Mitch Daniels: Government Unions Unfair, Shouldn’t Exist

If Daniels was talking about a union for legislators, then, yes, negotiation between the union and government WOULD be government sitting "on both sides of the table."

But that's not what public sector unions are. They are made up of the workers… the people who get paid a wage and earn benefits, have to apply for their jobs, get hired, get evaluated by supervisors, and receive health insurance benefits… just like any other working person! Union members are NOT the elected officials and upper level administrators they negotiate for.

And I don't think you can say public sector unions have successfully fought for outrageous wages and benefits. Compare what a city street worker, a police offer, a fire fighter, or any other municipal laborer earns to those of union workers in the private sector… they are not even close! These union members are reasonable and willing to work for far less than Daniels and his friends seem to claim. They are not a problem!

On the other hand, how much do the governor and the elected officials in the legislature earn? What is their salary? What kind of benefits package do they get?

And who gives them raises or pay cuts? They are in the unique position of voting for their own raises!

So where have the cuts come – these unions who are such a "problem?" Or the legislators and elected officials to could vote to cut their own pay/benefits?

Let's start the trimming with the only group who has yet to suffer such cuts! Push for a cut in pay and reduction in benefits for the General Assembly, the Governor, Lt. Gov, and Atty Gen, and Supt of Public Schools. THEN we can turn your trimming back toward the working class!

Eliminating collective bargaining is not the way to solve this issue but we can all admit that something must be done.

When it comes to pay, it's like fighting over a cake that has already been eaten. There is no money to be had. That isn't to say that teachers and other public union members don't deserve more compensation, both in pay and benefits, but the money has to come from some where.

Public unions have never asked for outrageous raises or salaries but when there is no money to be had , then someone has to give in a little. And when it comes to private sector unions, they may receive outrageous raises but look at what those sort of agreements and, quite frankly strong arming by the union, have done to industries. The UAW was a major cause of the failure of the American automotive industry.

The average pay, all things considered of an Indiana legislator is less that $44,000. That doesn't count benefits and things like travel cost but that means that the entire legislature plus governor Daniels costs the tax payer 6 million or so a year. So for the sake of benefits lets double that to 12 million. The average salary of the over 60,000 teachers in Indiana is $47,255. That means teachers salaries alone, not including benefits, cost the tax payer over 2.8 billion dollars a year. Raising teachers salaries a very small .2% would cost almost as much as the inflated number of the entire legislature.

That isn't to say that cutting legislators salaries wouldn't make them feel a little bit of the pain that the rest of America is feeling, but it will be less than a drop in the bucket when it comes to real cost cutting.

The solution is not to cut teachers salaries, or any public unions salary. It is also not eliminating collective bargaining. But because of the pressures put on an already stretched budget by seemingly small raises to public salaries, people have jumped to the conclusion of eliminating public unions. Both sides are not innocent here. And until the government and the unions can learn to work towards common goals, then this argument will never end.

The headline is misleading. He didn't say all unions. He said public unions, just like FDR did.

No, what's really unfair is Our Representatives being able to give themselves a raise any time they want, and have better health care than any union worker, and oh their pension is what they make for the rest of their lives, and security too , for only serving one term. Think on that.

Unions! Our schools are worse than ever. It was not like that before unions got involved. Before Jerry Brown in his first go-around as govenor and before he helped usher unions into the public sector, CA ranked first in education. Now they rank 49th. There are more administrtors in the LA unified school district than students. How is that tax payers? That is what unions have done. All for them and nothing for the children. At this rate it won't be long before we are a 3rd. World nation.

I agree with John. I've met Mitch Daniels many times, and he's a douchebag getting rich off of his "work" sitting on the board of IPL and Eli Lilly. "Work" that took away many worker's bonuses and more importantly their retirement; while his pockets were fully lined. Yes, money is power and greed brings out the worst in people. If both of these companies had union representatives, perhaps Mitch and the other board members wouldn't live off of other's misfortunes. Definetly NOT "My man Mitch!"

David Goldberg Administrators are not in a Union, their MANAGEMENT.

David, take from someone who has worked at both union and non-union businesses. YOU HAVE NO VOICE in non-union places, period, end of discussion!!!!! We are going to become a third world country thanks to Wall Street and our government.

As a Hoosier, I will tell you that Mitch Daniels has lied to our state about many things. He padded job creation figures, hid money that caused schools to lay off teachers and cut back on budgets and he openly stated he was against right to work but signed it into law this year. His track record with stripping pensions from private sector employees may have even been illegal. Mitch Daniels is not a good person. He is a person who is good at hiding things. Consequently, he will not run for higher office because those things will be brought forth.

You answered before me! Nicely done, Sherri. Also, maybe if more families had more union wage jobs we could have more one income families and parents could spend more time and help children with homework. Done blame this all on teachers; it's a very weak argument but red meat for the knuckle draggers.

I agree with John Pitzer and choristinadean…..