At the same time, it is seeking to give administrators greater control over how to provide different services to communities (with the limited resources that they have available). According to James Shrek of the Heritage Institute, "The current legislation gives state and local officials more control over the costs of employing government workers. In many places, public officials have little leverage to lower these costs because they are set in union contracts. If benefits were removed from the collective bargaining process, states and localities could change them without having to negotiate with the unions, a process that can drag on for months or even years." (Luhby) This is significant, because it is showing how these kinds of changes will become more common in the future. The reason why, is because many of the issues facing states and local governments are long-term problems. This means that administrators and public officials will need greater amounts of flexibility when dealing with these issues.
At the same time, some states have been taking these kinds of laws one step further. In states such as Ohio, new regulations have been enacted to restrict the number of public sector employees who are allowed to join a union. (Luhby) This is a major development, because many public sector employees have often been organized as a closed shop. This means that anyone who works for a particular employer must join the union (regardless if they want to or not). Part of the reason why this has been taking place, is because administrators want to: have greater control over labor costs and how they are able to adjust the number of employees working for the government. As, this will give them greater flexibility in: moving employees around the different departments and they can make adjustments quickly during severe financial challenges. (Luhby) Over the course of time, this will reduce the power of the unions and it...
This is significant, because it is showing how these kinds of trends will become very common at all levels of government in the future.
Clearly, one of the most pressing issues that all public administrators will have to continually wrestle with is how to provide different services with the shrinking financial resources they have available. This is because the underlying economic conditions and many years of frivolous spending are forcing a reexamination, as to how many of these entities are addressing the needs of the general public. At the heart of this dispute, is the inflexibility that many administrators have in dealing with these different challenges.
As a result, a shift has taken place in how much power employees and their unions will have during the labor negotiations. This is because, the different collective bargaining agreements and the generous benefits that they were receiving over the years have begun to highlight the ineffectiveness of the current system. As, the budgetary constraints and the inability to adjust to them; are causing many administrators to demand greater authority in making these changes. This has led to new laws in certain states that will reduce collective bargaining agreements and limit the power of unions during the process. Over the course of time, the precedent that is being established is highlighting a shift that is occurring in the budgetary process.
Bibliography
"Casinos." Michigan in a Brief, 2002. Web. 15 May 2011.
"Collective Bargaining," Legal Dictionary, 2011. Web. 15 May 2011.
"Three American Cities on the Verge of Going Bankrupt." Retire Early, 2010. Web. 15 May 2011.
Luhby, Tami. "Unions Under Fire." CNN, 2011. Web. 15 May 2011.
MLA Format. http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/01/
