"...are you saying that the government needs to be regulated by unions, because they aren't good at regulating themselves."

GfS,,,did I say that? No... I did NOT say that. That is a gross exaggeration of what I said & meant. Why would anyone even suggest that "...the government needs to be regulated by unions..."??
   I said that unions need to be **available** (note emphasis) if government fails to act decently...to represent staff workers when regulating gets out of hand. It does NOT mean (before you ask and accuse me of saying so) that unions must always get everything their way. It means that there needs to be a formal means of negotiation beyond just 'filing a complaint'...which, without an open, public process, often just means being ignored and/or disciplined. That is why there have been so many incidents of 'whistle blowers' being hung out to dry.

Is that enough to clarify what I said?