Quote from cgroupman:
In keeping with my attempt to see both sides of most equations, I thought I would render this. I'm not sure that I agree that public employees, who we, as US citizens, hire, need to have those same hires form a Union to charge them, which is US, dues to come up with compensation plans between the same US.
Not sure if that makes any sense, but if we simply set up fair compensation plans for employees then we might eliminate the need for unions in the public sector. The key word is, of course, fair.
Do we pay our military enough? Are they taken well enough care of in their retirement, disability time? I'm not so sure.
Then, if we just mandate what salaries will be, and what compensation packages will be, then, yes, accusations of Socialism. This can be a tough one.
Other thoughts?
c
I believe I can help you.
If you are able to hire enough well-qualified employees, then you are paying an adequate wage. If you have trouble hiring people, then you need to review your compensation/benefit levels.
"Fair" is not an economic concept. It is a values judgment used to obscure the real issue. How do you define "fair"? If it "fair" to taxpayers to pay more than is necessary to get the job done? Isn't that the definition of "waste?"