jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (5 posts)

If the right wing are against unions, why do they still sanction police unions?

  1. pagesvoice profile image84
    pagesvoiceposted 3 years ago

    If the right wing are against unions, why do they still sanction police unions?

    Beginning with Reagan the right wing showed their disdain for unions and union busting. However, for some strange reason they have a "hands off" attitude when it comes to police and fire department unions. I believe they have consciously made this decision so the police, in particular, will be there to act as their personal security force to protect them from the disgruntled masses. Do you find this as interesting as I do?

  2. Kathleen Cochran profile image82
    Kathleen Cochranposted 3 years ago

    They want to win endorsements and elections.

    1. pagesvoice profile image84
      pagesvoiceposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      A few years ago the teamsters, AFL-CIO, teacher's unions, civil service employees unions and a host of others wielded more power. The republicans have weakened many unions, except police and fire. I think it's a calculated move to protect them.

  3. Tusitala Tom profile image67
    Tusitala Tomposted 3 years ago

    Here in Aussieland they also keep their hands off the Medico's Union.   Same reason, I guess.   Those right-wingers are always seeking ways to control those who might well be working for them as employees, but don't want to 'rock the boat' when it comes to their own protection, so it's hands off the cops, firies, and medical fraternity.

    1. pagesvoice profile image84
      pagesvoiceposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      You have echoed my feelings exactly. The police are employees of the mega wealthy and don't even realize it. If there is social unrest because of unfair banking or employment practices the police will quell the unrest and protect the influential.

 
working