• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Trump targets the collective bargaining right of the Defense Departments civillian workforce.

RedVejigante

RedVejigante

Member
Aug 18, 2018
5,640
www.govexec.com

Trump Administration Publishes Memo That Could End Defense Unions

More than three weeks after President Trump signed a memo authorizing Defense Secretary Mark Esper to effectively outlaw collective bargaining at the Defense Department, the White House has posted the document to the Federal Register.
www.govexec.com
So Trump has essentially given Mark Esper the authority to do away with union organizing at the Pentagon if it is deemed to be in the interest of "national security". Remember kids, it's not wrong if you claim you're doing it for the good of the country!
 
TAJ

TAJ

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
12,446
Trump's impeachment defense was that literally everything he does, including simply being President, is vital to national security.
 
Tapiozona

Tapiozona

Avenger
Oct 28, 2017
2,253
Feel like I'm gonna get yelled at for this one but it's not a stretch in this case to say it could impact national security.
 
neon_dream

neon_dream

Member
Dec 18, 2017
3,644
Systematically weakening the government, from rank and file beauracrats to the highest levels of congress while relentlessly expanding the powers of the office of the president.

Could it be any more clear what he's doing?
 

Sandstar

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,739
Maybe we should just declare that conservatives can't run for office, for national security reasons.
 
Netherscourge

Netherscourge

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,904
Bernie is going to be very popular with unions.

Only unions I see Trump keeping is the police unions. For obvious reasons...
 
OP
OP
RedVejigante

RedVejigante

Member
Aug 18, 2018
5,640
If there was some precedent of union organizing being an impediment to national security than I can maybe see that being a conversation worth having. Until then it simply looks like like an example of the president exploiting provisions so that he can enact anti-labor policies against those he has the most power to inflict them on.
 
RiOrius

RiOrius

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,073
Tapiozona said:
Feel like I'm gonna get yelled at for this one but it's not a stretch in this case to say it could impact national security.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Could, certainly. Like, if we were seriously at war and all of a sudden every ammunition factory went on strike that'd be bad for said war. Heck, if it were a real all-out, WWII style war where Rosie the Riveter is encouraging everyone pitch in even small-scale disruptions in the munitions supply chain could cost lives.

But realistically, we're not in that scenario, and won't be any time in the foreseeable future. If the Pentagon ran out of drones tomorrow and all the drone manufacturers went on strike, our national security would still be thoroughly intact. And even more realistically, you know good and well that "for national security purposes" would be used incredibly liberally (word play!). Like how various documents related to Ukraine were classified/redacted "for national security purposes," and then the originals were leaked and it was clear that they were just redacted "because they're very incriminating."

So let's not play around with what's "technically correct" when what's actually going on is incredibly obvious, and thoroughly disgusting.
 
bulletbill10

bulletbill10

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
393
If I remember correctly, almost no federal employees can strike, so that isn't really a valid concern. Even when folks weren't getting paid during the shutdown, they weren't allowed legally to strike.

I'm not sure under a non-wartime scenario what problem collective bargaining could cause, and even then I don't think it's worth trading in our rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.