Monday, September 17, 2012

Wisconsin Unions vs. Governor Walker

Governor Scott Walker (Republican) of Wisconsin survived his recall election this past summer after democrats tried to oust him based on his union policies.  Walker restricted the power of collective bargaining for public workers to attempt to trim the state budget by disallowing bargaining on health benefits, workplace safety, and vacation.

This past weekend, his union law was been deemed unconstitutional by Judge Juan Colas; Colas ruled it unconstitutional to cap union worker's wages while leaving nonunion members uncapped on the basis that it was a violation of equal representation, freedom of speech, and freedom of association.    Appeals are sure to follow or even a fast return to the State Supreme Court--where it was previously found constitutional--but many union workers and democrats are celebrating this victory.

By calling this law unconstitutional, workers supposedly return to the "status-quo" from when before the law was passed.  However, there is some debate on the ramifications of this case

 An interesting opinion piece also connects the recent (and ongoing) Chicago school teacher's strikes to this past summer's drama with Wisconsin.  For other two other court cases that have been trying to revoke the restriction of collective bargaining, check out this article.

At the heart of this issue lies the question: are unions today a dangerous faction or is this power necessary for the good of the workers?  What do you think of the law restricting collective bargaining and the recent ruling?  What will this mean for controlling unions in the future?

Are unions overbearing or necessary?

2 comments:

Savanna Kiefer said...

The power of unions has long been debated. Despite the problems and issues they cause, I believe that unions are necessary for the safety and security of workers. Unions give workers a feeling of power. Union members to band together and fight for the conditions they deserve. It allows the middle class to feel more important and recognized. As for the law restricting collective bargaining, I can see why Walker implemented it; it would be a logical way to save money. However, this would be done at the expense of the power of the unions. Things like health benefits, vacation, and safety in the workplace are of vital importance. Unions should have the power to implement collective bargaining concerning these issues, otherwise they would be giving up some of their rights regarding important issues. The current disputes between the extent of a union's power may be irritable, but overall I believe unions are necessary components of our society.

Unknown said...

The Unions were created as a way to get workers their rights, and the benefits they deserve. While the need to save money may have driven Walker to end their collective bargaining rights, it is justifiably a cause for uproar. By restricting collective bargaining rights, this puts many of these workers at risk for unfair wages and leaves them with little way to fix their situations. While Unions may seem overbearing now, they did prove their purpose and success when they were first created, and perhaps now are being taken for granted. I feel that stripping collective bargaining rights may have been only the first step in what could become a move to remove unions of their powers, defeating the purpose of their existence. Despite potential costs to the state, Unions are a necessary organization for the benefit of the workers.