Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

marym625

(17,997 posts)
7. intended or not,
Fri Jan 2, 2015, 01:08 PM
Jan 2015

Good pun.

Precisely. The whole reason for unions is to protect the workers. When one union is not just constantly and consistently ignoring atrocities against society but defending them, they are not doing any service to anyone. That includes the people they represent. I believe that the way the NYPD are acting, the slow down especially, is hurting them as much as it is society on a whole.

Although, from what I have read, it hasn't really seemed to have changed anything as far as crime goes.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

NYC Labor May Break With Police Union [View all] Starry Messenger Jan 2015 OP
Good. n/t marym625 Jan 2015 #1
Yes indeed. Jackpine Radical Jan 2015 #2
intended or not, marym625 Jan 2015 #7
I agree too. Starry Messenger Jan 2015 #3
Good question marym625 Jan 2015 #8
NYTimes cites five but doesn't name the other four. Starry Messenger Jan 2015 #10
"Unions aren't perfect on race issues" joshcryer Jan 2015 #13
They should as Lynch etc. have dragged the word Union down in to the dirt lunasun Jan 2015 #4
Due to the nature of police work....... socialist_n_TN Jan 2015 #5
I saw that story this morning on FB. Starry Messenger Jan 2015 #9
I'm not sure that it can actually be scaled up, but then again...... socialist_n_TN Jan 2015 #12
And false arrests or prosecutions for revenue. joshcryer Jan 2015 #14
Rec! progressoid Jan 2015 #6
Good. 2banon Jan 2015 #11
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Socialist Progressives»NYC Labor May Break With ...»Reply #7