It's quite fashionable to attack public-sector unions and fiscal exploitation. To a certain extent, I am reluctant to follow suit. The interests of public sector unions generally align with mine. Their demise would weaken the coalition which supports the 'liberal,' social goals I endorse: gay marriage, privacy in the bedroom, and the right of a woman to control her medical decisions even when pregnant. Even so, the strength of public-sector unions at the city and county level has led to absurd disparities in the salaries of federal, state and county employees.
Consider this:
After 10 years of services, a U.S. Navy Captain (Grade 0-5) makes
$79,912.8 annually.
A lieutenant with the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue Department <b>
starts at $93,387.30.</b>
As of January 2008, the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court made
$217,400.00 annually.
By comparison, 32 individuals in the Miami-Dade County Attorney's office made
more.
Why is it that county government, in position after position, finds the ability to pay so much more than our state and federal governments? It seems the most compelling argument is local, public-sector labor unions.
<b>blockquote<b>
[C]onsider the function of public-sector unions. If they do anything at all, it is to protect their members' claims on future government revenue from democratic discretion—to limit the power of the elected representatives of the democratic public to set the terms on which union-members will receive transfers from taxpayers.</b>blockquote</b>
Whatever truth their is to that quote, it is nowhere stronger than the local level. That is, paradoxically, at the level 'closest' to the voter.
