There is a pretty tight formal argument that, whether one is for or against unions, <i>public</i> unions are clearly bad. Here is the latest thing I have read on this: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Government-against-Itself-Public-Consequences&#x2F;dp&#x2F;0199990743" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Government-against-Itself-Public-Conse...</a><p>EDIT: Comment below is hysterical and political. This book is a good read. Chuck Reed, former mayor of San Jose, says this about it: &quot;Daniel DiSalvo has laid bare the harsh political realities facing mayors across the country who want to improve the quality of life in their cities. In the annual battles over cutting services, raising taxes or controlling costs to balance the budget, public employee unions usually have the upper hand. In many jurisdictions, costs are skyrocketing, taxes are up and services are deteriorating, yet fiscal reform seems impossible. This book explains how and why the narrow interests of unions in improving pay and benefits frequently overwhelm the broader interests of the people in improving services.&quot;