>>>>>>We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. One of the shining moments of his 8 years was when he stood up to the extortionist tactics of the air traffic controllers union. Loved it when he fired them all :)
>>>>>
>>>>>Disagree, for sure.
>>>>>It was his worst moment for me.
>>>>
>>>>Correct me if I'm wrong, but the union wanted a 10K wage increase annually and hours reduced from 40 to 32 a week. They were basically blackmailing, and Reagan called them on it. He made an example of them.
>>>
>>>Yes, he did.
>>>And he set the tone that emboldened employers throughout the country to do the same.
>>>Jimmy Carter had something to do with it too, but the real decline in the labor movement in the US can be traced to that action by Reagan.
>>>It's noteworthy that people who support that action by Reagan are horrified when working people want increased wages and shorter work weeks, but blink when idiots inherit billions for doing nothing.
>>
>>
>>Was Regan the start or was FDR?
>>"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.
>>
>>Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees."
>> FDR
>> Letter on the Resolution of Federation of Federal Employees Against Strikes in Federal Service
>>August 16, 1937
>
>He was right.
>The governmental employee, by nature of the government's monopoly positon, has a status that differs from those of other employees.
>That's also true of employees of utilities, rails, etc.
>That means that dealing with those employees requires different managerial techniques.
>Firing them is not management - it's bullying.

I don't think following the law is bulling.
Wagner Act of 1935
Taft-Hartley Act 1947
Public Law 84-13 1955 (upheld by the US Supreme Court in 1971 affirming that there was no constitutional right to strike.)
THE LAW PROVIDES
Strikers could be fined $1000 a day and/or year +1 day in jail.
''An individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States'' if he ''participates in a strike'' against the Government.
Employees must sign an oath that they will not strike.
At least 40 US district courts ruled the 1981 strike illegal(few or none were Reagan appointees)
Federal judges levied fines of $1 million a day against the union.
Are you suggesting that Reagan should have ignored the law and the courts?

By the way, I was on the losing side of the 1971 decision. My father was a member of the United Federation of Postal Clerks that brought the suit.