaningful numbers. That is not a justification for what happened in Baltimore, but we have blame to go around on all sides. None of it justifying injury or death, but a complex stew of problems nonetheless.
"murder by power-crazed cops"
The alleged murderer was Black, as was the ranking officer on the scene (also a woman).
I think it is time for everyone to exhale here. The speed with which Mosby filed charges will need to be offset by a higher expectation for the judicial process which must follow. Turning street justice into politician justice falls short of what we need: real justice and real change.
Cops do awful work. And most of us would never take the job. In quiet suburban towns, 20% of the calls are to intervene in domestic violence altercations. Police exist because citizens either cannot police themselves or restrain their neighbors (or relatives). We all want things put right. But I don't think people go into policing so that they can kill Freddie Gray perpetrators.
But I also believe that Black cops find it to be beyond tragic to see the behavior of the people they must police (and supposedly protect). The Black cop must have a unique view on his/her job as they apprehend some of the broken and unrepentant men in their precincts. The reason that we don't hear about middle age White men resisting arrest is because, quite logically, they probably don't do that in meaningful numbers. That is not a justification for what happened in Baltimore, but we have blame to go around on all sides. None of it justifying injury or death, but a complex stew of problems nonetheless.
2
This may well be the only time I ever agree with Ross Douthat, but as an African American who is sick and disgusted with needless police violence against men and women in my community, I agree with him about police unions. I think it is no accident that in the past year, the state where I grew up, South Carolina, has fired and prosecuted more police involved racial violence than any number of states and cities that are perceived as more liberal. I cannot help but think that the reason why bad police in South Carolina have been so quickly fired and prosecuted is because union protection in South Carolina is exceptionally weak. The same was probably also true of some high profile firings of bad police in Alabama and Florida.
In Staten Island, police choked Eric Garner to death on video and were given a no bill by a grand jury. In North Charleston, Walter Scott was shot to death on video, and the officer was fired and arrested the day the video became public. In my opinion, the difference of union strength in both cities was surely at least partially responsible for the radically different way two similar situations were handled.
As a public sector employee myself, I have always supported the right to organize, but the political influence that police unions exercise over the investigation of themselves is simply not consistent with a society in which all are equal before the law, and if police unions are to continue, they must be sharply circumscribed.
In Staten Island, police choked Eric Garner to death on video and were given a no bill by a grand jury. In North Charleston, Walter Scott was shot to death on video, and the officer was fired and arrested the day the video became public. In my opinion, the difference of union strength in both cities was surely at least partially responsible for the radically different way two similar situations were handled.
As a public sector employee myself, I have always supported the right to organize, but the political influence that police unions exercise over the investigation of themselves is simply not consistent with a society in which all are equal before the law, and if police unions are to continue, they must be sharply circumscribed.
196
@Anthony
It has always been fascinating to me that employees of the government, doing many jobs in white collar areas, need to organize. It says something insidious about the employer, namely, the government. Or, more likely, it is as Ross asserts: a convenient way to provide the Democrats with a guaranteed and reciptrocal voting bloc.
With all due respect to those who did or do require collective bargaining, my guess is that the latter prevails. Kudos to Ross for pointing out just how damaging that has been to police: enabled originally by Democrats and embraced by Republicans...basically ensuring their misbehavior.
It has always been fascinating to me that employees of the government, doing many jobs in white collar areas, need to organize. It says something insidious about the employer, namely, the government. Or, more likely, it is as Ross asserts: a convenient way to provide the Democrats with a guaranteed and reciptrocal voting bloc.
With all due respect to those who did or do require collective bargaining, my guess is that the latter prevails. Kudos to Ross for pointing out just how damaging that has been to police: enabled originally by Democrats and embraced by Republicans...basically ensuring their misbehavior.
1
You don't agree with Ross Douthat. He's using our disgust with the PBAs and FOPs as a stalking horse for conservative hopes to bring down teachers' and civil servants' unions, including yours. He's pretending they're the same thing, and they're not.
I think the reason the Walter Scott shooting was handled better is just that nobody, however dishonest, could argue with that video. It's interesting to note that the North Charleston PBA pulled out of the case and stopped providing for the shooter's defense, which is being funded by secret sources. A real union would have followed its principles (he's a member so they should have paid for his defense no matter how obviously guilty he is), but the PBA is more concerned with publicity.
I think the reason the Walter Scott shooting was handled better is just that nobody, however dishonest, could argue with that video. It's interesting to note that the North Charleston PBA pulled out of the case and stopped providing for the shooter's defense, which is being funded by secret sources. A real union would have followed its principles (he's a member so they should have paid for his defense no matter how obviously guilty he is), but the PBA is more concerned with publicity.
Why is the right only ever concerned with power attained by unions and NEVER concerned with the power to dictate policies, the tax code and the future of politicians, and our very democracy, by the very wealthy? Noy one word is ever spoken in opposition to that huge, growing concentration of power.
The "intellectual critique" of the right is sucked from the swamp of its primary objectives: lowering taxes on the wealthy, weakening the power of any sort of collectivized citizen influence and gaining ever more power for those who possess wealth and position. Same ol' same ol'.
Like his "colleague", David Brooks, this columnist cites "evidence" in cases never likely to be proven. Doesn't matter. Whatever he wants to see, he believes. Whatever he believes, he sees (thank you, Doobie Brothers: the '70s weren't a complete waste.) Brooks recently asserted that America has spent 15 trillion dollars trying to cure poverty in recent decades, no doubt including Social Security in that undefined, lump sum. SS is a defined benefits program, not welfare.
Are police unions often too powerful? Probably. What's more, there's something kinda weird about a union that carries guns and can crack anyone over the head, or Taser them, and then make up excuses why it was absolutely necessary.
Let's not weaken unions of any sort, however, until we've got a good plan to put America back on the path to broad based prosperity by paying decent wages to everyone who works.
Doug Terry
The "intellectual critique" of the right is sucked from the swamp of its primary objectives: lowering taxes on the wealthy, weakening the power of any sort of collectivized citizen influence and gaining ever more power for those who possess wealth and position. Same ol' same ol'.
Like his "colleague", David Brooks, this columnist cites "evidence" in cases never likely to be proven. Doesn't matter. Whatever he wants to see, he believes. Whatever he believes, he sees (thank you, Doobie Brothers: the '70s weren't a complete waste.) Brooks recently asserted that America has spent 15 trillion dollars trying to cure poverty in recent decades, no doubt including Social Security in that undefined, lump sum. SS is a defined benefits program, not welfare.
Are police unions often too powerful? Probably. What's more, there's something kinda weird about a union that carries guns and can crack anyone over the head, or Taser them, and then make up excuses why it was absolutely necessary.
Let's not weaken unions of any sort, however, until we've got a good plan to put America back on the path to broad based prosperity by paying decent wages to everyone who works.
Doug Terry
50
Of course much of Social Secuity IS, in part, welfare -- you are forced to join (i.e., to pay the tax) and the more you contribute the less of your contributions you get back. Benefits for those who contribute least is typical of welfare.
Similarly, while unions can be for the common good, and forbidding their existence would be in violation of the First Amendment (freedom of association), there is no reason why public sector unions should be allowed to strike or to provide political support for their employers, the politicians running the government. Public sector strikers should just be fired -- Reagan did it and we all benefited from that.
Similarly, while unions can be for the common good, and forbidding their existence would be in violation of the First Amendment (freedom of association), there is no reason why public sector unions should be allowed to strike or to provide political support for their employers, the politicians running the government. Public sector strikers should just be fired -- Reagan did it and we all benefited from that.
If the Social Security program were operated by private corporations, would you consider it welfare? Of course not. No matter how it came out, it would be celebrated as an example of creative capitalism.
As for police unions, we have a situation in which 1/2 or more of our society is being denied reasonable compensation for their labor while a very small percentage of the population controls most of the wealth and property. I can't shed too many tears for inappropriate union actions in that case. What does concern me, however, are the efforts of police unions to reenforce methods and laws that allow police to act illegally on the job and get away with it. As a voting block, police can represent a threat to public safety.
The antidote to public unions having too much power is for citizens to organize themselves into much broader based organizations that would be able to speak for the common good, not just limited groups. As it stands now, we, the public, are divided into artificially created, opposing groups rather than united for general benefit.
As for police unions, we have a situation in which 1/2 or more of our society is being denied reasonable compensation for their labor while a very small percentage of the population controls most of the wealth and property. I can't shed too many tears for inappropriate union actions in that case. What does concern me, however, are the efforts of police unions to reenforce methods and laws that allow police to act illegally on the job and get away with it. As a voting block, police can represent a threat to public safety.
The antidote to public unions having too much power is for citizens to organize themselves into much broader based organizations that would be able to speak for the common good, not just limited groups. As it stands now, we, the public, are divided into artificially created, opposing groups rather than united for general benefit.
No, you are naive and protected and unexposed to the realities of thugs on both sides of the law. America is a military police state that dictates what it wants to Congressional, state, and local legislators. The Military cops have the Television stations and some radio stations in their pocket. While the police state is ruled by military cops, the people stay mostly indoors watching what else?.......Cop shows and war movies.
3
The police are an integral part of our system of jurisprudence and yet their adherence to the "thin blue line" of silence to cover the misdeeds of their comrades is disgraceful and leads to lack of credibility and respect. And, yes, being an officer is quite difficult when one is assigned to high crime areas.
9
Public service unions do serve the common good. Governments are run politically and public employees need protection against politics.
21
Unions bad, business good. Public sector unions really bad. This is a perfect understanding of our world.
3
gemli, so perfectly said. Union bashing, the 1%, illegals and the underclass draining and destroying the middle class.
5
Insightful article sbout the Conservative stress over insulting and reining in a public union when it intrudes on justice: the police.
Read by few here.
Criticized by all, because the author was Douthat.
The Progressive tone-deaf donkey-nod continues.
It is laughable. Rima, Netliner, and gemli all up and pounding away on their laptops.
Read by few here.
Criticized by all, because the author was Douthat.
The Progressive tone-deaf donkey-nod continues.
It is laughable. Rima, Netliner, and gemli all up and pounding away on their laptops.
3
It's not laughable but laudable. They recognize a Trojan Horse when the see one.
Under every rock, the Progressives see demons. I have read Douthat enough that he was trying to present irony where Liberals see only subterfuge.
Wow. Mr Douthat raises very valid concerns about public unions, police unions in particular, and 12/12 comments I see now are accusing him of "being reflexive conservative".
To all those comenters...might your own ad hominem attacks be a bit reflexive?
To all those comenters...might your own ad hominem attacks be a bit reflexive?
7
Of course public service employee unions don't serve the public good, that's not their purpose. A union's purpose is to protect workers and represent them when bargaining for salary and benefits. Police unions will always support cops who are accused of wrongdoing, that's what they are supposed to do, just like an accused's lawyer will always defend their client even if the evidence against him or her is overwhelming. Just remember, police unions don't hire the cops, the city does, and if they hire a bad cop the union must then defend them when they do something bad.
Unions serve an important function in society. The fact that a columnist for the Times doesn't seem to understand that function is not surprising. The press in general makes the same mistake, expecting unions to throw their members under the bus whenever the public wants someone fired. Cops and teachers are lucky to have unions, in fact any worker who doesn't want to be represented and protected by a union is as feckless as a citizen accused of a crime refusing to seek a lawyer.
Unions serve an important function in society. The fact that a columnist for the Times doesn't seem to understand that function is not surprising. The press in general makes the same mistake, expecting unions to throw their members under the bus whenever the public wants someone fired. Cops and teachers are lucky to have unions, in fact any worker who doesn't want to be represented and protected by a union is as feckless as a citizen accused of a crime refusing to seek a lawyer.
165
>Police unions will always support cops who are accused of wrongdoing
This is an essential problem I have with your argument. Does the analogy to a lawyer/client really hold water?
This is an essential problem I have with your argument. Does the analogy to a lawyer/client really hold water?
The union has a responsibility--an obligation--to make sure that an accused member has legal representation and to guarantee due process. The union has no responsibility to assert the member's innocence. When the head of the police union in Baltimore insists that the six cops have done nothing wrong and that the State's Attorney has made a "rush to judgement," he has gone beyond his proper role. For forty-one years I have been a member of teachers' unions, and I have been glad to see my leadership protect due process. But I have never seen a union hold a press conference to proclaim the innocence of a teacher accused with sexual molestation of his or her students. I hope never to see such a thing.
71
It is so wrong to say that unions defend their members even if they do something bad. I would think that no police captain would tolerate a bad egg in his command and summon proof to show he deserves to be fired. The union can supply a lawyer but facts are facts. The same goes for teachers. A bad teacher who is abusive or immoral and totally incompetent can and should be let go. The union may aid in a hearing of his defense but if principals marshall the facts and show a pattern of bad behavior, he should be fired. I don't believe a union wants criminal or incompetent members.
3
Let's just say it directly -- if the covers of the FOP were to be peeled back, I think many would agree we'd quickly find evidence of flagrant racketeering. And while it may be true that some unions share this trait, it is not true of unionization in general. Like all human efforts, some groups are corrupt. When it's a group that is given tremendous power, such as the police, it's important that corruption be actively investigated.
5
There are many countries in which there are no police unions. That does not mean that they do not have bad policemen.
The law should hold police accountable like everyone else, if it does not, then it is the failure of those who uphold the law and not unions.
The law should hold police accountable like everyone else, if it does not, then it is the failure of those who uphold the law and not unions.
7
I'm sorry, but we should not let Mr. Douthat use the excesses of police killing black citizens as a wedge to attack unions in the United States.
It is not the unions that are causing police to shoot innocent black people. It is their lack of training and lack of public oversight that is causing these horrendous crimes against the citizenry. Blaming the police unions is a smokescreen argument to mask the fact that we have a problem with racism in the United States, and police forces are simply not able to handle themselves professionally when confronted with inner city citizens. There is a presumption of guilt and even danger that causes the police to shoot under-aged teenagers before even ascertaining if there has been an infraction. How are the unions culpable?
This is another case of Mr. Douthat's conservative views masking a real problem by blaming some other irrelevant area of the social fabric of which he disapproves.
It is not the unions that are causing police to shoot innocent black people. It is their lack of training and lack of public oversight that is causing these horrendous crimes against the citizenry. Blaming the police unions is a smokescreen argument to mask the fact that we have a problem with racism in the United States, and police forces are simply not able to handle themselves professionally when confronted with inner city citizens. There is a presumption of guilt and even danger that causes the police to shoot under-aged teenagers before even ascertaining if there has been an infraction. How are the unions culpable?
This is another case of Mr. Douthat's conservative views masking a real problem by blaming some other irrelevant area of the social fabric of which he disapproves.
27
It is far worst, more like militarized police state, where cops , at least some over 70% have high school education and the only requirements for the job is a high school diploma, plus preference to ex military gun ho types, with two year tour of duty in Iraq, Afghanistan or some place else in the Middle East. Where they acquired the taste and learned how to indiscriminately kill innocent civilians who were deemed all terrorist. In Iraq only, some over 500.000 plus innocent civilians were killed turkey shoot style that Dick Cheney and his types enjoyed with their kind of passion. Since then and decades past to the Vietnam war the police hierarchy in this country starts with four and five star Sheriffs or chiefs of police, which think they are some freaking field marshals with militarized swat teams etc. The union bosses are ex Black Water types with money funded by the NRA and the likes of Koch Brothers.
Plus there are one too many cops with fake so called purple heart medals and the like. That give them the veteran status and benefits. Then on top of it all is the freaking so called internal affairs investigations and whole sale cover up.
Plus there are one too many cops with fake so called purple heart medals and the like. That give them the veteran status and benefits. Then on top of it all is the freaking so called internal affairs investigations and whole sale cover up.
4
Great. So now we equate bad police strategies with unionized labor and even teachers! Trying to bottom feed here to much?
11
All public unions should be banned.
GM was paying fifteen hundred dollars for health care for every car made.
Market forces took over and GM declared bankruptcy.
The Government cannot do the same.
GM was paying fifteen hundred dollars for health care for every car made.
Market forces took over and GM declared bankruptcy.
The Government cannot do the same.
2
When GM and most public entities negotiated medical benefits for unions, those benefits were far less costly. Unanticipated medical inflation ruined that management choice.
Actually, the number was more like $1200. The irony is of course that this conservative complaint illustrates perfectly the need for a single-payer health system.
2
In general, I would agree that public unions and politicians have relationships that are too cozy, especially in large cities. However, police work is dangerous and as we have seen, eyewitnesses from the community are not always accurate and don't always tell the truth when something happens between the police and someone from the community. The Michael Brown case didn't turn out as everyone seemed to think it would.
I certainly hope that Ms. Mosby has the goods on the cops, assuming the charges are valid, because if she doesn't, you can be sure that the attorneys hired by the police union will rightfully tear the case to shreds. This will further strain relationships and strengthen the union's resistance to some reforms.
"Broken Windows" policing is valid but it has led to a situation where many poor people, especially men, are unemployable because of domestic violence or minor crimes. We don't have the right balance and it is contributing to friction between the police and the community. Walter Scott was a perfect example of the impact of overzealous law enforcement.
I certainly hope that Ms. Mosby has the goods on the cops, assuming the charges are valid, because if she doesn't, you can be sure that the attorneys hired by the police union will rightfully tear the case to shreds. This will further strain relationships and strengthen the union's resistance to some reforms.
"Broken Windows" policing is valid but it has led to a situation where many poor people, especially men, are unemployable because of domestic violence or minor crimes. We don't have the right balance and it is contributing to friction between the police and the community. Walter Scott was a perfect example of the impact of overzealous law enforcement.
1
Conservatives are constantly complaining about tenure and due process rights making it difficult and expensive to remove incompetent teachers, but they rarely complain about how expensive and hard it is to remove incompetent cops.
Kudos to Mr. Douthat for (1) highlighting the hypocrisy of fellow conservatives and (2) reminding us, as if we needed it, that incompetent cops are armed and can kill as we have seen recently in Ferguson and North Charleston.
Kudos to Mr. Douthat for (1) highlighting the hypocrisy of fellow conservatives and (2) reminding us, as if we needed it, that incompetent cops are armed and can kill as we have seen recently in Ferguson and North Charleston.
2
Talking out of both sides of the mouth; "the right" demonizes teacher's unions and deifies police unions -yet refuse to acknowledge the hypocrisy.
6
The current darling of the Right, Scott Walker, let the Police and Firemen alone and went after the teachers - and got away with it. I have had a couple of "beat guys" tell me proudly how conservative they are. "That's funny", I tell them, "Conservatives don't like you."
11
Wow. "The decadent phase of the welfare state". With phraseology like that, Ross Douthat must think he's the V.I. Lenin of the Right. But wait, Ross Douthat. You mean to say that there was a phase of the welfare state that wasn't decadent?
Actually, I wonder what public sector services and workers (teachers, transit workers, police, building inspectors, etc.) have to do with the welfare state. I put my garbage out today and it was collected. I guess I'm on the dole.
As a NYC resident, I find my family's life and well-being nearly entirely dependent on teachers, sanitation workers, fire fighters, police, transit workers, water works (d.e.p.) folks etc. The only non-public employees we're dependent on are those of regulated monopolies (ConEd, Cablevision, and whatever the gas company is calling itself these days). It is beyond me why workers who are ESSENTIAL, to whom I am so grateful, should have fewer and weaker rights to negotiate their compensation packages and conditions of employment.
What you're saying, Ross Douthat, is that the more important your work, the less say you should have in it and the less compensation you should receive for it. The Times does need to have a diverse set of expressed views, and you do express conservative values perfectly.
Actually, I wonder what public sector services and workers (teachers, transit workers, police, building inspectors, etc.) have to do with the welfare state. I put my garbage out today and it was collected. I guess I'm on the dole.
As a NYC resident, I find my family's life and well-being nearly entirely dependent on teachers, sanitation workers, fire fighters, police, transit workers, water works (d.e.p.) folks etc. The only non-public employees we're dependent on are those of regulated monopolies (ConEd, Cablevision, and whatever the gas company is calling itself these days). It is beyond me why workers who are ESSENTIAL, to whom I am so grateful, should have fewer and weaker rights to negotiate their compensation packages and conditions of employment.
What you're saying, Ross Douthat, is that the more important your work, the less say you should have in it and the less compensation you should receive for it. The Times does need to have a diverse set of expressed views, and you do express conservative values perfectly.
30
"But after the untimely death of Freddie Gray, no issue looms larger than the need to discipline, suspend and fire police officers who don’t belong on the streets — "
You left out prosecute, convict, and incarcerate.
You left out prosecute, convict, and incarcerate.
7
An NYPD was shot tonight in Queens. Must be the union's fault.
2
How sickening. This has nothing to do with unions, but you and the far right are blinded by your hatred of unions. I suggest the next time you fly a commercial airliner, ask to see the captain and express your distaste for his or her high salary and guaranteed union pension. Or, why not stop an ironworker on the 40th floor of a new building to mention how you think unions caused the destruction of the twin towers? Go for it.
12
Douthat manages to find a way to blame something he already dislikes. And nobody is surprised.
Really, Ross? The problem with police violence against minorities is the policemen's union?
Next he'll say that it's because of Obamacare and abortion, just for good measure. Are you even capable of doing anything except flogging the same bete noirs in every op ed?
(apologies for the mixed metaphor)
Really, Ross? The problem with police violence against minorities is the policemen's union?
Next he'll say that it's because of Obamacare and abortion, just for good measure. Are you even capable of doing anything except flogging the same bete noirs in every op ed?
(apologies for the mixed metaphor)
5
Anybody else remember when Patrick Lynch of the Patrolman Benevolent Association cried that there was blood on the hands of the mayor in a callous attempt to use the execution of his fellow officers as a bargaining chip in his contract negotiations with the De Blasio administration?
When I think about that, along with the statement of the police union in Baltimore (to paraphrase, "these officers did not leave the house in the morning intending to hurt someone so they are innocent"), I find it difficult to disagree with Douthat. The police unions are abusing their power and the public trust. Something needs to be done about it.
When I think about that, along with the statement of the police union in Baltimore (to paraphrase, "these officers did not leave the house in the morning intending to hurt someone so they are innocent"), I find it difficult to disagree with Douthat. The police unions are abusing their power and the public trust. Something needs to be done about it.
6
"I find it difficult to disagree with Douthat. The police unions are abusing their power and the public trust. Something needs to be done about it."
But: is it "police unions" or just "the police" that are doing the abusing? That's where a lot of us disagree with Douthat -- he sees the issue of police evil as nothing more than a club to hit unions over the head with.
But: is it "police unions" or just "the police" that are doing the abusing? That's where a lot of us disagree with Douthat -- he sees the issue of police evil as nothing more than a club to hit unions over the head with.
1
I don't remember the last time there a serious accusation of police miss-conduct in Alameda. Our police are very hard-nosed, they wear military style uniforms, carry automatic weapons. But they don't deal with violent people day in and day out. Sorry, but dealing with low-lifes all day and night wears away your humanity. We live right across a very small body of water from some of the worst parts of Oakland.
In the past 10 years, 1,500 police officers have been killed protecting the public. One every 58 hours. Go here to look at a picture of the "miss-understood youth" who killed four Oakland Police officers in under two hours:
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Family-s-account-of-Oakland-parole...
That's many peoples worst nightmare. That's a cop-killer. That's why you can't get juries to convict. The police are not responsible for most of the problems in Baltimore, or Oakland. Bad cops should be fired or removed. They should be prosecuted if they commit crimes.
Many African-Americans are successful in the United States. The success of Caribbean and African born Blacks is very impressive. There are racists of every color. Racism does not explain why some communities are so spectacularly unsuccessful in this country.
Even with very high salaries (certainly compared to this union teacher's) it is difficulty to attract good police to a city like Oakland. Bad cops should be removed; but 'bad' unions are not the problem.
In the past 10 years, 1,500 police officers have been killed protecting the public. One every 58 hours. Go here to look at a picture of the "miss-understood youth" who killed four Oakland Police officers in under two hours:
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Family-s-account-of-Oakland-parole...
That's many peoples worst nightmare. That's a cop-killer. That's why you can't get juries to convict. The police are not responsible for most of the problems in Baltimore, or Oakland. Bad cops should be fired or removed. They should be prosecuted if they commit crimes.
Many African-Americans are successful in the United States. The success of Caribbean and African born Blacks is very impressive. There are racists of every color. Racism does not explain why some communities are so spectacularly unsuccessful in this country.
Even with very high salaries (certainly compared to this union teacher's) it is difficulty to attract good police to a city like Oakland. Bad cops should be removed; but 'bad' unions are not the problem.
"Bad cops should be fired or removed. They should be prosecuted if they commit crimes."
Does your definition of 'bad cops' include cops who know about crimes by police officers but keep silent about it? Because I suspect that that's a major impediment to any sort of solution -- cops more loyal to (or cowed by fears of ostracization or worse from) their 'brothers' than to the society that they're supposed to serve and protect.
Does your definition of 'bad cops' include cops who know about crimes by police officers but keep silent about it? Because I suspect that that's a major impediment to any sort of solution -- cops more loyal to (or cowed by fears of ostracization or worse from) their 'brothers' than to the society that they're supposed to serve and protect.
1
The problem with the police in this country is that it uses violence, often with para-military tactics, on a scale unknown to any other democratic country. Around 450-500 people (that we know of since even the statistics are sketchy) are killed by the police every year, which is, relatively to the population, 100 times the rate in the UK, and 50-100 times the rate of most developed countries. This is true, and remains true even if many cops are wonderful people who do a very difficult job, but it is true, and it is unacceptable.
And it is not even just a racism problem, even if people were killed by the police at the "lower" rate Whites are killed, it would still be out of the scale compared to any other developed country.
It is crazy, and unions are not the problem. A violent culture and people (mostly conservatives, sorry) with a constant hard-on for the men in uniform are the problem.
And it is not even just a racism problem, even if people were killed by the police at the "lower" rate Whites are killed, it would still be out of the scale compared to any other developed country.
It is crazy, and unions are not the problem. A violent culture and people (mostly conservatives, sorry) with a constant hard-on for the men in uniform are the problem.
3
I seldom agree with Mr. Douthat’s columns, but here he is at least touching on a real problem.
Police unions do perform some useful activities as unions, and as a union member myself, I do not agree with the view that public workers shouldn’t be allowed to organize. And police officers who are accused of illegal violations of people’s rights are as entitled to legal defense and due process as anyone else, of course.
On the other hand, it seems that every time one of these “I can’t breathe” incidents (let’s call them) occurs and gets publicized, the head of a police union runs to the media and loudly proclaims a political position that most unions would not endorse, to say the least. And it is understandable that police forces, by the very nature of their work, develop strong group solidarity, as do military forces.
How brutal police officers (however numerous they may or may not be in any given police department) can be weeded out of their departments under these conditions is a serious problem. I also agree with Mr. Douthat that police misconduct can have much more serious, even lethal, consequences than bad teaching, which makes the problem even deeper.
Police unions do perform some useful activities as unions, and as a union member myself, I do not agree with the view that public workers shouldn’t be allowed to organize. And police officers who are accused of illegal violations of people’s rights are as entitled to legal defense and due process as anyone else, of course.
On the other hand, it seems that every time one of these “I can’t breathe” incidents (let’s call them) occurs and gets publicized, the head of a police union runs to the media and loudly proclaims a political position that most unions would not endorse, to say the least. And it is understandable that police forces, by the very nature of their work, develop strong group solidarity, as do military forces.
How brutal police officers (however numerous they may or may not be in any given police department) can be weeded out of their departments under these conditions is a serious problem. I also agree with Mr. Douthat that police misconduct can have much more serious, even lethal, consequences than bad teaching, which makes the problem even deeper.
4
Good analogy between teachers and police:
- Require teachers to wear cameras so that we can see why our schools are failing.
- Put teachers on trial when they make mistakes.
- Burn down cities when teachers make mistakes.
- Require teachers to wear cameras so that we can see why our schools are failing.
- Put teachers on trial when they make mistakes.
- Burn down cities when teachers make mistakes.
1
1 out of 3, Jim, but still for any comment here to have 1 original good suggestion, that's extraordinary.
Yes, classroom cameras (perhaps not on the teacher but wide angle in a corner somewhere) could really help-- particularly the teacher whose class is recorded. I know that a review of the class, with a senior mentor could really improve teaching.
Teachers on trial when they make mistakes? That's not analogous. No one asks that cops go on trial for mistakes. People just want cops to go on trial when they break the law. That actually already happens to teachers. So they should apply the same rules to cops as they do teachers.
Burn down cities? Never a good idea. Even for a real bad arithmetic lesson.
Yes, classroom cameras (perhaps not on the teacher but wide angle in a corner somewhere) could really help-- particularly the teacher whose class is recorded. I know that a review of the class, with a senior mentor could really improve teaching.
Teachers on trial when they make mistakes? That's not analogous. No one asks that cops go on trial for mistakes. People just want cops to go on trial when they break the law. That actually already happens to teachers. So they should apply the same rules to cops as they do teachers.
Burn down cities? Never a good idea. Even for a real bad arithmetic lesson.
Ross, I'm in agreement with you. I've been ranting about this on the Times blogs for ages. Bust the union, gotta do it. These Keystone cops think that they're immune from prosecution, or scrutiny. Even NYC's tough talking mayor cowed down to the PBA. Also, his close friend is the Corrections Officers President, now we know there won't be any meaningful changes to the current state of affairs at the jails, and the Police Dept... Liberals rally for union causes but should not rally for any cop or CO union causes and wishes.. As for the Republicans being two-faced regarding union busting, you are 100% right on that one. Just mind boggling how this is so out in the open and people don't seem to care. They just keep electing the right wingers into office. These cops and COs won't change because they're being allowed to continue on their merry , corrupt, and thuggish ways.. What do they teach in these Police academies anyway?
2
Franklin Roosevelt, no conservative, thought public sector unions opposed to the public interest and inappropriate.
Police unions indeed frustrate some of the needed reforms but are not the origin of the need for the reform. They did not create the problem that we nearly all agree exists.
Our own contribution to this problem as a voting public has been to demand a greater degree of intrusiveness by our police forces than public safety demands, thereby putting themselves in a position to generate escalating hostility between them and the community. We do this by criminalizing minor acts of annoyance or incivility which in a previous we would have been dealt with directly by one citizen with another or simple tolerance of other people's choices.
We also do it by demanding more government than we are willing to pay for turning police agencies into revenue collectors via fines and the theft of civil asset seizure. Tax collectors are always resented. Arbitrarily confiscatory tax collectors are hated.
Police unions indeed frustrate some of the needed reforms but are not the origin of the need for the reform. They did not create the problem that we nearly all agree exists.
Our own contribution to this problem as a voting public has been to demand a greater degree of intrusiveness by our police forces than public safety demands, thereby putting themselves in a position to generate escalating hostility between them and the community. We do this by criminalizing minor acts of annoyance or incivility which in a previous we would have been dealt with directly by one citizen with another or simple tolerance of other people's choices.
We also do it by demanding more government than we are willing to pay for turning police agencies into revenue collectors via fines and the theft of civil asset seizure. Tax collectors are always resented. Arbitrarily confiscatory tax collectors are hated.
One example of police egregiously misbehaving was the "Fear City" campaign in New York in 1975.
NYC was on the brink of bankruptcy -- and was eventually bailed out by the feds. To make ends meet, the City proposed layoffs. In response, the Council for Public Safety (police, firefighters and other unions) distributed "a scaremongering pamphlet called "Welcome to Fear City: A Survival Guide for Visitors to the City of New York."
"If you had plans to visit NYC, you would probably swiftly abandon them after seeing this thing, which featured a skull on the cover. Just like the skull under your pretty face that would surely be slashed should you dare walk the streets after 6 p.m., or leave Midtown, or take the subway ever. The tips inside included:
Stay off the streets after 6 p.m.
Do not walk — "If you must leave your hotel... summon a taxi by telephone."
Avoid public transportation — "You should never ride the subway for any reason whatsoever."
Remain in Manhattan — "If you remain in midtown areas and restrict your travel to daylight hours, emergency service personnel are best able to provide protection" and more.
http://gothamist.com/2013/09/16/the_1970s_pamphlet_aimed_at_keeping.php#...
NYC was on the brink of bankruptcy -- and was eventually bailed out by the feds. To make ends meet, the City proposed layoffs. In response, the Council for Public Safety (police, firefighters and other unions) distributed "a scaremongering pamphlet called "Welcome to Fear City: A Survival Guide for Visitors to the City of New York."
"If you had plans to visit NYC, you would probably swiftly abandon them after seeing this thing, which featured a skull on the cover. Just like the skull under your pretty face that would surely be slashed should you dare walk the streets after 6 p.m., or leave Midtown, or take the subway ever. The tips inside included:
Stay off the streets after 6 p.m.
Do not walk — "If you must leave your hotel... summon a taxi by telephone."
Avoid public transportation — "You should never ride the subway for any reason whatsoever."
Remain in Manhattan — "If you remain in midtown areas and restrict your travel to daylight hours, emergency service personnel are best able to provide protection" and more.
http://gothamist.com/2013/09/16/the_1970s_pamphlet_aimed_at_keeping.php#...
3
Unions, schmunions. Police tactics that violated the very laws officers are sworn to enforce are a very old problem that started way before unions. Just have enough public officials who are willing to look the other way, and there's never been a lack of those. Especially in a country where all too many people believe that merely being suspect - or simply too different - is as good as a conviction, with that belief happily reinforced by oligarchs and their political servants. It's typical of the 'divide and conquer' mentality, the way those in power entrench themselves by setting off one group against another. For many years that was the way of such nations as Russia (from the Czars to the Soviets to Putin), France under the Bourbon Restoration and the Second Empire, South Africa under apartheid, India under the British Raj (Regrettably, much of that persists there), Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and China (to date, in spite of attempts to produce change), Pinochet's Chile and Argentina under the military juntas. All police states. Unionised? Don't make me laugh.
As Lord Acton put it so well, "All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." It is corruption at the top that fosters brutality below, and it will take honest, ethical, freedom-loving leaders to end it. And that begins not at the police station or the union hall, but at the ballot box. We do not have to keep electing crooks who support thugs. So why do we?
As Lord Acton put it so well, "All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." It is corruption at the top that fosters brutality below, and it will take honest, ethical, freedom-loving leaders to end it. And that begins not at the police station or the union hall, but at the ballot box. We do not have to keep electing crooks who support thugs. So why do we?
8
Beats me why we do. Menendez is just the latest example.
1
It's a matter of checks and balances. When there are no unions workers have no representation, no legal help and no bargaining power so labor loses value. We are close to that today in the private sector helped by government policy on trade and taxes that empowers increasing profit by using cheap labor whether by offshoring or importing it legally or illegally. When unions are too strong employer profits are reduced, unsustainable benefits are promised, and employees are over-protected (cannot be fired for cause without monumental effort). Police unions are in that situation with the help of for-profit prisons, the "war on drugs", and political considerations. In either case the checks and balances, the struggle between workers and employees has been won. It should never be won by either side.
The police union is doing its job of advocating for it's members and protecting them. Politicians are not serving a major sector of the public which they have suppressed with the help of the police armed with military equipment and not held to account. It is a corrupt compact when a city like Ferguson uses the police and loads on the fines to finance itself instead of taxing for better schools and more opportunity.
The police union is doing its job of advocating for it's members and protecting them. Politicians are not serving a major sector of the public which they have suppressed with the help of the police armed with military equipment and not held to account. It is a corrupt compact when a city like Ferguson uses the police and loads on the fines to finance itself instead of taxing for better schools and more opportunity.
91
More opportunity! Our billionaires and multi-millionaires don't want the rest of us to have opportunities because the increasing income- and net-worth inequalities favor them. The economy, to them, is a zero-sum game. They win, and the rest of us lose. Decades ago Neil Diamond (I think) sang about "America, land of opportunity". Nowadays: fuggetaboutit!
Local police support for low tolerance of quality of life crimes ("Broken Windows" law enforcement) has always been selective of arrests by race, class and communities, with a disproportionate arrest rate among the poor and minorities. But the high police union tolerance for "Broken Policing" has too often been the other face of "Broken Windows" policing. Indeed, given the bell-curve of local police performance measurements, the lowest ranking police performing communities should have the largest number of police terminations for cause, the highest rate of police prosecutions for brutality, the highest number of public complaiints, the highest and most numerous municipal civil lawsuit payouts, and largest number of police arrests of police for corruption. But unlike falling crime rates related to "Broken Windows" policing, one fiinds that a high union tolerance and support of "Broken Policing" is closely related to the highest number of police brutality investigations and the lowest number of convictions of accused police, as reported in the Times on Friday following the Maryland D.A. Marilyn Mosby's decision to indict the 6 police involved in the arrest and death of Freddie Gray. Predictably, the Baltimore and other police unions protested her decision. For those police unions, there is no such thing as "Broken Policing."
68
What was the union spozed to do--"Well, there's been no admin or legal process, but what the hay, fire 'em. And while you're at it, let's not get too fussy about no trial...you know they're guilty, we know they're guilty, golly, there's a lot of political heat, so just throw 'em in the slammer now, it'd be better all around?"
One supposes that we're also spozed to yell at lawyrs for defending their clients, who must be guilty, or they wouldn't be in court.
One supposes that we're also spozed to yell at lawyrs for defending their clients, who must be guilty, or they wouldn't be in court.
Ross never saw a union that he liked… but he loves corporations (and low wages and poor working conditions). Oh, and health care limited to the wealthy.
9
FDR did not think it wise to have unionized government employees and he has been proven right continuously since then. Certain government services are defactor monopolies, by law, and should not have any union involvement. Police, air traffic control, and fire to name a few. Democrats have been staunch supports of this forever. Hillary needs to de-unionize all government functions when she becomes President. It never made sense in the beginning and certainly makes no sense now.
1
Throw in the correctional employees union for the sadists that run Rikers Island as well.
Unions play a necessary role to insulate workers from the unbridled avarice that is the ethos of many American corporations these days and that is why right wing mandarins like Douthat loathe them. However when unions act to let murderers in uniform skate they are simply cabals that have nothing to do with protecting workers of the predations of industry but are in essence criminal enterprises which deserve no societal protection.
Unions play a necessary role to insulate workers from the unbridled avarice that is the ethos of many American corporations these days and that is why right wing mandarins like Douthat loathe them. However when unions act to let murderers in uniform skate they are simply cabals that have nothing to do with protecting workers of the predations of industry but are in essence criminal enterprises which deserve no societal protection.
3
Is Ross pining for the good old days before police unions? Does he seriously think that places without police unions have better policing? Where?
This is the old complaint about all unions: they protect their members. Other groups do not?
This is the old complaint about all unions: they protect their members. Other groups do not?
5
So I, a liberal, am naive to think that hundreds of thousands of unconstitutional searches with no probable cause are not needed anymore, Mr. Douthat? In past days when I engaged in crime analysis, I used to believe Broken Windows Theory was social science, too, not junk science. But broken windows theory is merely the justification of the oppressor that he is in charge, that if you (black, hispanic or poor people) step out of line, the agents of the system will take you down. I think I might be able to buy your conclusion if I saw Wall Street brokers and middle class white men like you having to submit to stop and frisk, but somehow we don't see that happening, do we?
7
Wow! First we start with three paragraphs on why public unions are bad and there is not a kernel of truth in any of them.
In the 4th paragraph he links the union movement to the welfare state. Conservatives have come full circle. First, it was welfare recipients who were the dead beats ( if you have to work for your welfare benefits, aren't you employed?) Then conservatives applied the same language and standards to unemployed workers (drug testing, mandatory job training, cut them off sooner.) NOW even fully and gainfully employed persons are part of the welfare state if they belong to a union.
Conservatives justify police errors by pointing out the dangers of the job, split second decisions, the horrors they are exposed to every day. Conservatives are quick to find language that makes the victim of police errors seem like they are at fault for their demise. The 12 year old kid shot dead in Cleveland was "big for his age" "Why did he run?" "What was he doing in that neighborhood."
Now we have this hand wringing over how to get rid of bad cops and, you guessed it! It's the union's fault.
Why isn't it the fault of grand juries who refuse to indict, like in S.I.
Or juries who refuse to convict, because it's the cops (remember Rodney King?)
Many municipal unions are forbidden to strike and must agree to binding arbitration.
Conservatives support the cops for the same reason they support the troops: It looks good to frightened white people at election time.
In the 4th paragraph he links the union movement to the welfare state. Conservatives have come full circle. First, it was welfare recipients who were the dead beats ( if you have to work for your welfare benefits, aren't you employed?) Then conservatives applied the same language and standards to unemployed workers (drug testing, mandatory job training, cut them off sooner.) NOW even fully and gainfully employed persons are part of the welfare state if they belong to a union.
Conservatives justify police errors by pointing out the dangers of the job, split second decisions, the horrors they are exposed to every day. Conservatives are quick to find language that makes the victim of police errors seem like they are at fault for their demise. The 12 year old kid shot dead in Cleveland was "big for his age" "Why did he run?" "What was he doing in that neighborhood."
Now we have this hand wringing over how to get rid of bad cops and, you guessed it! It's the union's fault.
Why isn't it the fault of grand juries who refuse to indict, like in S.I.
Or juries who refuse to convict, because it's the cops (remember Rodney King?)
Many municipal unions are forbidden to strike and must agree to binding arbitration.
Conservatives support the cops for the same reason they support the troops: It looks good to frightened white people at election time.
11
Crime has gone down because the population has aged and a smaller percentage of people are of the crime-prone age.
4
I think Ross has made a very good point here. Why do Republicans make an exception of police unions when they try to eviscerate all unions? Sure, eviscerating all unions is not smart, but police unions are prey to the same problems that other public sector unions are prey to. Ross is asking for some consistency. He points out that police unions can make more serious errors than teachers unions have made. Any problems with that?
3
So the unions are responsible for the fact that juries almost never convict police. (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/us/baltimore-prosecutor-faces-national...
No, what we are looking at here is the right wing's unquenchable desire to blame every problem on unions. Because when unions have been eradicated there will be no advocates whatsoever for normal people who work for a living. And that will allow the right wing to finally accomplish what they have been seeking for so long.
No, what we are looking at here is the right wing's unquenchable desire to blame every problem on unions. Because when unions have been eradicated there will be no advocates whatsoever for normal people who work for a living. And that will allow the right wing to finally accomplish what they have been seeking for so long.
3
Union Buster Walker is scared to death of the police unions. He doesn't seem to realize they exist.
2
Notwithstanding the defense of unions by all the early commenters here, Mr. Douthat has clearly articulated the problem of public employee unions. At some point even liberals are going to have to choose sides: Do they favor the Freddie Grays of the world or the police unions that make it virtually impossible to fire bad cops? Do they favor minority children in failing schools or the teachers' unions that oppose most reforms (except those allocating more money for teachers.)
In my school district property taxes (90% of which go to schools) have increased at three times the rate of inflation over the past 30 years. Student enrollment is virtually unchanged, as is the number of teachers and administrators. Salaries and benefits have increased nicely for the teachers. Nice work if you can get it.
In my school district property taxes (90% of which go to schools) have increased at three times the rate of inflation over the past 30 years. Student enrollment is virtually unchanged, as is the number of teachers and administrators. Salaries and benefits have increased nicely for the teachers. Nice work if you can get it.
1
Did you hear a guy in custody ends up dead with a broken spine? The unions did it.
Exactly! Do you know how high my taxes are because of the worthless teachers' union! Three times as high as they were! Triple! For nothing!
Look! A blimp!
ahh, conservatives. Can't distract them from their sulks.
Exactly! Do you know how high my taxes are because of the worthless teachers' union! Three times as high as they were! Triple! For nothing!
Look! A blimp!
ahh, conservatives. Can't distract them from their sulks.
1
Even bad cops - just like criminals - have a right to due process. When an organization wishes to terminate a unionized employee, it's the union's function to ensure that a process is followed, and to ensure that the accused's rights as an employee are protected while accusations are investigated. This protects union members against arbitrary or discriminatory termination. It's tempting to want unions to throw their members under the proverbial bus when the accusations are heinous, but unions are advocates for their members, not for the police or for the public.
Also, we should remember that unions exist because employers - some rarely and some regularly - abuse, mistreat and arbitrarily terminate their employees.
None of this is to say that bad cops should continue to be employed as cops - just that police officers have bargained collectively to have rights as employees, and those rights have to be respected.
Also, we should remember that unions exist because employers - some rarely and some regularly - abuse, mistreat and arbitrarily terminate their employees.
None of this is to say that bad cops should continue to be employed as cops - just that police officers have bargained collectively to have rights as employees, and those rights have to be respected.
5
"It's our money..." but funny, nobody ever asked me how many F-35's we need and how much to be gouged for each one.
9
Is the question about unions or is it about how insular groups, of any kind, are loathe to discipline their own? It's natural in any community to not want to be the enforcer with your colleagues: see sexual abuse in the military, pedophilia among some priests, malpractice among some doctors, ineptitude among some teachers and undue use of force/abuse of power among some police. Look then at the inability of federal regulators to regulate banks or Boards to reduce excessive compensation to executives or the NFL unwilling to protect its players. Look all around: to the left and to the right, in government, schools, corporations and neighborhoods. No one wants to be a snitch, in a gang or in a brotherhood of doctors, lawyers, CEOs or executives. It's about our culture and how we lack the kind of ethical leadership and selflessness that we need in the heat of the moment in more places. Including in journalism.
10
We are living today with a few "unions" that are perversions of the original workers' unions. Police and teachers unions are probably the most visible examples. It's nearly impossible to dismiss incompetent teachers or abusive police officers, despite the obvious dangers these people pose to our society.
I would happily support the unions of these professionals --- as I strongly do of other workers -- if the obvious abuses welded into union contract were eliminated. How does our society benefit when a police officer, who has participated in a police action under investigation, is protected for many days by union contract from even being interrogated? How does our society benefit when mere seniority protects the job of an incompetent teacher?
Keep the unions, but only if the union contracts are free of patently abusive features that do not serve the greater interests of the public. It seems needless to say it, but the public that pays these public servants' salaries should demand no less.
I would happily support the unions of these professionals --- as I strongly do of other workers -- if the obvious abuses welded into union contract were eliminated. How does our society benefit when a police officer, who has participated in a police action under investigation, is protected for many days by union contract from even being interrogated? How does our society benefit when mere seniority protects the job of an incompetent teacher?
Keep the unions, but only if the union contracts are free of patently abusive features that do not serve the greater interests of the public. It seems needless to say it, but the public that pays these public servants' salaries should demand no less.
5
Dissolving police unions will take care of racially motivated violence by police officers against citizens of color? Not a chance. However small a group, the same police officers who were predisposed to mistreat minorities will still be there, union or no union--they will just have less training and pay without a union. If anything, bias crimes committed by police were more of a problem before there were police unions, back in the 1930's and 40's. "Rough justice" perpetrated by police was famously prevalent back then, and the discriminatory mistreatment that remains won't be solved by union-busting now.
5
Unions are useful when they serve to safeguard the interests of the weaker individual against the actions of the stronger organization. They make sense when workers are pitted against managers who claim that their exclusive responsibility is to the shareholders (including, in large parts, to the managers themselves). If and when rank and file policemen are unfairly treated by their commanders, the public, or the legal system, police unions will make sense. When police unions work to shield policemen from the consequences of their unlawful behavior, police unions are not working in the interests of the public at large or the country.
3
Anyone paying attention to the truly shameful behavior of the NYPD unions toward Bill Deblasio knows that, at least in NYC, these unions' militancy has not just crossed the line, but crossed it repeatedly and gleefully squeeled its tires on it. And across the country we are almost daily submitted to the spectacle of macho police officers doing criminally, stupidly aggressive things, and in reponse, their macho union brethern inevitably close their blue ranks, utterly incapable of self-criticism or reflection. The macho thuggishness of the police mirrors the macho thuggishness of the (overwhelmingly male) violent criminals they face. Quite simply, we need gender parity in our police rank and file and leadership, and given their paramilitary role, police, like the military, should not be allowed to unionize.
5
The idea that reducing police union negotiating power would help the poor is nonsense. You said police union "negotiations inevitably drive up the cost of public services, benefiting middle-class bureaucrats at the expense of the poor."
How about giving us one example where a reduction of police union power helped the poor.....or how about a logical rationale explaining why Republicans would be motivated to use money saved at the police union bargaining table to fund poverty programs?
Republicans need some image improvement when it comes to helping the poor. This was a nice try......but it was "a swing and miss".
How about giving us one example where a reduction of police union power helped the poor.....or how about a logical rationale explaining why Republicans would be motivated to use money saved at the police union bargaining table to fund poverty programs?
Republicans need some image improvement when it comes to helping the poor. This was a nice try......but it was "a swing and miss".
6
Good try Ross. But it's obvious you're trying to execute a sneak attack on all unions. Police unions are critical in an era when weak politicians are springloaded to throw them under a bus to appease some pressure group. Like rioters.
1
Horror of horrors, public sector unions benefit "middle-class bureaucrats at the expense of the poor and saddle governments with long-term fiscal burdens." Of course, the conservatives lose sleep over the miseries of the poor and the high living of secretaries, clerks, trash collectors cops, firefighters, and other undeserving workers who just manage to make it into the middle class.
Of course, Wal-Mart, whose entire business plan IS BASED ON THE EXPLOITATION OF WORKERS doesn't create a burden on governments that must pay for the Medicaid required by workers who have no medical insurance. Of course the shenanigans of AIG Financial Products, whose 400+ employees each had compensation exceeding $1 million per year peddling insurance on defaults of CDOs backed by sub-prime mortgages placed no fiscal burdens on government and taxpayers.
The burden a bad teacher places on the children they teach is not to be understated but, Mr Douthat, what burden has your private sector heroes placed on millions of people throughout the world? What about jobs lost, houses foreclosed, family security destroyed?
Yes, fault can be found in the workplaces that have unions, but these faults pale in comparison to what befalls workers who are not represented and protected by a union. We have put up recently with the effects of much worse than those arising from public sector unions.
Of course, Wal-Mart, whose entire business plan IS BASED ON THE EXPLOITATION OF WORKERS doesn't create a burden on governments that must pay for the Medicaid required by workers who have no medical insurance. Of course the shenanigans of AIG Financial Products, whose 400+ employees each had compensation exceeding $1 million per year peddling insurance on defaults of CDOs backed by sub-prime mortgages placed no fiscal burdens on government and taxpayers.
The burden a bad teacher places on the children they teach is not to be understated but, Mr Douthat, what burden has your private sector heroes placed on millions of people throughout the world? What about jobs lost, houses foreclosed, family security destroyed?
Yes, fault can be found in the workplaces that have unions, but these faults pale in comparison to what befalls workers who are not represented and protected by a union. We have put up recently with the effects of much worse than those arising from public sector unions.
4
(Sigh.) I don't know where to start, Mr. Douthat. Your arguments are specious to the point of absurdity. I'll restrain myself to responding to one of your fallacies.
You claim that, because bargaining for public sector pay means that politicians and "their employees" (!) are "dividing the spoils," which benefits "middle class bureaucrats at the expense of the poor," so public unions are "decadent."
What spoils? When politicians bargain with defense contractors are they "dividing the spoils?" When they bargain with construction companies to pay billions to build roads and bridges, are they "dividing the spoils?" Is Halliburton "decadent?" When it makes a 25% guaranteed profit on a contract, isn't that "at the expense of the poor?" Of course it is, and it's a;so at the expense of the "middle class bureaucrats" whose bargaining power you crave to reduce -- not because it results in anything unfair, but because the union itself promotes pro-labor policies and pro-labor political activities that you want to stifle by attacking their Constitutional freedom of association.
Just be honest -- you like it when the government taxes the middle class to hand their money to corporations (privatize it!), but you hate it when the rich are taxed to promote the interests of regular folks (socialism!).
Your article does demonstrate "decadence" -- but it is the decadence of public discourse.
You claim that, because bargaining for public sector pay means that politicians and "their employees" (!) are "dividing the spoils," which benefits "middle class bureaucrats at the expense of the poor," so public unions are "decadent."
What spoils? When politicians bargain with defense contractors are they "dividing the spoils?" When they bargain with construction companies to pay billions to build roads and bridges, are they "dividing the spoils?" Is Halliburton "decadent?" When it makes a 25% guaranteed profit on a contract, isn't that "at the expense of the poor?" Of course it is, and it's a;so at the expense of the "middle class bureaucrats" whose bargaining power you crave to reduce -- not because it results in anything unfair, but because the union itself promotes pro-labor policies and pro-labor political activities that you want to stifle by attacking their Constitutional freedom of association.
Just be honest -- you like it when the government taxes the middle class to hand their money to corporations (privatize it!), but you hate it when the rich are taxed to promote the interests of regular folks (socialism!).
Your article does demonstrate "decadence" -- but it is the decadence of public discourse.
6
Ross, you are exactly right. As a moderate ( and independent) voter, I don't often agree with your positions, but today's column certainly rings true.
I have personally been the target of vicious attacks by police union leaders simply because I dared to speak out against a local case of police brutality here in small town Michigan.
In all my years of living and writing, I have NEVER seen a single example of the police union folks EVER criticize one of their own. Not...even...once in 58 years. The FOP has less credibility than any union group in America today. They make Jimmy Hoffa's Teamster Union seem like Snw White in comparison!
I have personally been the target of vicious attacks by police union leaders simply because I dared to speak out against a local case of police brutality here in small town Michigan.
In all my years of living and writing, I have NEVER seen a single example of the police union folks EVER criticize one of their own. Not...even...once in 58 years. The FOP has less credibility than any union group in America today. They make Jimmy Hoffa's Teamster Union seem like Snw White in comparison!
6
A good analysis of the practical aspects. But this sentence really amused me: "Second, the government’s money is not its own, so negotiations between politicians and their employees (who are also often their political supporters) amount to a division of spoils rather than a sharing of profits." In what sense are the government's lawful receipts "not its own"? Many centuries of court decisions have certainly recognized government's proprietary interests. And criticizing government because it doesn't adhere to a profit-making model is simply absurd.
Public unions are part of the modern understanding of civil service. The union defines a body of employees and protects them from arbitrary hiring, firing, pay and benefits, discipline, and work conditions. Without the union to give public employees legal recognition as a body and protect their rights individually, office-holders would gradually revert to a more sophisticated version of the spoils system. Internal policies put in place by regulation are quite easy to evade and erode if every individual public employee had filing suit as his/her only recourse to arbitrary treatment.
That said, I have to agree that most public safety and teachers' unions long ago lost any interest in the craft dimension of what their members do. They see their role as merely economic and political, without any actual public service component. (I'm speaking here of the unions, not their individual members.)
Public unions are part of the modern understanding of civil service. The union defines a body of employees and protects them from arbitrary hiring, firing, pay and benefits, discipline, and work conditions. Without the union to give public employees legal recognition as a body and protect their rights individually, office-holders would gradually revert to a more sophisticated version of the spoils system. Internal policies put in place by regulation are quite easy to evade and erode if every individual public employee had filing suit as his/her only recourse to arbitrary treatment.
That said, I have to agree that most public safety and teachers' unions long ago lost any interest in the craft dimension of what their members do. They see their role as merely economic and political, without any actual public service component. (I'm speaking here of the unions, not their individual members.)
3
After a career as a university professor (non-union, though guild privileged), I, this past year, joined a college faculty that required union dues and membership. Woeful experience. Self-serving rules, procedures, and policies extinguished concerns for the public (taxpayer) and educational mission. Couple those facts with power and prestige-seeking administrators and the result: Waste, turmoil, and perhaps, a particle of learning for massive spending.
1
Most people would kill to be in a union, to have a good paying job and good benefits so they could raise their family without looking over their shoulder. Mr. Douthat confuses philosophy with reality.
6
Ross, public sector unions are not the core issue. I used to be the president of a local public employees' bargaining unit with 240 members. We had collective bargaining rights, but not the right to strike. We had a legal obligation to provide robust defense for all of our members, even if we didn't like them and privately wished that they had never been hired (by management) as our co-workers.
My union business representative offered to teach a session for top managers at my agency on how to legally terminate members of our union. The personnel manager declined her offer!
The core issue is misplaced loyalty. What do members of military units, police forces, and fraternities have in common? They are completely or primarily male and have the same code of loyalty as members of criminal gangs: "don't snitch on a buddy." Until that code changes, we will have high rates of sexual assault in the military, far too much brutality and corruption among police officers, and serious misconduct at fraternities, from life-threatening hazing to rape.
It's about upholding a core conservative value: being honest in the face of serious peer pressure and even threats of physical harm from your (phony) brothers.
My union business representative offered to teach a session for top managers at my agency on how to legally terminate members of our union. The personnel manager declined her offer!
The core issue is misplaced loyalty. What do members of military units, police forces, and fraternities have in common? They are completely or primarily male and have the same code of loyalty as members of criminal gangs: "don't snitch on a buddy." Until that code changes, we will have high rates of sexual assault in the military, far too much brutality and corruption among police officers, and serious misconduct at fraternities, from life-threatening hazing to rape.
It's about upholding a core conservative value: being honest in the face of serious peer pressure and even threats of physical harm from your (phony) brothers.
13
Excellent and very timely article. The out of control prison guard situation at Rikers is an example close at home for all New Yorkers.
2
Blame the unions. Good grief.
If police made less and had less control over their lives, they would do a better job? The good old profit motive is behind much our problems with law enforcement. We incarcerate the highest percentage of people, especially minorities, than any other country. We have laws that bring up the numbers so private jails can make more money, laws that particularly apprehend blacks such as in Baltimore.
But get rid of the unions; they are a drag on the profit state some on the right see as utopia.
If police made less and had less control over their lives, they would do a better job? The good old profit motive is behind much our problems with law enforcement. We incarcerate the highest percentage of people, especially minorities, than any other country. We have laws that bring up the numbers so private jails can make more money, laws that particularly apprehend blacks such as in Baltimore.
But get rid of the unions; they are a drag on the profit state some on the right see as utopia.
6
Equating police work with teaching, or any other profession, is a mistake. Being a police officer is unlike anything else. Officers see the worst in life. They deal with criminals, many dangerous, that society doesn't want anything to do with. Unless you've been a police officer there's no way you can understand what they go through. I'll not become involved in a debate of the current cases. Whatever is decided keep this in mind. The public will ALWAYS need police officers. ALWAYS. There's no Plan B. And they want educated, mature people who act responsible all the time. So when the debate comes as to what to "do about the police" be cautious and don't make the restrictions so onerous as to drive viable candidates away and attract only those who are less qualified. The last thing a city needs is accepting unqualified people simply because there's no alternative.
46
"Officers see the worst in life" is a bit melodramatic. Actually, people who live in high crime areas see the worst in life, and don't stop seeing it at the end of their shift. The ER personnel, prosecutors, and other professionals see crime and its results. Cops are not unique in seeing "the worst" but in having clubs, guns, back-up, and nearly complete discretion in how to use force on people they often wrongly decide are "the worst."
1
This is exactly the type of rhetoric we all need to publicly combat. Is policing difficult and stressful? Absolutely. Is it different from teaching in a lot of ways? Yes. But is it some out-of-the-world experience that noone other than police can relate to and therefore we should let them get away with whatever they do? Absolute not.
At the core of it, police is like several other professions in the sense that you are dealing directly with the people. About the public always needing the police. Hmm. I have lived in countries with much less, police footprint, and it is not the nasty brutish anarchy police-suppois try to suggest it would be.
At the core of it, police is like several other professions in the sense that you are dealing directly with the people. About the public always needing the police. Hmm. I have lived in countries with much less, police footprint, and it is not the nasty brutish anarchy police-suppois try to suggest it would be.
Police also have powers that no other citizen has, including to kill and make arrests and ruin others lives. Baltimore has 3000 officers, and, like teaching, we are only speaking of a few bad apples. Any occupation has a percentage of people who are not cut for the job, and they should be employed elsewhere. (Been there myself). At least police chiefs should have discretion to fire like any other executive
1
A surprisingly straightforward assessment of the mistaken and harmful blind spot too many on the right have when it comes to police unions. Bravo Mr. Douthat for swimming against the GOP tide here. Unlike all the palaver from the left in the initial comments I've read your column isn't about the union movement, but public unions where contracts are negotiated by politicians whose ethics (on the statehouse level) are often atrocious and who are playing with our tax monies.
In my state the public unions have the kind of power over both parties only the gun fetish lobby has in the so-called "red" states. I could tell you tales about the bought physicians years ago who found all sorts of service related injuries in order for their patients to procure substantial disability pensions for healthy 40 year olds. Then these ex-cops would run marathons, swim across Long Island sound or go into the roofing and construction business. But they were all terribly injured they claimed. My state also has a "heart law", which creates a legal presumption (non-rebuttable) that coronary problems are service related for cops as a matter of law, no medical proof needed. Yes, they deserve good pensions for going in harm's way. But they shouldn't get to abuse the system because of feckless politicians.
In my state the public unions have the kind of power over both parties only the gun fetish lobby has in the so-called "red" states. I could tell you tales about the bought physicians years ago who found all sorts of service related injuries in order for their patients to procure substantial disability pensions for healthy 40 year olds. Then these ex-cops would run marathons, swim across Long Island sound or go into the roofing and construction business. But they were all terribly injured they claimed. My state also has a "heart law", which creates a legal presumption (non-rebuttable) that coronary problems are service related for cops as a matter of law, no medical proof needed. Yes, they deserve good pensions for going in harm's way. But they shouldn't get to abuse the system because of feckless politicians.
3
From Douthat's article, it seems the leadership of police union has more control and influence over the police force than the police commissioner who should be chief in their chain of command. This in itself should be cause for concern.
Also, the fact that police unions tend to be Republican, may explain a police culture that tends to be adversarial and hostile to the segment of community that is low income and high crimes. Republicans in general tend to see these type of people as criminally prone outcasts than their fellow citizens who need help. Republicans in general do not see the existence of police brutality.
It has been said that one of the problem with police is their being militarized. If the police union protect the police from being accountable to the community they police, then they have become a taxpayer supported militia.
Also, the fact that police unions tend to be Republican, may explain a police culture that tends to be adversarial and hostile to the segment of community that is low income and high crimes. Republicans in general tend to see these type of people as criminally prone outcasts than their fellow citizens who need help. Republicans in general do not see the existence of police brutality.
It has been said that one of the problem with police is their being militarized. If the police union protect the police from being accountable to the community they police, then they have become a taxpayer supported militia.
5
I'm tempted to agree that police unions need reining in.
But then I look at the situation Douthat claims is much the same, but that I know much more about: that of teachers' unions. Their practice of "driv[ing] up the cost of public services" to the point where teachers make 60% of what comparable workers make in the private sector, their efforts "to protect failed policies and incompetent personnel" that have resulted in an environment where it's relatively easy to fire even good teachers for little or no reason, and where the unions are on the right side of almost every issue, but usually unable to be successful in their fight against truly failed policies.
Douthat is ridiculously, disgustingly misinformed about teachers' unions. He's decided to believe the self-serving lies that self-proclaimed conservatives have told themselves and others so often that they've convinced themselves they're really true. And that causes me to wonder if his opinion on police unions, which I find more credible (but perhaps that's because I know less about the nuts and bolts of them), might be similarly willfully ignorant.
But then I look at the situation Douthat claims is much the same, but that I know much more about: that of teachers' unions. Their practice of "driv[ing] up the cost of public services" to the point where teachers make 60% of what comparable workers make in the private sector, their efforts "to protect failed policies and incompetent personnel" that have resulted in an environment where it's relatively easy to fire even good teachers for little or no reason, and where the unions are on the right side of almost every issue, but usually unable to be successful in their fight against truly failed policies.
Douthat is ridiculously, disgustingly misinformed about teachers' unions. He's decided to believe the self-serving lies that self-proclaimed conservatives have told themselves and others so often that they've convinced themselves they're really true. And that causes me to wonder if his opinion on police unions, which I find more credible (but perhaps that's because I know less about the nuts and bolts of them), might be similarly willfully ignorant.
15
I consider myself a progressive, and I agree with Douthat on this question. It is not a progressive position to support public sector unions that bargain for their membership, which is often relatively privileged, at the expense of the rest of the population, most of which is less privileged in many jurisdictions. I support unions in the private sector wholeheartedly, but in the public sector, which is the sole provider of vital functions such as public safety, unions have undue power. We have seen that, too often, they use that power to comfort the comfortable (themselves) and afflict the afflicted (most of the population). Because government employees provide vital services, they should have expanded whistleblower protection. Such protection would allow them to publicly air demands or practices by their employers that could harm the public without fear of reprisals. But the terms of their employment should be set by the same market forces and regulations, such as the minimum wage, that other workers face. That said, Douthat would disagree, but we need a higher minimum wage nationally, with even higher regional minimums in regions with high costs of living.
127
The fundamental reason that right wing pundits like Douthat target unions is that their memberships generally support left wing politicians financially and therefore provide something of a bulwark against the billionaire cash going to the right. Its clearly in their interest that this is stopped, it is not in the interest of progressives or the wider country. Unions typically represent people that are lower middle class or working class so are not 'relatively privileged' as they have struggled with flat incomes as the explosion of wealth of the 1% has happened. Protecting unions is key to rolling back the inequality that has decimated communities and lives across the US. They are not perfect but it is vital that whats left of them are protected. That said, the police union's practise of stonewalling even the clearest case against bad cops must be stamped on, it is not acceptable in a democratic society.
The minimum wage idea is a joke. Two things are pulling wages down:
40 million illegals and crony capitalism. Our politicians can be bought cheaply and by the gross and corporations know that. Corporations and government are interwoven in codependency. Democracy and doing the peoples work are farces in America, distractions for the ignorati.
40 million illegals and crony capitalism. Our politicians can be bought cheaply and by the gross and corporations know that. Corporations and government are interwoven in codependency. Democracy and doing the peoples work are farces in America, distractions for the ignorati.
You're not a progressive, for three reasons: you don't know what you're talking about on things like whistleblower protections, you don't know how the economics works, and you dislike unions doing what they're supposed to do.
And, you don't have hold of the essential part: the question isn't why do we have oublic sector unions,mit's why don't we have more private sector unions.
And, you don't have hold of the essential part: the question isn't why do we have oublic sector unions,mit's why don't we have more private sector unions.
1
Thank you, Ross. A friend and I were talking about police unions today. Remember, police unions and unions in general are there to protect their members come hell or high water. Liberals decry police abuse, but they love public employee unions. Sometimes, things you support can cause things you abhor.
3
Mr. Douthat: perhaps NYC's police patrolmans' union would be more favorably disposed toward reform if the City seriously tried to come to terms with them on a contract. They've been working without one since well back in the Bloomberg Administration - how many years, I'm not sure. Given the overall uncertain future of the City's finances, it's difficult to avoid the suspicion that City Hall is using the current public loathing of police officers to duck the contract question.
As I read your column, I see that a NYC policeman was shot in the head on the job today. I don't read this in the New York Times, though, just in other online sources such as the Daily News and NBC.
As I read your column, I see that a NYC policeman was shot in the head on the job today. I don't read this in the New York Times, though, just in other online sources such as the Daily News and NBC.
I agree, it is odd the GOP would go after teachers, sanitation workers and others that are basically powerless, but defer to the one group that can kill us with impunity. Let's not forget the cops in Baltimore have been indicted, but no convictions yet. Juries tend to acquit police regardless of the grievous nature of the crimes. It's the 'ministry of fear' effect. Do't look of anyone to go to jail over the recent killings.
6
WoW. Ross Douthat takes the tragedy of Mr. Grey's death and turns it into political attack ad. While I strongly disagree with the police union's defense of the indicted officers, it is (hopefully) still part of the judicial system to assume innocence. And it is a union's position to protect its members from undeserved prosecution and pressure.
But instead Douthat turns into a screed against public unions. He takes the conservative line that any protection provided any employees from more powerful monied interests is intolerable. The officers deserve their day in court with a vigorous defense. Sounds like the idea Ross is promoting is if you're indicted you must be guilty, so don't even bother with the trial.
Sure wish we could use this "rule" on a few bankers from 2008.
But instead Douthat turns into a screed against public unions. He takes the conservative line that any protection provided any employees from more powerful monied interests is intolerable. The officers deserve their day in court with a vigorous defense. Sounds like the idea Ross is promoting is if you're indicted you must be guilty, so don't even bother with the trial.
Sure wish we could use this "rule" on a few bankers from 2008.
4
They are NOT union contracts; they are collective bargaining agreements. They always are signef by at least 2 parties.....City of Baltimore and the Bartimore Police Associati
on.
on.
4
In fact, many collective bargaining agreements are imposed upon municipalities by 'neutral' arbitrators chosen by both sides. One problem, however, is if the arbitrator ever wants to be chosen again by any police union he had better not hand down a decision adverse to union interests.
Ross deserves a small amount of credit for anticipating why the analogy between police unions and teachers' unions is basically faulty. But he fails to mention a couple issues. First, no sane teacher would ever teach without joining a union if one is available. Assuming that you will be able to withstand the lunacy of parents and of administrators all on your own is absurd. (I have known teachers who were proud of their refusal to join a union, but they were all people more focused on being heroic than on being competent). Second, it is much easier for citizens in general to agree on what we expect from policemen. Opinions about educational theory and practice are all over the map. But almost all of us agree that it is okay to shoot someone who grabs for your gun if you are a cop. It is not okay to arrest people without due process and it is not okay to bounce them around the inside of a van so that they die of their injuries.
3
So Ross sees the problem as the inability to find and hire police officers who can spend their time tuning up the populous without becoming bullies in uniform?
That is always the problem for conservatives. They have this bright picture of this perfect world. If only they didn't require that all men be saints, or selfless, or stable, or just rational.
That is always the problem for conservatives. They have this bright picture of this perfect world. If only they didn't require that all men be saints, or selfless, or stable, or just rational.
3
"That is always the problem for conservatives. They have this bright picture of this perfect world. If only they didn't require that all men be saints, or selfless, or stable, or just rational."
And then they -- okay, to be fair only some of them, usually the ones with the biggest mouths -- tell us that they're the hard-nosed realists while the liberals are all dreaming fools.
And then they -- okay, to be fair only some of them, usually the ones with the biggest mouths -- tell us that they're the hard-nosed realists while the liberals are all dreaming fools.
1
"In California over the last few decades, the correctional officers union first lobbied for a prison-building spree and then, well-entrenched, exercised veto power over criminal justice reform."
Mr. Douthat cites a perfect example but in his bias misses the real problem entirely: the problem is not unions, it is the out-of-control power of moneyed interests to influence lawmaking and control government. Unions are bit players in comparison to billionaires like the Kochs, the oil industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and the weapons makers.
Mr. Douthat cites a perfect example but in his bias misses the real problem entirely: the problem is not unions, it is the out-of-control power of moneyed interests to influence lawmaking and control government. Unions are bit players in comparison to billionaires like the Kochs, the oil industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and the weapons makers.
18
Unions for public employees is a recent event. George Meany and FDR were both against public unions including police unions. They knew that the traditional means of settling things was the strike and felt it could not be in public unions.
Ross points to the real danger, corrupting the union management relationship. Those on both side benefit from higher wages and benefits, both sides. The public is stuck with the tab. Public Pensions are eating many city, county and state budgets. Were it not for the voracioius appetite of SS and Medicare for public funds we would hear more about federal pensions but with national public debt in the trillions and SS and other public programs 100 trillion in arrears on their funding requirements, we would hear more.
It is time the police and fire unions felt some heat from the public, the real employer.
Ross points to the real danger, corrupting the union management relationship. Those on both side benefit from higher wages and benefits, both sides. The public is stuck with the tab. Public Pensions are eating many city, county and state budgets. Were it not for the voracioius appetite of SS and Medicare for public funds we would hear more about federal pensions but with national public debt in the trillions and SS and other public programs 100 trillion in arrears on their funding requirements, we would hear more.
It is time the police and fire unions felt some heat from the public, the real employer.
2
Ross Douthat absolutely nails the problem with police unions. While consistently attacking teachers' unions, absolutely no politician has been willing to take on police unions, which are operating as wholly corrupt organizations. I say this not because every police officer behaves unlawfully, abuses their authority, or refuses to abide by departmental policies, but because large numbers don't and their unions block any effort to rein in offenders. Simply put, public safety must be put ahead of job protection.
The key word in this piece: Accountability. It is one I have found myself repeatedly using in numerous comments on police abuses. The police themselves, through their unions and individual behavior, steadfastly refuse any accountability for their actions however egregious. The actions of the police have been toxic, and long ago poisoned relations with black Americans. What is amazing about recent events is that ubiquity of cameras has brought to the fore the issue of police abuses, and raised this issue for white America. As that has happened the police have seen a marked change in the public attitudes whose swiftness is startling. I cannot say that I am optimistic about change. The response of N.Y.P.D. officers has been to continue arresting people lawfully filming the police, with new reports as recently as this week. Nor can I be hopeful for change when Mayor DeBlasio has started heaping praise on the N.Y.P.D. while dropping any push for accountability.
The key word in this piece: Accountability. It is one I have found myself repeatedly using in numerous comments on police abuses. The police themselves, through their unions and individual behavior, steadfastly refuse any accountability for their actions however egregious. The actions of the police have been toxic, and long ago poisoned relations with black Americans. What is amazing about recent events is that ubiquity of cameras has brought to the fore the issue of police abuses, and raised this issue for white America. As that has happened the police have seen a marked change in the public attitudes whose swiftness is startling. I cannot say that I am optimistic about change. The response of N.Y.P.D. officers has been to continue arresting people lawfully filming the police, with new reports as recently as this week. Nor can I be hopeful for change when Mayor DeBlasio has started heaping praise on the N.Y.P.D. while dropping any push for accountability.
5
I think you need to separate public and private unions. I actually agree with Ross that if you're dismantling the power of public sector unions (not always good, by the way), you might as well include police unions. After all, they've been known to promote the "blue wall of silence" more than about any institution, and their resistance to reforms is a huge barrier to decreasing the increasing number of cases of police brutality that seem to occur on a weekly basis.
But not all unions are always bad--how else can private sector workers exert any control over working conditions and wages? In fact, I'd venture to say the American worker is even more likely to be exploited without some group arguing on their behalf. Yes, there are excesses, and yes companies have often been held hostage to demands for higher benefit packages than the average joe working in a non-unionized industry, but overall, I think the balance has tilted toward greater worker protection than not.
So, yes, I agree with Ross, although I wonder what his Republican brethren would say to this. Probably nothing good. I'll be curious to read the comments from known conservative posters--to see if they come down hard on this columnist for daring to take on police unions.
But not all unions are always bad--how else can private sector workers exert any control over working conditions and wages? In fact, I'd venture to say the American worker is even more likely to be exploited without some group arguing on their behalf. Yes, there are excesses, and yes companies have often been held hostage to demands for higher benefit packages than the average joe working in a non-unionized industry, but overall, I think the balance has tilted toward greater worker protection than not.
So, yes, I agree with Ross, although I wonder what his Republican brethren would say to this. Probably nothing good. I'll be curious to read the comments from known conservative posters--to see if they come down hard on this columnist for daring to take on police unions.
4
Mr. Douthat, please don't think for a moment that your attempt at challenging your own tribe's consistency and logic will be met with anything but scorn by the well-chronicled bias of NY Times readers.
2
How about this: Every police officer should be required to submit to a biannual psychiatric exam by a team of board-certified psychiatrists with no connection to the police union and selected by lottery. Then we will have greater confidence in our police force.
1
What Ross is missing here is the fact that contracts are negotiated. They do not just appear from the blue. If politicians do not negotiate well, then perhaps that is more the problem than collective bargaining. There are public sector contracts that contain language prohibiting strikes so the fear of a walk out of essential employees is a straw man. Politicians CAN be held accountable for their positions and support of lousy contract language.
Unions and collective bargaining exist to level the playing field between the employer and the employee. This is an anathema to conservatives who want employees powerless. If the contracts with public employees contain language that is detrimental to the community, then perhaps the issue lies with the negotiators.
Unions and collective bargaining exist to level the playing field between the employer and the employee. This is an anathema to conservatives who want employees powerless. If the contracts with public employees contain language that is detrimental to the community, then perhaps the issue lies with the negotiators.
5
The police are right to be wary of the demands made on it by a public who does not often see things from their position - one that is often wrought with danger - just as the public should be wary of any Americans with the legal authority to kill other Americans.
2
Nice trick trying to make the case that because unions lobby politicians, unions are a problem.
No. The problem is that politicians have to cater to lobbyists, and that they only listen to lobbyists with money.
Your problem seems to be that unions have money with which to lobby. In your world, only employers should be able to "speak" to their representatives.
No. The problem is that politicians have to cater to lobbyists, and that they only listen to lobbyists with money.
Your problem seems to be that unions have money with which to lobby. In your world, only employers should be able to "speak" to their representatives.
15
Ross Douthat's despicable union bashing opus only proves that unions are still relevant today. A police union's primary job is to protect its members from being tried and found guilty in the kangeroo court of public opinion. The 6 police officers accused of Freddie Gray's death are "entitled" (there's that word conservatives hate so much) union protection and to eventually have their day in court. Innocent until proven guilty applies to unionized cops too.
4
I live in a country which has strong police unions and strong public service unions and part of our social contract is that civil servants serve the needs of the public. I lived in Chicago and I often didn't know who the police were there to serve as their need for additional income put them on many payrolls. When I went for my green card I was shocked at how many public employees whose job it was to handle paper work were functionally illiterate.
The problem in America is not unions but a concerted effort by the American right wing to discredit government. It is 70 years since Joseph Raymond McCarthy took over Washington with the help of the Buckleys and 50 years since William F Buckley Jr turned fascism into conservatism. Today May 2nd is the 58th anniversary since the death of McCarthy but his philosophy and disdain for democracy still dominates the American right.
Mr Douthat please come to Canada for a week and watch our unionized professional police and civil servants work, that is part of the social contract that America forgot about when the right wing took over 70 years ago. We have occasional problems with public servants and their unions but our police and public employees are an intrinsic element in our middle class and behave with the same fundamental human values that you extol. That is why when a Canadian police officer dies in the line of duty the entire country mourns because we have lost a friend and a valued member of society. Ross have you no shame?
The problem in America is not unions but a concerted effort by the American right wing to discredit government. It is 70 years since Joseph Raymond McCarthy took over Washington with the help of the Buckleys and 50 years since William F Buckley Jr turned fascism into conservatism. Today May 2nd is the 58th anniversary since the death of McCarthy but his philosophy and disdain for democracy still dominates the American right.
Mr Douthat please come to Canada for a week and watch our unionized professional police and civil servants work, that is part of the social contract that America forgot about when the right wing took over 70 years ago. We have occasional problems with public servants and their unions but our police and public employees are an intrinsic element in our middle class and behave with the same fundamental human values that you extol. That is why when a Canadian police officer dies in the line of duty the entire country mourns because we have lost a friend and a valued member of society. Ross have you no shame?
81
Although I strongly disagree with your assertion that American conservatives have fascist tendencies, I would also invite Mr. Douthat to look at other countries. I live in Germany, and although there is unionization in the public sector, we do not see the excesses that the column envisions. To me, one must take culture and history into account. Whereas the US has a highly confrontational labor history, Germany is traditionally much more corporativistic. The result is that although labor negotiations often begin with alot of posturing, everyone knows that the goal is a compromise between the opposing interests, so that consequently sooner or later a viable compromise is found. This leads to very stable labor relations in the long run. So what the US might try to do is attempt a culture shift.
2
Your branding of U.S. public employees as functionally illiterate does a far better job of discrediting government than the right wing might.
Having also grown up in Canada, I can assure readers that government workers there are not one iota different.
Few would argue that in either country the people in question are inherently bad. Ergo, it must be the system in which they work.
Having also grown up in Canada, I can assure readers that government workers there are not one iota different.
Few would argue that in either country the people in question are inherently bad. Ergo, it must be the system in which they work.
First, you identify the poor quality of the government employees in Chicago, then go on to blame...republicans? Sorry. It is democrats who have traditionally used our government as a jobs' program and, in so doing, have created unresponsive bureaucracies. In Chicago's case, it is a patronage program, designed to help democrats not to serve taxpayers.
Until fairly recently, most government services were terrible. The IRS and Motor Vehicle Departments were nightmares, poorly run and completely unaware of the end users' -- taxpayers' -- needs or concerns.
This is where the privatization push came from, a sense that our government bureaucracies could not get any worse.
I shudder at the thought of the democratic machine, completely unopposed, operating all our government agencies. No thanks. I like to walk into Motor Vehicles office and not have to wait hours or have the clerk completely disinterested and without a concern for whether I am satisfied with his/her service.
Until fairly recently, most government services were terrible. The IRS and Motor Vehicle Departments were nightmares, poorly run and completely unaware of the end users' -- taxpayers' -- needs or concerns.
This is where the privatization push came from, a sense that our government bureaucracies could not get any worse.
I shudder at the thought of the democratic machine, completely unopposed, operating all our government agencies. No thanks. I like to walk into Motor Vehicles office and not have to wait hours or have the clerk completely disinterested and without a concern for whether I am satisfied with his/her service.
1
Sow the Wind, Reap the Whirlwind:
Garrity v. New Jersey was a 1967 U.S. Supreme Court case that was the fountainhead of the Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights statutes that many states, including Maryland, fell over themselves in a headlong rush to enact and that give cops extravagant "due process" privileges that cop unions now trot out for cops to hide behind in cases of cop misconduct.
It is the height of irony that in the Garrity case, it was none other than liberal stalwart Justice William O. Douglas who wrote the Majority Opinion -- in favor of "due process" privileges for cops -- joined by all the other liberal justices of that time: Earl Warren, William Brennan, Hugo Black and Abe Fortas. In stark contrast, the Dissenting Opinion -- opposing "due process" privileges for cops -- was written by conservative champion Justice John Harlan, joined by all the other conservative justices of the time: Potter Stewart, Byron White and Tom Clark.
Garrity v. New Jersey was a 1967 U.S. Supreme Court case that was the fountainhead of the Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights statutes that many states, including Maryland, fell over themselves in a headlong rush to enact and that give cops extravagant "due process" privileges that cop unions now trot out for cops to hide behind in cases of cop misconduct.
It is the height of irony that in the Garrity case, it was none other than liberal stalwart Justice William O. Douglas who wrote the Majority Opinion -- in favor of "due process" privileges for cops -- joined by all the other liberal justices of that time: Earl Warren, William Brennan, Hugo Black and Abe Fortas. In stark contrast, the Dissenting Opinion -- opposing "due process" privileges for cops -- was written by conservative champion Justice John Harlan, joined by all the other conservative justices of the time: Potter Stewart, Byron White and Tom Clark.
4
"Garrity v. New Jersey was a 1967 U.S. Supreme Court case that was the fountainhead of the Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights statutes"
Garrity decided that a cop could not (1) be compelled to answer questions in criminal investigations upon pain of being fired if he doesn't and then (2) have his "voluntary" statements used against him in criminal court. How this caused elected officials to implement the extravagant "Cops' Bill of Rights" we have today is... unclear.
Garrity decided that a cop could not (1) be compelled to answer questions in criminal investigations upon pain of being fired if he doesn't and then (2) have his "voluntary" statements used against him in criminal court. How this caused elected officials to implement the extravagant "Cops' Bill of Rights" we have today is... unclear.
Ah yes, those pesky unions, always standing up for their members. What a better world it would be if those working people would just take what they are given and be quiet it would be a much better world for Ross (I can call you Ross right? Just call me Squiggs) I am not of fan of some police unions these days because policing seems to have become a nice place for thugs, racists and work hand in hand with corrupt politicians and businesses. That said, could it have more to do with anti-crime, anti-drug, anti-terrorism, militarization and the innately racist policies of the last 40 years then the fact that cops are organized? We have given them the idea that they are soldiers fighting against an unfeeling world and it attracts some unsavory characters who have spent their lives itching for a fight. If you are itching for a fight police work is a good way to find one. They are not soldiers, they are policemen sworn to protect and serve.
However, I tend to respect and appreciate the job most cops do. Maybe we should pay them more, give them better things, like pensions and health care. I think that any cop works harder than any investment banker and they do put themselves in real danger.
By the way, how's your union working out for you?
However, I tend to respect and appreciate the job most cops do. Maybe we should pay them more, give them better things, like pensions and health care. I think that any cop works harder than any investment banker and they do put themselves in real danger.
By the way, how's your union working out for you?
6
Police Unions are a reflection of the thought and culture of the police. As the culture of the police improves, or changes, so too will the culture of the unions. Blaming the unions, or even broken windows style policing, is missing the obvious. The obvious problem is that we have a police force being deployed to fight the drug war. As long as police officers see themselves as soldiers, and the population the enemy, then this culture of violence will continue.
8
"But to sustain this kind of police work, it's necessary to restrain those excesses associated with it; to restrain those excesses, it's necessary to hold cops accountable." Do you feel the same way about Financial reform? How about Campaign Finance reform? How about Filibuster reform? Collective bargaining, a union's main function, is not the cause of bad behavior. When Republican Governors' refused Medicaid expansion in their states they caused more deaths then all the unions combined, proving that the rank and file aren't to blame, poor management is.
10
One aspect of Congressional oversight of federal public employees is that the Congress as a practical matter does not concede an iota of authority to other actors. It ultimately preserves its right to ensure accountability. And the federal civil service is more capable, competent, and cost effective than almost any other civil service in the US.
A civil service should ensure a smooth functioning of authority and accountability in both directions of the employer-employee relationship.
A possible reform would be to apply the "funding formula" rule to all such arrangements; that a future city council, county board, or state legislature can change at will arrangements made by previous legislative authorities. Previous legislative bodies should not be allowed to bind the policy making of future legislative bodies. Collective bargaining by public employee unions today is an abrogation of democratic accountability through elected legislative bodies.
A civil service should ensure a smooth functioning of authority and accountability in both directions of the employer-employee relationship.
A possible reform would be to apply the "funding formula" rule to all such arrangements; that a future city council, county board, or state legislature can change at will arrangements made by previous legislative authorities. Previous legislative bodies should not be allowed to bind the policy making of future legislative bodies. Collective bargaining by public employee unions today is an abrogation of democratic accountability through elected legislative bodies.
This would be one of Ross’s “coming out” moments, when he gets tired for a piece or two about the frustrations attendant to being one of two conservative op-ed pundits at one of the most liberal of our influential publications, and just puts the truth out there unvarnished. He should relax more often: if they wanted him kneecapped, it would have happened long ago.
And the truth he offers certainly is unvarnished, isn’t it? Well, another Republican wants to go one better, just so the readers here don’t think Ross and David are unique.
We should fire every single police officer in the U.S., then selectively re-hire those who pass profile examination that examines their records for indications of patterns of willful abuse of civilians, particularly abuse targeted by race or ethnicity. State cops, local cops, federal police (FBI), even federal marshals. It would require at least federal legislation to hold the cop unions at bay, but we could let them organize those who passed through the sieve and were re-hired.
It would cost a ton, but maybe we don’t build a few F-22 fighters to pay for it. Maybe we get cops as a result who don’t NEED to be protected by unions from censure for patently bad or even criminal behavior.
Now, you see? Not only are Republicans reasonable, but we can be creative problem-solvers, as well.
And the truth he offers certainly is unvarnished, isn’t it? Well, another Republican wants to go one better, just so the readers here don’t think Ross and David are unique.
We should fire every single police officer in the U.S., then selectively re-hire those who pass profile examination that examines their records for indications of patterns of willful abuse of civilians, particularly abuse targeted by race or ethnicity. State cops, local cops, federal police (FBI), even federal marshals. It would require at least federal legislation to hold the cop unions at bay, but we could let them organize those who passed through the sieve and were re-hired.
It would cost a ton, but maybe we don’t build a few F-22 fighters to pay for it. Maybe we get cops as a result who don’t NEED to be protected by unions from censure for patently bad or even criminal behavior.
Now, you see? Not only are Republicans reasonable, but we can be creative problem-solvers, as well.
4
Richard,
Sounds great in theory. How exactly do you propose we manage the transition period between "fire every single ... officer" and "selectively re-hire those who pass profile examination"? Sounds like an invitation to anarchists.
Sounds great in theory. How exactly do you propose we manage the transition period between "fire every single ... officer" and "selectively re-hire those who pass profile examination"? Sounds like an invitation to anarchists.
1
It is dispiriting, if unsurprising, to see conservatives using the Freddie Gray tragedy as a mechanism to bolster their decades-long assault on the last real unions in this country, those of the public sector. Unsatisfied with having precipitated the near collapse of private sector unions, the hard-right is determined to hammer away at public sector unions, in large part to deny funding from its members to the Democratic Party. Public sector employees understand that the GOP is virulently anti-union, so of course they will naturally favor the other party. To Republicans, this is corruption; to public sector employees it is about retaining their working rights and avoiding the worse-case scenarios that emanate from GOP-dominated House committees.
As others have said, it makes no sense to link police unions to teachers unions or firefighter unions or almost any other unions. Mr. Douthat is correct, however, in assigning significant blame for police union corruption and intransigence to the Republican Party, as conservative support has allowed most Fraternal Order organizations to feel almost untouchable. That is not the fault of the left. We don't have a police union problem; in many places, we have a police problem. It comes from officers who should know better defending and protecting their colleagues whether those people are right or wrong. And they're not doing so because they belong to the same union, but due to the fact they wear the same uniform.
As others have said, it makes no sense to link police unions to teachers unions or firefighter unions or almost any other unions. Mr. Douthat is correct, however, in assigning significant blame for police union corruption and intransigence to the Republican Party, as conservative support has allowed most Fraternal Order organizations to feel almost untouchable. That is not the fault of the left. We don't have a police union problem; in many places, we have a police problem. It comes from officers who should know better defending and protecting their colleagues whether those people are right or wrong. And they're not doing so because they belong to the same union, but due to the fact they wear the same uniform.
10
Your column isn't meant to reign in police unions because of misbehavior by police. It is meant to diminish their pensions and for that matter, all pensions of public workers.
Right now in the United States, there is a concerted effort to roll back pensions, even for retirees such as police, fire fighters, teachers, clerical workers, custodians and others. Most have a contractual obligation with federal, state and local municipalities to to their jobs in exchange for a defined benefit when they retire.
Conservatives have done what they can to encourage "legal theft" of pensions and to some extent have succeeded in threatening democrats and republicans alike if they don't roll back pensions.
A few states are fighting back. On Friday, the Oregon State Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous decision that the legislature acted wrongly in cutting cost of living adjustments( COLA's) for retired workers and this is in a very democratic state. Imagine what the situation is like in Texas, Idaho or Alabama.
C'mon Ross, be honest. You aren't trying to go after police unions to ensure justice for citizens of Baltimore or any other place in the country. You want to gut unions because they have the audacity to stand up for workers.
Right now in the United States, there is a concerted effort to roll back pensions, even for retirees such as police, fire fighters, teachers, clerical workers, custodians and others. Most have a contractual obligation with federal, state and local municipalities to to their jobs in exchange for a defined benefit when they retire.
Conservatives have done what they can to encourage "legal theft" of pensions and to some extent have succeeded in threatening democrats and republicans alike if they don't roll back pensions.
A few states are fighting back. On Friday, the Oregon State Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous decision that the legislature acted wrongly in cutting cost of living adjustments( COLA's) for retired workers and this is in a very democratic state. Imagine what the situation is like in Texas, Idaho or Alabama.
C'mon Ross, be honest. You aren't trying to go after police unions to ensure justice for citizens of Baltimore or any other place in the country. You want to gut unions because they have the audacity to stand up for workers.
23
Those overgenerous pensions are bankrupting the country. The police retire at forty; get another job to replace the two they have been doing already as a cop and a bouncer, and now their pension plus the income from their new job. The police and the fire fighters have the so-called left and the so-called right eating out of their hands. They must be laughing all the way to their (very early) retirement.
2
Police Union representatives have thrown fuel on the fires for communities reeling from unjustified killings. In Cleveland, the Police Union head defended shooting 12-year-old Tamir Rice, saying that the child had been "menacing." And no sooner were charges brought against the 6 officers involved in Freddie Gray's suspicious death, their Union criticized the charges as a rush to judgement (which, of course, this is not, as an indictment may or may not follow). It's one thing for the Police Union to provide legal defense, but it's inflammatory to make PR disparaging the victims or before the facts have been presented in court.
8
The downside of police unions came to the fore for me with the disgraceful actions of Patrick Lynch and the union he represents. Publicly instigating a rift with a sitting Mayor, turning a funeral into a venue for the schism, using juvenile approaches like announcing "Our backs are turned to you" in the sky, pretending that Mayor de Blasio was responsible for a murderous dead-ender's actions, denying a father's right to counsel his son on conduct around Officers...these are petty, unprofessional, unacceptable antics beneath the task of law enforcement or the communities they serve.
20
The police stick together and defend each other just as do other groups. And many of these other groups defend their members successfully. Doctors, dentists, lawyers, priests (until recently), stockbrokers, lobbyists, salesmen, bankers, generals, and politicians -- few get more than slaps on the wrist, if that, and policemen know this.
They will see their prosecution as an attempt to appease various interest groups that do not like them anyway, and will fight tooth and nail against their enemies. As long as our society is filled with lies and corruption, the police will see attempts to discipline them as a power struggle rather than a moral issue.
They will see their prosecution as an attempt to appease various interest groups that do not like them anyway, and will fight tooth and nail against their enemies. As long as our society is filled with lies and corruption, the police will see attempts to discipline them as a power struggle rather than a moral issue.
20
When was the last time a Police Union spokesman admitted that the police may have done something wrong? They are always perfect, justified, and unappreciated. I have no problem with police having good pay and benefits. I just wish they'd lose the perfection stance. It would be so refreshing to hear that they are looking into improving procedures so that arrests go down without injuries, and so that situations are defused rather than escalated. The good cops must begin to speak out against misconduct and be ready to clean up their side of the street. The Union issue is a red herring. It's the culture.
75
Public sector unions not serving the “common good”? From Douthat? Hmmm - that concept is so foreign to the politicians he supports.
I won’t prejudge the six arrested Baltimore officers, but there does at least seem to be a case against them; however, I refuse to vilify police unions in general. Among all public servants, police are at the most at risk because, in their infinite wisdom, politicians have seen fit to enable Americans to arm themselves to the teeth. Alone of advanced countries, cops in this Exceptional Nation must assume that everyone they encounter is armed, so much that they must approach even a simple traffic stop with apprehension.
As for teachers, doesn’t Douthat wonder why so many supposedly poor performers just happen to be in places hit by poverty? Does he really imagine effective teachers from wealthy districts (or from his private alma mater) could teach in the inner cities and miraculously shine? Like his political bedfellows, Douthat expects teachers to solve society’s underlying problems which, as his fellow columnist Kristof reminds us today, are largely caused by political choices. It seems that one dominant political choice is to scapegoat institutions that don’t fit the correct narrative.
As to public sector unions in general, they are the last line of defense against the corporate assault on labor that has, in effect, undermined the middle class. It’s no accident that there’s a concerted campaign against them.
I won’t prejudge the six arrested Baltimore officers, but there does at least seem to be a case against them; however, I refuse to vilify police unions in general. Among all public servants, police are at the most at risk because, in their infinite wisdom, politicians have seen fit to enable Americans to arm themselves to the teeth. Alone of advanced countries, cops in this Exceptional Nation must assume that everyone they encounter is armed, so much that they must approach even a simple traffic stop with apprehension.
As for teachers, doesn’t Douthat wonder why so many supposedly poor performers just happen to be in places hit by poverty? Does he really imagine effective teachers from wealthy districts (or from his private alma mater) could teach in the inner cities and miraculously shine? Like his political bedfellows, Douthat expects teachers to solve society’s underlying problems which, as his fellow columnist Kristof reminds us today, are largely caused by political choices. It seems that one dominant political choice is to scapegoat institutions that don’t fit the correct narrative.
As to public sector unions in general, they are the last line of defense against the corporate assault on labor that has, in effect, undermined the middle class. It’s no accident that there’s a concerted campaign against them.
84
Instead of blaming politicians in general you must take on that criminal organization NRA which wants unfettered sane of arms to anyone in US. The police union is not attacking NRA. WHY? Of course there are many wretched Republican politicians who are against gun control as they don't care if people die. As for risk there are so many jobs that are risky. Take the military. So don't tell me that the police are special. If a policeman is afraid he should quit. Most policemen are high school drop outs and they are unemployable elsewhere.
1
Talk about conflation! It's one thing to point out the way that police unions reflexively and mendaciously protect their own. Many would disagree. It's quite another to generalize that the problem is unionism itself -- and then to choose, oh so not accidentally, the teachers' union to bash along the way. Sure there are problems there, too, but is it really useful to compare the two.
The "conflation dead giveaway" though is the statement that public-sector union power "represents a decadent phase in the history of the welfare state." Sheer ideological mumbo-jumbo. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously dropping little bombs like that one without actually saying anything meaningful in terms of argument or evidence?
The "conflation dead giveaway" though is the statement that public-sector union power "represents a decadent phase in the history of the welfare state." Sheer ideological mumbo-jumbo. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously dropping little bombs like that one without actually saying anything meaningful in terms of argument or evidence?
81
But the problem addressed is PUBLIC unionism, not all unionism. Coming from a family where my father was a union organizer when and where unions were absolutely essential, I think I can say without prejudice that Douthart makes a good point, about public unions -- police and teachers.
THEY DON'T WORK. HELLO!!!!
THEY DON'T WORK. HELLO!!!!
2
That's right, Ross, the problem with out of control, deadly cops is unions.
You are such a predictable conservative, it's laughable, and not very interesting or insightful into the problem at hand. It's as if your column was written by writers at the Onion, as satire of how the Right would respond.
However it is insightful into the Pavlov's Dog response by you, Cruz, Rand Paul and the rest of your gang of conservatives.
Yes, the tactics of the militarized police have made a difference in locking up a disproportionate amount of black men and incarcerating them. Stop and Frisk has made a difference as well. But, you are the one who is naive, Ross, if you think this is sustainable or worth throwing away a whole segment of society.
From Petraeus getting a slap on the wrist for treasonous behavior to Mozilo at Countrywide getting a slap on the wrist for stealing massive sums of money, you and your fellow Republicans only care about one segment of society, which you think is criminal.
Your view is really offensive.
You are such a predictable conservative, it's laughable, and not very interesting or insightful into the problem at hand. It's as if your column was written by writers at the Onion, as satire of how the Right would respond.
However it is insightful into the Pavlov's Dog response by you, Cruz, Rand Paul and the rest of your gang of conservatives.
Yes, the tactics of the militarized police have made a difference in locking up a disproportionate amount of black men and incarcerating them. Stop and Frisk has made a difference as well. But, you are the one who is naive, Ross, if you think this is sustainable or worth throwing away a whole segment of society.
From Petraeus getting a slap on the wrist for treasonous behavior to Mozilo at Countrywide getting a slap on the wrist for stealing massive sums of money, you and your fellow Republicans only care about one segment of society, which you think is criminal.
Your view is really offensive.
282
In labeling an opinion with which you do not agree as "offensive", you are such a predictable liberal, it's laughable, and not very interesting or insightful into the problem at hand.
1
How predictable of you, Ross. Tragedy in Baltimore which involves some bad police officers and it is a union problem. Unfettered power in any relationship breeds corruption. I would perhaps have more sympathy if you made the argument that unfettered corporate power or unfettered state power is equally a problem.
I find it curious conservatives rarely call out the inordinate power of corporations in our public discourse or the power of billionaires who fund "dark money" operations. Unions serve a valuable role as a check and balance against unfettered power.
I find it curious conservatives rarely call out the inordinate power of corporations in our public discourse or the power of billionaires who fund "dark money" operations. Unions serve a valuable role as a check and balance against unfettered power.
239
@azlib
You make a mistake by not differentiating between public-sector employee unions and other unions. They are two entirely different beasts.
You are correct about the inordinate power of corporations today and the need for unions as a countervailing force.
The same dynamics do not exist between government and public-sector unions. In this case, it is the public-sector unions that have inordinate power and are doing grave damage to our country. Whether that is by bankrupting municipalities with outrageous pensions, resisting all reform efforts (e.g. teachers unions and police unions), or by other manifestations of the corrupt relationship between politicians and public-sector unions.
A perfect example is the Baltimore police. Police there have a legal right to refuse to be interrogated for 10 days after an incident. Plenty of time for crooked cops to confer with each other, examine the forensic evidence available, and concoct a phony alibi. This is so clearly an example of a police union creating protections for its union members who are criminal thugs. When a Baltimore politician recently tried to repeal this legal protection, the police union mobilized opposition and had this repeal quashed. Pure corruption and perfect example of a public-sector union pursuing policy that is good for its members and bad for the general public.
You make a mistake by not differentiating between public-sector employee unions and other unions. They are two entirely different beasts.
You are correct about the inordinate power of corporations today and the need for unions as a countervailing force.
The same dynamics do not exist between government and public-sector unions. In this case, it is the public-sector unions that have inordinate power and are doing grave damage to our country. Whether that is by bankrupting municipalities with outrageous pensions, resisting all reform efforts (e.g. teachers unions and police unions), or by other manifestations of the corrupt relationship between politicians and public-sector unions.
A perfect example is the Baltimore police. Police there have a legal right to refuse to be interrogated for 10 days after an incident. Plenty of time for crooked cops to confer with each other, examine the forensic evidence available, and concoct a phony alibi. This is so clearly an example of a police union creating protections for its union members who are criminal thugs. When a Baltimore politician recently tried to repeal this legal protection, the police union mobilized opposition and had this repeal quashed. Pure corruption and perfect example of a public-sector union pursuing policy that is good for its members and bad for the general public.
1
nonsense- The problem is that these unions will defend, support and bend over backwards for rogue cops, no questions asked. You say that in Baltimore it involves "Some bad police officers". No way, it's most of the force, just check their history of abuse, same with NYC, L.A., San Francisco, Chicago. It's beyond me , how you can make such statements.
2
"and saddling governments with long-term fiscal burdens that"
That said governments *chose* to saddle themselves with. But no, the problem is all with the unions, eh Ross?
(And: "the government's money is not its own"? Wha?)
That said governments *chose* to saddle themselves with. But no, the problem is all with the unions, eh Ross?
(And: "the government's money is not its own"? Wha?)
3
Thank you, Ross. You are entirely correct about police unions. Unfortunately the focus seems to be honing in on unions in general instead of the reality that the police unions are a big part of the problem.
And thank you for recognizing that Freddie Gray's death is the result of "thuggish" cops. There are too many of them. And they are the heart of the police unions.
Please make your voice heard on this.
And thank you for recognizing that Freddie Gray's death is the result of "thuggish" cops. There are too many of them. And they are the heart of the police unions.
Please make your voice heard on this.
65
Mr Douthat hasn't met a tragedy he can't exploit! Yes, I have reservations about some of the actions by police unions, yes, I have some reservations about the actions of some unions for public employees. However, Mr Douthat and his fellow right wingers are thoroughly happy if we forget the important protections from exploitation that unions also provide. The society that supports the brutal and callous treatment routinely meted out to young black men without any resistance, by some members of our police forces cannot merely shrug when frustration boils over. Routine stop and search, routine rough rides should only produce a lack of respect for policing procedures by all members of society and demand for change. I do not support violence as a solution, however, neither can I support blatant exploitation of current events by "experts" anointed by our news media editors to pontificate to their heart's content for their own political agendas.
165
But in this case, Senor Chicago, it's the unions that enable cops to routinely mistreat young black men, not to mention murdering kids.
And yet here you are, refusing to say that they're wrong to do so, and refusing to call for the heads of the cops involved.
And yet here you are, refusing to say that they're wrong to do so, and refusing to call for the heads of the cops involved.
@Jack
I think Douthat is weighing the benefits of tougher policing versus lower crime statistics, all of which would be true to the objective eye. Having done so, however, he points out its attendant weakness, namely, the blind eye that Conservatives have turned on police unionization. It gains one thing and loses another.
As for unions, in total, I know you are a Liberal so this is hard for you to hear. American workers are no longer protected by their unions. We are no longer in the business of restraining corporate titans bent on exploitation. When a fully-loaded job in America is no longer profitable (and consumers, my friend, determine what gets bought and sold...not CEOs...CEOs serve at the whim of the customer), it goes elsewhere. No amount of picketing can make that fact go away.
Government unions are insidious things. If you believe that the government which you so treasure needs a union to police essentially white collar desk jobs, you have guzzled so much Kool-Aid there is no reasoning with you.
If we raise the minimum wage at McDonald's, we will basically give a big pay raise to teenagers and immigrants. Now I have no problem with that. But let's not get all principled and assert that it will not move the price of hamburgers higher and still fail to accomplish anything meaningful for the "middle class".
Ward Cleaver was in the middle class. I don't recall him flipping burgers. Today he would be an IT professional. Who is taking his job?
I think Douthat is weighing the benefits of tougher policing versus lower crime statistics, all of which would be true to the objective eye. Having done so, however, he points out its attendant weakness, namely, the blind eye that Conservatives have turned on police unionization. It gains one thing and loses another.
As for unions, in total, I know you are a Liberal so this is hard for you to hear. American workers are no longer protected by their unions. We are no longer in the business of restraining corporate titans bent on exploitation. When a fully-loaded job in America is no longer profitable (and consumers, my friend, determine what gets bought and sold...not CEOs...CEOs serve at the whim of the customer), it goes elsewhere. No amount of picketing can make that fact go away.
Government unions are insidious things. If you believe that the government which you so treasure needs a union to police essentially white collar desk jobs, you have guzzled so much Kool-Aid there is no reasoning with you.
If we raise the minimum wage at McDonald's, we will basically give a big pay raise to teenagers and immigrants. Now I have no problem with that. But let's not get all principled and assert that it will not move the price of hamburgers higher and still fail to accomplish anything meaningful for the "middle class".
Ward Cleaver was in the middle class. I don't recall him flipping burgers. Today he would be an IT professional. Who is taking his job?
4
Perhaps predictably, Ross Douthat uses the tragic circumstances of Freddie Gray's death as a pretext to attack public unions.
Recent Supreme Court decisions haved conferred free speech rights (Citizens United) and religious freedom rights (Hobby Lobby) on corporations, rights that are exercised through corporate spending decisions. These decisions have been greeted with approval by conservatives.
At the same time, Douthat argues that police officers (actual human beings) do not have the right to spend their earned income to support a union. The inconsistency and wrongheadedness of this argument is breathtaking.
While I agree with Douthat that police unions would do well to endorse best practices related to policing, they offer important protections. In the current case, the union pays for legal defense for the officers implicated in Gray's death, an important protection regardless of their guilt or innocence.
The benefits conferred by collective bargaining equalize the negotiating strength of workers and the organizations that employ them. Strong levels of unionization resulted in rising living standards for ordinary Americans, including police officers and teachers. Declining levels of unionization since 1980 have resulted in income inequality and lessened living standards for working Americans. I'd argue that the decline of unions is the problem, not the solution.
Recent Supreme Court decisions haved conferred free speech rights (Citizens United) and religious freedom rights (Hobby Lobby) on corporations, rights that are exercised through corporate spending decisions. These decisions have been greeted with approval by conservatives.
At the same time, Douthat argues that police officers (actual human beings) do not have the right to spend their earned income to support a union. The inconsistency and wrongheadedness of this argument is breathtaking.
While I agree with Douthat that police unions would do well to endorse best practices related to policing, they offer important protections. In the current case, the union pays for legal defense for the officers implicated in Gray's death, an important protection regardless of their guilt or innocence.
The benefits conferred by collective bargaining equalize the negotiating strength of workers and the organizations that employ them. Strong levels of unionization resulted in rising living standards for ordinary Americans, including police officers and teachers. Declining levels of unionization since 1980 have resulted in income inequality and lessened living standards for working Americans. I'd argue that the decline of unions is the problem, not the solution.
254
No other unions posseses the power to intimidate management (in this case, the officials elected by the very people they are supposed to "protect and serve") that police unions have. When NYPD officers literally turned their backs on Mayor Deblasio, and then submitted the taxpayers to a work slowdown, it wasn't just disrepectful, it was menacing. And as police militarization increases, so does the menace. It has to stop.
9
@Netliner
Being to the right of you (and it is not a challenge to be on your right for I am no red-meat Conservative), I disagree with 99% of what you write. And today is no exception.
The American worker, organized or not, is standing up for better treatment by his employer. That was the premise, and a correct one, when American industrial companies held all the cards. The American worker is now standing up to state capitalism in countries like China where migrant workers will travel 800-1000 miles and live apart from their families to work in conditions you would find despicable. Or they are competing with the Filipino who moves to Shanghai to scrape out wages to send money back to a family in a Manila ghetto.
The 1% where I agree with you today is when you admitted that Ross had a point. But I laugh when Democrats cannot admit to what is a truism: unions are indentured laborers to failed economics. You cannot forever bash Conservatives and blame them for global economics while benefiting from it, on the one hand, and telling that highly-compensated union employee to ignore China's workforce.
Your arguments are almost childlike. Mr. Gompers would not recognize the labor markets or 2015, and we surely are making cars not cigars.
While I, too, despise worker exploitation, you would do well to think of Bangladesh, not Detriot, and tell me why you are wearing any articles of clothing made in developing countries. Only then will your words be coherent.
Being to the right of you (and it is not a challenge to be on your right for I am no red-meat Conservative), I disagree with 99% of what you write. And today is no exception.
The American worker, organized or not, is standing up for better treatment by his employer. That was the premise, and a correct one, when American industrial companies held all the cards. The American worker is now standing up to state capitalism in countries like China where migrant workers will travel 800-1000 miles and live apart from their families to work in conditions you would find despicable. Or they are competing with the Filipino who moves to Shanghai to scrape out wages to send money back to a family in a Manila ghetto.
The 1% where I agree with you today is when you admitted that Ross had a point. But I laugh when Democrats cannot admit to what is a truism: unions are indentured laborers to failed economics. You cannot forever bash Conservatives and blame them for global economics while benefiting from it, on the one hand, and telling that highly-compensated union employee to ignore China's workforce.
Your arguments are almost childlike. Mr. Gompers would not recognize the labor markets or 2015, and we surely are making cars not cigars.
While I, too, despise worker exploitation, you would do well to think of Bangladesh, not Detriot, and tell me why you are wearing any articles of clothing made in developing countries. Only then will your words be coherent.
1
Perhaps predictably? Dude's like the tide.
1
His initial throat-clearing has Mr. Douthat trashing unions, like all good conservatives must. We should remember that unions arose because employers could not restrain themselves when it came to paying starvation wages, demanding excessive hours, ignoring workplace safety and providing few benefits.
Thanks to conservatives, it's deja-vu all over again.
When unions were at their most powerful the country was at its strongest and most productive. High corporate taxes and well-paid union jobs expanded the economy, built the infrastructure and ensured that the next generation would do better than the last. The oligarchs have responded by freezing the minimum wage, attacking retirement security, raging against affordable health care and exporting jobs to countries that provide tax breaks, and that don't have the worker protections that we have.
The poor and middle classes are scraping bottom. Neighborhoods are decaying, workers are idle, and the American dream in many towns is replaced by economic abandonment, increasing poverty and despair. What's the real problem, according to Mr. Douthat? Police unions. In fact, police chiefs complain that loss of budgets mean that more younger cops are being hired and put on the streets with less training.
When he's handed chaos, Douthat can't criticize the bitter conservative social and economic policies that produced it, so he makes lemonade by criticizing police unions instead. Penn and Teller should misdirect as well.
Thanks to conservatives, it's deja-vu all over again.
When unions were at their most powerful the country was at its strongest and most productive. High corporate taxes and well-paid union jobs expanded the economy, built the infrastructure and ensured that the next generation would do better than the last. The oligarchs have responded by freezing the minimum wage, attacking retirement security, raging against affordable health care and exporting jobs to countries that provide tax breaks, and that don't have the worker protections that we have.
The poor and middle classes are scraping bottom. Neighborhoods are decaying, workers are idle, and the American dream in many towns is replaced by economic abandonment, increasing poverty and despair. What's the real problem, according to Mr. Douthat? Police unions. In fact, police chiefs complain that loss of budgets mean that more younger cops are being hired and put on the streets with less training.
When he's handed chaos, Douthat can't criticize the bitter conservative social and economic policies that produced it, so he makes lemonade by criticizing police unions instead. Penn and Teller should misdirect as well.
434
"... trashing unions, like all good conservatives must."
I guess FDR must have been a conservative:
"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters." - to Luther C. Steward, August 16, 1937
gemli should tell Paul Krugman he's been idolizing a conservative all these years! Maybe Prof. Krugman's blog should be retitled "Conscience of a Conservative"
I guess FDR must have been a conservative:
"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters." - to Luther C. Steward, August 16, 1937
gemli should tell Paul Krugman he's been idolizing a conservative all these years! Maybe Prof. Krugman's blog should be retitled "Conscience of a Conservative"
1
"When unions were at their most powerful the country was at its strongest and most productive." We also had just survived a World War without any damage to our industrial infrastructure, unlike all our enemies and allies. It would take 25 years for those crushed economies to compete, while we had the playing field to ourselves. Let's get off this notion that high union enrollment caused a high standard of living. It only coincided with it.
2
The time when the unions rode thehighest was simply the decade after WWII when Europe was recovering from the Nazi experiment with gigantic elitist government. That time could not be sustained even if we'd all gone Soviet and elected Gemli as our firs Premier.
When you look at all the Baltimores and Detroit - the symbol of American economic strength in the 1950's - you see liberal political thinking wreaking destruction at every turn. Instead of making the individual free and independent with money earned at work, liberal cities grow their government and its attendant cancer, dependency.
The only thing that can help Baltimore is creating an environment where the private economy is willing to invest money in creating JOBS. Anything else leads DIRECTLY to where Daltimore is today.
When you look at all the Baltimores and Detroit - the symbol of American economic strength in the 1950's - you see liberal political thinking wreaking destruction at every turn. Instead of making the individual free and independent with money earned at work, liberal cities grow their government and its attendant cancer, dependency.
The only thing that can help Baltimore is creating an environment where the private economy is willing to invest money in creating JOBS. Anything else leads DIRECTLY to where Daltimore is today.
1
I don't see the Republican position on government unions as being as principled as this column does, I figure they protect groups they like and bust the unions of groups they don't like. And the escalation of incidents and the excessive force sometimes used when allegedly trying to pursue a "broken windows" policy I don't see as being so unique to those kinds of stops and arrests; I'm supposed to believe that suspects of more serious crimes are treated with more care and restraint?
So while I'm all for holding police, their unions, and their leadership more accountable, I am having trouble with the path this column seems to take to get there. And while I'm all for more training to prevent unnecessary escalation of incidents and unnecessary use of force, and I would even like to see "broken windows" policies rethought, changed, and/or scaled back, I'm not sure I agree with an idea that the root of the problem lies there -- I think such cases provide starker more dramatic examples, and are easier to find consensus around, but I suspect that whatever drives the escalation and excessive use of force in "broken windows" cases is not absent in cases involving other kinds of crimes -- and I hope the suggestion is not that we are supposed to accord rights to low-level arrestees but not to higher-level arrestees -- that's not the way the Bill of Rights is structured.
So while I'm all for holding police, their unions, and their leadership more accountable, I am having trouble with the path this column seems to take to get there. And while I'm all for more training to prevent unnecessary escalation of incidents and unnecessary use of force, and I would even like to see "broken windows" policies rethought, changed, and/or scaled back, I'm not sure I agree with an idea that the root of the problem lies there -- I think such cases provide starker more dramatic examples, and are easier to find consensus around, but I suspect that whatever drives the escalation and excessive use of force in "broken windows" cases is not absent in cases involving other kinds of crimes -- and I hope the suggestion is not that we are supposed to accord rights to low-level arrestees but not to higher-level arrestees -- that's not the way the Bill of Rights is structured.
89
Polce unions don't invest time (at work) and money playing politics like the Treasury employees union. As we found out through the Lois Lerner crimes, the Treasury employees union seriously needs to go out of business and a huge investigation to shine light in all its dark corners, like where they reveal private taxpayer info to their political friends.
1
@Steve Austin
Lois Lerner worked for the IRS, not the treasury, and never admitted to, or was found guilty of, any wrong doing. Further, being in an administrative position virtually guarantees she was not represented by any union. But don't let the facts get in the way of your unfounded accusations!
Lois Lerner worked for the IRS, not the treasury, and never admitted to, or was found guilty of, any wrong doing. Further, being in an administrative position virtually guarantees she was not represented by any union. But don't let the facts get in the way of your unfounded accusations!
8
@Diana
Republicans are right to bust the unions they don't like, if that is what they indeed do.
If you feel it is okay for a Congressman to have lifetime employment by turning around and guaranteeing the wages and benefits to government-employed union workers, you should give Repbulicans the right to slather money around from the Koch brothers.
I, personally, find both behaviors destructive to the American ideal.
Republicans are right to bust the unions they don't like, if that is what they indeed do.
If you feel it is okay for a Congressman to have lifetime employment by turning around and guaranteeing the wages and benefits to government-employed union workers, you should give Repbulicans the right to slather money around from the Koch brothers.
I, personally, find both behaviors destructive to the American ideal.
2
"Second, the government’s money is not its own, so negotiations between politicians and their employees.."
The problem with statements like these is the premise that government is some sort of independent body that isn't rooted in the people. The problem is expressed in the words chosen to discuss it. Its own. Politicians and their employees. Government is of the people and by the people. Government money is our money, meant to be spent for our purposes.
That is why, on the left side of our politics, we object so much to money being speech and special interests dictating policy, from homeland security, to policing, to trade. It's our lives, our privacy and personal freedoms, our personal safety, and our jobs.
The police unions, in very stark contrast to labor unions of every other kind, are as far away from what unions are supposed to be like and act for, that they really shouldn't be referred to as police unions, but by their other name, Fraternal Orders. Their behavior has been thuggish in the recent cases that have come up in the news, in the face of blatant civil and criminal violations, no matter the proof in front of them or the degree of horror demonstrated by single and groups of officers. The reaction from the Fraternal Order for Baltimore was no different yesterday.
They've all gotten too big for their britches and are exerting undue influence at the cost of human lives. This has ZERO to do with unions of any other kind. Zero. Shame on you, Ross!
The problem with statements like these is the premise that government is some sort of independent body that isn't rooted in the people. The problem is expressed in the words chosen to discuss it. Its own. Politicians and their employees. Government is of the people and by the people. Government money is our money, meant to be spent for our purposes.
That is why, on the left side of our politics, we object so much to money being speech and special interests dictating policy, from homeland security, to policing, to trade. It's our lives, our privacy and personal freedoms, our personal safety, and our jobs.
The police unions, in very stark contrast to labor unions of every other kind, are as far away from what unions are supposed to be like and act for, that they really shouldn't be referred to as police unions, but by their other name, Fraternal Orders. Their behavior has been thuggish in the recent cases that have come up in the news, in the face of blatant civil and criminal violations, no matter the proof in front of them or the degree of horror demonstrated by single and groups of officers. The reaction from the Fraternal Order for Baltimore was no different yesterday.
They've all gotten too big for their britches and are exerting undue influence at the cost of human lives. This has ZERO to do with unions of any other kind. Zero. Shame on you, Ross!
345
The Eric Garner case kicked up a huge dust cloud with the NYPD unions and what ensued was truly ugly. Even Commissioner Bratton, whom most people regard as even-handed, took the union's side:
"“I don’t think that anybody watching that video isn’t disturbed by what they saw, that policing using involving use of force, it always looks awful. We have an expression: “lawful but awful…”"
http://www.rimaregas.com/2014/12/perspectives-on-the-ericgarner-case-chi...
Jeffrey Toobin wrote a piece on the Atlantic at about the same time, addressing the "who should investigate police" aspect of our problem with police brutality.
http://www.rimaregas.com/2015/01/answering-jeffreytoobin/
We need to deal with brutality from many angles. One of them is police fraternal orders. But whatever we do, must come from a majority of Americans, across race and class, addressing our fundamental issues, rather than applying band-aids to one cut.
http://www.rimaregas.com/2015/04/mlks-message-to-blacklivesmatter-moralm...
"“I don’t think that anybody watching that video isn’t disturbed by what they saw, that policing using involving use of force, it always looks awful. We have an expression: “lawful but awful…”"
http://www.rimaregas.com/2014/12/perspectives-on-the-ericgarner-case-chi...
Jeffrey Toobin wrote a piece on the Atlantic at about the same time, addressing the "who should investigate police" aspect of our problem with police brutality.
http://www.rimaregas.com/2015/01/answering-jeffreytoobin/
We need to deal with brutality from many angles. One of them is police fraternal orders. But whatever we do, must come from a majority of Americans, across race and class, addressing our fundamental issues, rather than applying band-aids to one cut.
http://www.rimaregas.com/2015/04/mlks-message-to-blacklivesmatter-moralm...
47
Name one way in which any other public employee union isn't a Fraternal Order.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt - an enemy of today's Left due to his religiosity - was right when he said that allowing government employee unions would ALWAYS be wrong.
1