LogFAQs > #952449968

The very purpose of a union is collective bargaining to prevent abuse by an employer.

Since both sectors are federally employed, you could argue that is the federal government has/had the mechanisms to properly compensate those respective industries. You shouldn't require federal protections from your employer when your employer IS the government(hypothetically)

You would have to provide respective scales of compensation/raises prior to anything being abolished, as well as ensuring that the required protections for federal employees are codified into law, but if those standards were met would you be willing to sacrifice teacher's unions to get rid of the police unions under the pretense of doing away with unions for most public sector jobs?

I'm genuinely curious if such a thing would be palatable to people.

---

Official ANCIENT Killer. I make account bets from time to time so either man up or shut up. The Quote is dedicated to those we have lost.