Labour monopolies

The main difference between public sector unions and private sector unions is that the former operates within government imposed monopolies and the latter must respond the competitive, free-market forces that will ultimately make all union demands accountable to a business model that must adjust to market forces in order to survive.  

The perfect private sector "case in point" was the closure of the 2011 Caterpillar plant in London Ontario where the union was told to make adjustments or lose 160 union jobs. The union leaders "played chicken" with Caterpillar at the risk of losing 160 jobs. The result? There are now 160 new jobs in an Indiana (a "right-to-work" state)  plant  and none in London. 

By comparison, some 75% of all workers in the Ontario Public Service are under union contract which is back-stopped by OPM-addicted politicians who claim to "have their back" when union-funding issues arise. How did we ever allow our government to award such an abuse of power to public sector labour leaders? 

Monopolies are illegal in the "for-profit" portion of the economy BUT are the only model employed by governments everywhere.   How can anyone justify this double-standard morally, rationally or ethically? A Public Services union is a labour monopoly and, hence, exists at the pleasure of the State for the state's own purposes which are frequently at odds with large swaths of the public.

Since I am not a shareholder of CPR, a private sector conglomerate, then it is none of my business how they choose to implement their business model - labour unions or not.  But I am a taxpayer, and this is why I aggressively attack the excessive powers that have been granted to union leaders in the Ontario Public Service.