You can’t blame the union for a racist power structure in this country. These cop’s aren’t let off scot-free by the union, rather the criminal justice system. The union aren’t the ones repeatedly deciding that black victims are always at fault.
You’re saying the rather explicit threat to public safety was an appropriate thing for a police officer to say?
Go ahead then, have the last word. My vote cancels yours out where it matters anyhow.
Again, yes, I can. The procedures used for hiring, firing, and disciplining cops are outside of the criminal justice system, and largely negotiated by the union. The existing structure and procedure of the criminal justice system that determines whether cops even get trials are set by statute, and the police union has often successfully lobbied for those to be favorable to the police.
You can’t just pawn all responsibility for this stuff off on the power structure in this country. The union wields a lot of power in that structure and is in large part responsible for the structure being what it is. If the union was advocating strongly for reforms instead of against them, do you believe we’d have the same amount of controversy? Or do you believe meaning reforms would not be much easier to achieve?
1 Like
And that is the double edged swords of Unions. They are made to prevent employers from abusing and using firing as leverage against employees. Of course then when they gain power they make hard to fire anyone. I’ve heard the same thing about Teachers Unions, Auto Unions, etc. Everyone I know in a Union bemoans that someone at work is a worthless pile of crap, but it would take an act of god to get rid of them, so they get shuffled around to where they do the least amount of damage.
Of course there are many positives with some unions as well.
I honestly have a hard time criticizing unions. My dad’s been in the IBEW for 35+ years, it’s treated us well, and as far as I can tell does its best to focus on positive business interactions. I’m very biased. But I do see what some unions do as unwarrantably greedy in some cases. A few unions I know of absolutely refuse to compromise with businesses, and are less about collective bargaining than they are about throwing their weight around to gain political power. That seems rather iffy to me.
Probably the reason why I see the IBEW in such a positive light is because they’ve integrated into their industry so deeply that both the union and the businesses know that they rely on each other too much to argue all the time. The IBEW writes and publishes the national electrical code, has the big apprenticeship program, has all the contracts with technical schools and community colleges, in my area all the commercial electrical work is supplied to the contracting companies by the IBEW. It has a ton of power, so it gets to make the rules, so it’s probably not so much that it has to be a good union, but a union that has both set and keeps the status quo.
And the union insurance is so awesome. I’m less than a year away from 26, so I won’t be able to have the insurance much longer, so I’m squeezing the most out of it before it runs out.
I think it depends on the union. From what I know about the IBEW I like it because it sort of vets that its members know what they are doing. And they have a structure in place that sets standards and trains people to that that standard. Sort of like a guild.
Again, I’m very biased, but I really like the IBEW, and am grateful it exists.
Fun tidbit. My dad always refers to “right to work” states as “right to work for less than living wage” states.
Also, my dad’s been the union foreman on a number of jobs, and he’s had to fire union workers who weren’t working to the standard. He hates managing people, but he does his damndest to be diplomatic, and he’s a very diligent guy, sometimes to the point of being anal, so he’s ended up as foreman even though he’d rather just do the electrical work.
Labor unions were only effective as long as the behavior of employers was ludicrously unacceptable. When employers are more passive with their aggression their unions seem to lose political power.
With crime at an all time low and the bulk of the crazy on their side, the weight of assholes will drag them down.
the reagan era of union-busting and the use of corporate shills as appointees to the nlrb didn’t help much either.
No, not at all. Quit being hysterical. Read…please…
Uh no. The system is racist and skewed towards defending white power, privilege and supremacy. The union has little to do with that. Trying to divert away from that and attacking labor sort of reminds us how much that’s true. It’s not surprising to see so many commenters who benefit from this racist system trying to attack labor instead of elites either. The cop’s power has nothing to do with unions. If it did you’d be talking about how all of NYC are scared to death of fire fighters or teachers. Their power has nothing to do with their union and everything to do with them preserving, and protecting power and privilege, which is why they protect Wall Street instead of the working class.
…and the labor movement’s decline of political power through the 50s and 60s made that possible. (6) v. half dozen.
I’m having to reverse-engineer his posts, sadly. It’s pretty hard.
I’m not attacking labor in general, I’m attacking this one particular union. What they’re doing to inflame this shit is unconscionable, and you appear to be trying to deflect my words to avoid that point.
You seem to believe that the FOP has no power. The fact that we’re all here discussing their words makes it clear that that is not true. Question: can you state clearly and for the record whether you believe that the union’s public statements on this are a useful and just contribution to the situation?
Comparing the FOP to fire fighter and teacher’s unions is similarly silly. Firefighters and teachers aren’t allowed to carry around weapons, nor given the right to arbitrarily detain us or arrest us.
To be clear, I’m saying THIS PARTICULAR union bears plenty of blame for the system in general, in the policies they’ve successfully advocated for, and their refusal to accept the dismissal of cops dismissed for just cause. They also bear plenty of blame for escalating the contentiousness of this particular situation, in their attempts to conflate requests for accountability with hatred for the police.
2 Likes
You are kidding, right?
Can you explain the connection between the Fraternal Order of Police and the Patrolman’s Benevolent Association?
Surprised this hasn’t been linked to yet:
It is comforting to think of these acquittals and non-indictments as contrary to American values. But it is just as likely that they reflect American values. The three most trusted institutions in America are the military, small business, and the police.
To challenge the police is to challenge the American people, and the problem with the police is not that they are fascist pigs but that we are majoritarian pigs. When the police are brutalized by people, we are outraged because we are brutalized. By the same turn, when the police brutalize people, we are forgiving because ultimately we are really just forgiving ourselves. Power, decoupled from responsibility, is what we seek.
[…]
When it is convenient to award qualitative value to murder, we do so. When it isn’t, we do not. We are outraged by violence done to police, because it is violence done to all of us as a society. In the same measure, we look away from violence done by the police, because the police are not the true agents of the violence. We are.
Worth reading all the way through. Ta-Nahesi Coats is one of the great living editorialists.
7 Likes
Yes, I mixed up the two. Don’t think that changes the point much.
Off-Duty Officer Is Fatally Shot by Police in Harlem
The shooting is likely to raise questions again about departmental procedures involving communications among plainclothes officers — particularly those in different units — as well as issues of race. Officer Edwards was black; the officer who shot him was white.
I remember listening to an interview with a representative of an organization for black police officers in the NYPD, and being favorably impressed. I tend to be very harshly critical of police; this seems like a good time to point out that, occasionally, I do encounter people who are trying to reform the institution from the inside. The problems with policing, I believe, are structural; ultimately, police are maintaining order in an unjust social order, and that limits the possibilities of reform of that institution, in isolation from broader social change. But there are at least a few potential allies within the institution, and we should be ready to recognize them and welcome them.
1 Like
Oh, You’ve changed over to telling me what i am being.
Well, to return the favor: You’re a peach!
1 Like
