Did President Ronald Reagan have to fire the air traffic controllers ?

[tradeunionsupporter]

Did President Ronald Reagan have to fire the air traffic controllers and break up their Union PATCO IN 1981 Im asking this question because some Right Wingers say the air traffic controllers had no legal right to strike and that they signed contracts saying they would not strike and that air traffic controllers going on strike was unsafe ?

Labor - And A Whole Lot More

Ronald Reagan's War on Labor

http://www.dickmeister.com/id89.html

[RichardAWilson]

Yes, they did. Otherwise, they would have faced a British-style Winter of Discontent. Reagan's Conservatism, like Thatcher's, needed to be Iron Fisted to work. By firing the Controllers, Reagan showed he wasn't going to bargain with the unions.

[Baseball]

Did President Ronald Reagan have to fire the air traffic controllers and break up their Union PATCO IN 1981 Im asking this question because some Right Wingers say the air traffic controllers had no legal right to strike and that they signed contracts saying they would not strike and that air traffic controllers going on strike was unsafe ?

Labor - And A Whole Lot More

Ronald Reagan's War on Labor

http://www.dickmeister.com/id89.html


No. However the law as passed by Congress in the 50s and upheld by the Supreme Court in 1970 said no strike. Also no strike clauses were in the existing contract. But the president had the right.


The air traffic controllers had higher than average salaries-- and wanted steep pay hikes and better retirement benefits. The union struck because the Administration would not give it to them.

Public support was on the side of the president. In a recession which was worse than the one recently experienced, it was tough for the public to swallow such demands of the union.

[Die Rote Fahne]

This is a great example to use for those small government types who basically think Reagan is a god.

But no.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

Did he "have to" fire them? No. If he was supportive of labor, although technically they were breaking the law (no-strike clauses are a joke), he could of decided against it.
It was a perfect opportunity to strike a massive blow. IIRC, over 15,000 people were fired immediately. That's a huge blow to just one union, and it helped create the momentum against labor that has continued ever since.
It was a rather hypocritical situation, because Reagan was elected with labor support, most infamously by the Teamsters, the US's largest single union. Although nothing was guaranteed, Reagan had nudged at the idea of helping unions like the Teamsters if he was elected. His reaction? Firing 15,000 people within his first year.

[MattShizzle]

Not to mention there's a shortage of Air traffic Controllers to this day. Reagan was one of the worst presidents there was. All I can think of worse are GWB, for obvious reasons and Andrew Jackson (still shamefully on the $20 bill) for his genocidal Indian Removal Act.

[RichardAWilson]

Reagan was an interesting character. As Governor of California, he was suspicious of the now famous Proposition 13. He even supported increasing the state's income tax.



Reagan ended up approving a $1 billion tax increase on a $6 billion annual budget. That tax increase was, proportionately, the biggest tax increase in state history.

[RGacky3]

The air traffic controllers had higher than average salaries-- and wanted steep pay hikes and better retirement benefits. The union struck because the Administration would not give it to them.


I hate that argument, its not that these guys had salaries that were too high, its that everyone else had saleries that were WAYYY to low.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

No-strike clauses? Fuck that. Good on the union for ignoring such blatantly anti-worker clauses, and vomit, piss and shit on the memory of that turkey-necked ghoulish fuckstick.