upvote

points

by tatersolid8 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby achr28 hours ago|
next
[-]
No the shortage goes back to Regan when their justified strike was busted. It ended the PATCO “union” and was a negative turning point for labour unions in general.
reply
upvoteby lesuorac8 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
I think you mean Reagan. He removed the union for the ATC not Clinton.

Honestly, you can generally just blame Reagan for about anything. A presidency about weaking labor, strengthening Iran, and ballooning the deficit is uh never going to leave good traces.

reply
upvoteby nradov7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Reagan did the right thing in that case. Government employees should never have collective bargaining rights. Public employee unions are contrary to the interests of taxpayers.
reply
upvoteby kube-system4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Over the course of the past year, I think we've seen more evidence that the federal workforce's collective bargaining rights aren't strong enough. Workers' employment contracts are being ignored, employees are being threatened, constructively terminated, all in an attempt to enact RIFs without following the law.

Things are happening to the federal workforce right now that aren't even legal in the private sector.

reply
upvoteby nradov3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
If contracts are violated then the impacted parties can seek redress through the courts. Government employee unions aren't needed for that.
reply
upvoteby throwway1203853 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
You have to have your contract violated for a significant amount before you can notionally afford to hire a lawyer to fight it out. Below 5 figures it doesn't make much financial sense to do that for most people, so they just eat it instead. It's how a lot of "theft of wages" and other mistreatment happens so often. Lawyers don't take those cases for free, and court isn't free either. And you're not going to instantly appear at the top of the docket for something small like that especially if the government buries you in procedure. They can do that for years.

But sure, yeah you can seek redress through the courts.

reply
upvoteby kube-system57 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
The result of some of the issues at hand might not even be damages, but simply to realign policies with what the law requires.... which may no longer be relevant for someone who lost a job a year ago and has since moved on out of necessity.

And this admin doesn't simply stop an initiative when courts block them, they find a new "creative interpretation" to do the same thing, and carry on for however long it takes the next trial to happen.

reply
upvoteby kube-system3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Suing the federal government solo is an insurmountable task for most people -- even more so while they're being constructively terminated. Employee unions have been suing on their workers behalf over the past year, but the executive branch can drag out federal trials for a lot longer than people can stay without a job.
reply
upvoteby superxpro123 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Centralization of all power in the government is also contrary to the interests of the taxpayers.

Every time i see an anti-union article, its usually about unions that do good union things...

But noone ever complains about the police union. It's always the public goods people like ATC or teachers.

reply
upvoteby InitialLastName2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
People complain about police unions all the time, it's just their complainants don't overlap much with the people who complain about private sector unions.
reply
upvoteby callmeal5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Does your comment also include the police union(s)?
reply
upvoteby cake_robot4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Yes absolutely. They're a perfect example of the unique issues w/ collective bargaining for public services.
reply
upvoteby nradov5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Yes, absolutely. No government employees should ever have collective bargaining rights. If they want better wages and working conditions then they can advocate for those through the political process, the same as any other citizen.
reply
upvoteby rounce2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
In your suggestion any other citizen has collective bargaining at their disposal, do they not?
reply
upvoteby wat100003 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Collective bargaining rights shouldn’t even be a separate thing. They’re just a natural consequence of the fact that free speech is protected and slavery is illegal. The idea of an illegal strike is bizarre.
reply
upvoteby RC_ITR2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
This is a discussion with nearly unanimous agreement that poor ATC working conditions are causing Americans to die in preventable aviation accidents.

Maybe this is the one evidence-driven case where you can be open minded about the value of a public employee union?

reply
upvoteby nradov1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Nope. Public employee unions bring zero value and this incident is not evidence to support such unions. Relying on unions to act as ersatz safety regulators would be stupid, just completely the wrong approach. Decisions about things like ATC procedures, staffing levels, and training standards should be the responsibility of apolitical career bureaucrats.
reply
upvoteby fatbird3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Public employee unions are contrary to the interests of taxpayers

This is not obvious on its face, but also, paying taxes is not my only concern wrt the civil society in which I live.

reply
upvoteby xboxnolifes2 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Not just attract, it also has very high standards. And many people fail out.
reply
upvoteby rwyinuse3 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Somehow Europe manages to do that well enough.
reply
upvoteby MaxfordAndSons5 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
ATC/GTC seems like a really strong candidate for partial automation with recent advances in AI. Obviously we'd still want some expert humans in the loop for exceptional situations, but I have to imagine there's a way to significantly reduce the cognitive burden/stress for these folks.
reply
upvoteby nradov5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Recent advances in AI aren't useful for routine operations in safety critical domains such as aviation because we don't know how to verify and test them. An LLM is effectively an unpredictable black box with unknown failure modes. There is opportunity for greater automation but probably based on classical deterministic programming.
reply
upvoteby matthewkayin3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
In addition to this, LLMs are also simply too slow right now to deliver the results ATC would need.

Ridiculous to see people acting like LLMs are a silver bullet for every problem without putting any thought into what that would actually look like.

reply