The current fight between the public sector unions in Wisconsin and Governor Walker highlights many problems associated with allowing public sector unions in the first place. In my opinion, public sector unions have gone way too far in milking the taxpayers to line their own pockets and creating work environments where excellence is no longer respected and honored. Yes, there was a time long ago in the private sector where unions provided a useful counter balance, but even in the  private sector unions went too far with their demands and productivity stifling rules and these unions have therefore declined significantly.

Although I have never belonged to a union, when I graduated from college with a B.S. in Physics, I worked at the Crane Naval Ammunition Depot in Indiana for two years and saw first hand some of the negative implications resulting from union rules and working for the government. I subsequently worked in the high-tech industry for many years and could tell you many stories associated with unions and government bureaucracy to illustrate my concerns, but that will have to wait for another time.

The following quote is from a software developer I know who lives in California. It illustrates the cozy relationships developed over many years between public sector unions and Democrats that is no longer financially sustainable. It ties in very nicely with why Wisconsin Governor Walker has a huge fight on his hands and needs to win. I am sure you can appreciate why I will not identify my friend.

<begin quote> Gov. Walker wants to decrease the power of the public sector unions and has said as much. In fact he campaigned and was elected on the basis of this issue among others. While it’s hard to find good information I believe the following to be true.

1. The current bill would still allow public employees to belong to a union and collectively bargain for wages but not benefits. Presumably they could bargain for non-monetary working conditions but I could find nothing on this issue.

2. The unions did agree to wage and benefit concessions.

3. Nothing in the bill would affect private sector unions.

Let me shed some light on the issue of public employee unions from the perspective of a person, me, who was a public employee for 30+ years and who has benefited greatly from the cozy relationship between public employee unions and Democrats.

When I became a cop in 1973 I joined the union. A small portion of my dues went to a state “union”. During my 30+ years Democrats controlled both houses of the California legislature and always a majority of the local city council. The public employee unions have done a very good job of keeping Democrats in power.

In 1973 I paid almost 10% of my salary towards my pension. My pension was to be equivalent to 75% of an average of my last three years salary. I also contributed to my healthcare (medical & dental) benefits but I don’t remember the amount. Over the years my local union worked hard to get sympathetic candidates elected to the local city council as well as the state legislature. The same was true of the state “union”. The union even raised our dues in order to have more money to spend on elections.

The result was during my 30+ years I went from paying almost 10% of my salary toward my pension to paying nothing toward my pension. I also went from contributing something toward my healthcare to paying nothing. Furthermore when my wife became a state employee we shifted our healthcare from my coverage to her coverage. This allowed us to put all the money the city had been paying toward our healthcare into a city sponsored deferred compensation plan. Another benefit of the “cafeteria” plan of benefits negotiated by my union.

During that time my salary went from being near the median nationwide income to putting me in the top 20%.

At the state level the public employee unions were also working hard. For many years they had been working to “sweeten” public employee retirements. The end result for me was that they eventually were able to get through a bill signed by a Democrat governor they helped get elected that gave public safety employees of the state a 3% at 50 retirement based on their final year of salary. That meant that a public safety employee could retire after 30 years of service with 90% of their final years salary as a pension benefit with cost of living increases.

Once this happened for state public safety employees local public safety employees began to demand the same retirement benefit. As a result I retired in 2002 at the age of 56 with 91% of my final years salary as a pension benefit with cost of living increases since then. Not to mention that I am guaranteed that my purchasing power will never drop below 80% of what it was when I retired. And not to mention $300/mo the city contributes toward my healthcare. My wife’s healthcare is fully paid by the state since she retired. And also not to mention a nice IRA which was partially funded by the city.

When my wife first went to work for the state in 1968 she was actually making more money in the private sector. However the working conditions at the state were better and the benefits where much better offsetting the lower pay. She quit for awhile to raise our children then went back. When she retired her salary was higher than a comparable position in the private sector with fully paid healthcare plus a great retirement. As a state retiree her healthcare benefits are fully paid for by the state. She pays nothing. Plus she was able to “buy” additional years of service credit to increase her retirement even more. All of this provided by Democrats who’s campaigns receive large contributions from public employee unions.

Now as many of you are aware California and many of it’s local jurisdictions are in a dire financial situation. A contributing factor is, besides high public employee salaries and benefits, is paying for retired employees. The City of Vallejo actually declared bankruptcy and one of the factors they cited was their inability to pay their retired employees what they had promised them.

I can’t speak for Wisconsin but in California most public employees other than teachers are part of the CalPERS retirement system. CalPERS is a quasi government agency. In recent years public employee unions have been able to increase their influence over CalPERS policy making and one of the results was telling the state and local governments that CalPERS had lots of money and state and local governments could increase retirement benefits to their employees without having to contribute any more money to CalPERS. Now of course CalPERS is demanding more money from the state and local governments to pay for those increased retirement benefits that they originally said would cost nothing. This at a time when the state and local governments can least afford it.

So as a retired public employee I want to thank all of you for providing me, my wife, and my fellow public employee retirees with a comfortable guaranteed retirement. And I especially want to thank those of you who are strong supporters of public employee unions and the incestuous relationship they have with politicians mostly Democrats. <end quote>

For another viewpoint, take a look at Why I Changed My Mind About Unions.