One of the more prescient comments about the recent US government shutdown came from a columnist on Slate -- Matt Yglesias, if I recall correctly. Said columnist suggested that if air traffic controllers walked off the job, the shutdown would be ended right away.
Air traffic controllers in the US are deemed an essential service and hence barred from striking. Way back in the 1990s the controllers' union of the day, PATCO, called a strike anyway, and Ronald Reagan promptly fired them all. So it took a little while for today's controllers to realize that while they might not be allowed to strike as such, there was nothing to prevent them from calling in sick. By January 25 the number of controllers taking this option was sufficient to force the FAA to halt operations for a brief period at La Guardia, Newark and one or two more airports in the north-east. Lo and behold, a deal to end the shutdown, at least temporarily, was in place within 24 hours.
So it's probably safe to make this prediction: if the two sides in Congress are unable to come up with a budget deal by mid-month and the government shuts down again, air traffic controllers will start calling in sick in large numbers from day one. Since there are probably at least a few congresspersons who realize this, the chances of avoiding another shutdown may be somewhat better than most commentators expect.
Holding government workers hostage in partisan political fights is frankly immoral, and if the workers and unions have figured out a way to make shutdowns untenable, that's surely a good thing. It would be better, of course, if the politicians themselves swore off this negotiating tactic. They might want to consider that if you're going to pass a law to declare someone an essential worker, and hence bar them from striking, it might be only fair to have a parallel law that compels you to pay them.
No comments:
Post a Comment