On Unionizing Government Workers

There is a movement afoot to recruit federal government 

workers which is being wholeheartedly cheered on by 

the progressive Democrat members of the House of 

Representatives as well as far-lefties outside of Congress.

And it's apparent that these pro-union enthusiasts have 

no sense of history concerning their party, the thoughts on

unionization of federal government workers held by some 

Democrat presidents going back nearly a hundred years,

or the consequences of such unionization. 

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who was one of the

biggest allies unions have ever had in the White House,

opposed unions for federal government workers because it

would place both employer (Uncle Sam) and workers on

the same side of the negotiating table. Politicians would then

have an incentive with no downside, particularly in the form 

of figuring out to pay for their deals with the fed worker's

union, to give workers what they want on contracts.

Taxpayers, who would end up paying more in taxes for said

deals, would have no one representing them and their interests 

in the resultant unbalanced negotiations. 

So far, aides to eight progressive House members have filed 

petitions with the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights 

to start the unionization process. Staffers have long complained 

about discrimination, pay and working conditions, and during

most of these years of such complaining the Democrats have 

held the House, and many years both the House and Senate,

pointing to the Dems as the ones making for tough working

conditions for staffers and other government employees.

And proving FDR correct as well as prescient, the pro-union

staffers' bosses in Congress are joyously cheering the petitions.

All of this came after a House Resolution in May to allow staff

to collectively bargain for the first time in our country's history.

"I am so proud of the staffers who made a historic move today 

in seeking union recognition," crowed Michigan Rep. Andy

Levin (D). "I am inspired by my staff and all those organizing

who are leading by example," gushed Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar 

(D), who by the way is a member of the very far-left super-pro-

gressive group of U.S. representatives known as "The Squad"

whom your diligent Peasant wrote about in this blog some months 

ago. Again, the members of the House will not be paying their 

salaries; the taxpayers will get the bill. That, and the middle finger.

For the time being, each office must hold a separate unionizing vote,

and happily few offices are taking that step. But this could change 

if the Democrats prevail in this November's mid-term election.

The American people deserve to have elected representatives who

work for them; as well they should, for the people have hired them

by voting them into office, so the representative's staff should also

work for the representatives and for the people who elected them,

not for any labor union. Republicans, note well that one of your 

duties should you take back the House this fall should be to repeal

the union resolution. FDR knew that this would be a bad thing.

Some other Democrats over time, to be sure, have shared this stalwart

Democrat President's negative view of such a setup, proving 

opposition to federal workers' unionizing is not a solely partisan 

maneuver. The ball shall be in the GOP's court should they win

this November. 

MEM