Reply #23: +1 [View All]

I am fine with unions advocating for the interests of their members, which vary considerably. Often those interests coincide with the needs of the public, as those involved in delivering services understand their own profession best. But not under all circumstances: sometimes there's a conflict between the interests of customers (ie the public who use public services) and providers (who deliver said services). Insofar as many public services are a monopoly, public service workers can sometimes find themselves on the wrong side of the argument without realizing how they got there, because they are not directly impacted by competitive pressures.

For example, in California the CCPOA (prison officers' union) is the most powerful union in the state, financially and politically...but they're assholes who have supported a lot of really bad legislation because it brought them short-term gain. San Francisco's Transit Worker's Union is rapidly losing the support of the riding public in what is otherwise a very transit friendly city (http://www.sfbg.com/2010/02/23/open-letter-transit-workers-union for example - and this is in the SF's most liberal newspaper), the SEIU and the UHW have been digging themselves into a pit over some stupid turf war and wasting large amounts of members' dues in the process.

I'm not saying that these three examples are characteristic of unions in general, but pointing out what can happen when such an organization focuses too narrowly on its own interests.