What Unions Have Asked the Government to Cut Instead of Public Sector Jobs

Cut subsidies and back-office contracts first; protect frontline service. That approach centers on technology-driven efficiency and procurement reform, not layoffs. When negotiations begin, this recommendation should guide concrete plans that keep classrooms, clinics, and police exposed to minimal disruption, while freeing funds to maintain operating capacity in critical areas.

Across national budgets, states spend billions on non-frontline operations. By consolidating procurement, adopting shared services, and standardizing IT, governments can unlock savings through economies of scale over years. Find duplications in payroll, fleet, and records management; there are multiple systems that perform the same task. Currently, many agencies run separate platforms, driving unnecessary costs.

Reforms can also reallocate funds away from selective subsidies, such as aluminum processing incentives tied to energy costs. When subsidies vanish, funds flow to frontline service maintenance and to modern technology upgrades that improve reliability and speed of service delivery for all citizens.

Intelligence units and safety services face cross-border threats; merging back-office units and adopting shared intelligence platforms can increase effectiveness without reductions in personnel. By cutting through red tape, governments can maintain critical capabilities while cutting non-core overhead that grows with inflation. Through a national framework, these moves become transparent and trackable.

To start, a national roadmap should identify 10-12 priority cuts in procurement, IT, and external contracts within the next five years. Set measurable targets and publish quarterly updates. When governments implement these steps, savings can be taken back into the service budget to protect classrooms, clinics, and operations in rural and urban areas. The goal is a deficit-neutral reform that keeps public service delivery intact while reducing waste.

Policy Debate Snapshot: Unions, Security, and AI in Government

Establish a federal AI governance board to set fiscal controls, action milestones, and transparent reporting on how automation affects jobs and service delivery.

Policy Debate Snapshot outlines how unions push for robust protections while security programs seek rapid AI integration with clear risk controls. The objective is to find concrete, implementable policies that strengthen national capacity without sacrificing public service quality.

To translate actions into measurable results, this snapshot highlights where consensus can form and how to measure progress.

• Unions’ priorities focus on jobs preservation, predictable transitions, and professional development; the board should require retraining programs, portable certifications, and clear timelines for moving workers into new roles, protecting their livelihoods.
• Public safety and intelligence integration: AI use should include human oversight, explainable models, and a strict threat tolerance to minimize misidentifications while improving situational awareness; drone deployments should be limited to critical missions with strong privacy safeguards, and include coordination with troops where applicable.
• National strategy: align federal agency actions, ensure interagency data sharing within privacy rules, and keep core critical functions in public service roles rather than shifting them to external providers where possible.
• Talent and diversity: recruit a broad professional mix, including mexicans, and ensure equal access to training and advancement, backed by anti-discrimination protections and transparent promotion criteria.
• Operational guardrails: maintain unit-based command for security tasks, cap reliance on AI within defined thresholds, and require independent audits of AI systems used in service delivery.

1. Publish a 90-day plan by the board detailing risk categories, budget allocations, and an agency pilot timeline.
2. Fund retraining from a dedicated fiscal line, with targets such as 20,000 workers enrolled in AI-assisted service roles within 24 months.
3. Launch pilots in six agencies to assess performance, cost, and user experience, and publish quarterly progress updates.
4. Establish privacy and data-use rules, including data minimization, retention limits, and civilian oversight for biometric or surveillance-enabled features.
5. Set a clear drone policy with safety standards, permitted use cases, and civil liberty protections, reviewed annually.

This snapshot underscores the need for ongoing evaluation as technology advances and public expectations evolve.

Itemized Budget Cuts Unions Demand Instead of Public Sector Job Losses

Recommendation: cut non-frontline spending first and preserve essential employees. There is evidence that the most savings come from trimming administrative overhead rather than pushing frontline staff out. In the defence budget, the military side can be reduced by stopping non‑essential procurements while maintaining critical capabilities, protecting public safety and service delivery.

1) Defence budget reforms: renegotiate supplier contracts, pause non‑critical modernization projects, and cap new platforms. This approach would save a measurable share of annual spending–roughly 6–8%–which could total several tens of billions over five years while employees on frontline posts remain secure.

2) Administrative overhead: freeze or slow junior‑to‑mid level hires, consolidate agencies, and eliminate duplicative roles. Consolidation, cross‑training, and tighter vendor management would reduce spending by about 4–5% annually, directing funds to essential services and avoiding layoffs that would harm communities where there are threats to service access.

3) IT and operations modernization: retire redundant data centers, move to cloud where feasible, and standardize platforms. The most savings occur through virtualization and bulk software licenses, which lowers spending without compromising critical operations. This keeps staff focused on value‑added work rather than routine maintenance.

4) Procurement reform: tighten competitive bidding, curb no‑bid contracts, and implement stronger contract oversight. An emphasis on transparency (источник notes) reveals waste in 10–15% of annual procurement, with savings reinvested into frontline services and training for current employees.

5) Pension and hiring policies: shift new hires to defined contribution plans while preserving existing defined benefit structures. This reduces long‑term costs while offering fair compensation and career paths for staff that remain, supporting continuity over several years.

6) Reallocation to frontline programs: repurpose subsidies and discretionary grants toward public health, housing, and education, where positive outcomes are measurable. By prioritizing prevention and early intervention, authorities can address threats such as chronic illness and community crime without triggering large‑scale job cuts. Reportedly, this approach aligns with broad public expectations and supports a resilient workforce.

7) PSAC alliance and outreach: during the meeting with the PSAC alliance, leaders toldmembers that targeted cuts would protect essential services while avoiding layoffs. Weve heard from sources that the plan is workable, will gain broader support, and is supported by there stakeholders who seek stability for employees and their families–positive momentum that reduces strain on communities where families rely on government programs, including those with workers of diverse backgrounds such as Mexicans facing drug‑related challenges and other complex threats.

Drug Traffickers as a Top National Security Threat: Ranking, Evidence, and Policy Responses

Recommendation: Treat traffickers as the primary national security threat and allocate sustained funding for interdiction, financial disruption, and prevention programs in high-risk corridors.

Among threats, drug cartels and traffickers rank as a critical non-state risk, with networks spanning the border and commercial supply chains. Authorities said the scope will require durable, cross-agency action. Policy shifts during the trumps era intensified border enforcement and interagency collaboration, sharpening the focus on high-value targets. Some proposals call for dedicated troops to support operations, and officials reportedly discussed new surveillance measures.

Evidence from official assessments and field reports shows traffickers rely on technology, encrypted communications, and private consultants to optimize routes and funding flows. Drone surveillance, ground operations, and cross-border financing networks remain central. In cali and similar nodes, traffickers exploit weak controls at ports and highways, where shipments are timed to slip past existing checks. Тисточник

Policy responses should combine four pillars: disrupt financing, cut supply routes, reduce demand, and strengthen international cooperation. Invest in intelligence-sharing platforms, private sector partners, and more advanced technology; engage consultants to modernize data analytics and target planning. Establish a standing meeting cycle across agencies to keep strategies synchronized.

Short-term actions include expanding joint task forces, deploying drone-enabled surveillance along key corridors, tightening financial controls, and sanctioning cartel leadership and front networks. Use asset seizures and prosecutions to choke funding, and share intelligence in regular meeting cycles with regional partners to align on targets and metrics.

Measurable outcomes will include faster interdiction cycles, higher interception rates, and stronger financial tracing across banks and shell entities. Weve learned that traffickers adapt quickly to enforcement changes, and that without a data-driven approach the threat could persist forever. Источник

Sabia Goes to Washington: Objectives, Stakeholders, and Potential Outcomes

Recommend that Sabia press Washington to adopt a concrete framework that would align defence technology with public safeguards and a clear cost-recovery structure. The administration should set three non-negotiable pillars: transparency in procurement, robust enforcement standards, and measured collaboration with industry and states. This alignment would reduce cycles of policy drift and create dependable funding lines for critical projects.

Stakeholders include the administration, the states, public safety agencies, the military, professional enforcement bodies, defence contractors, and international partners. The dialogue should include Cape Canaveral-linked agencies and cross-agency task forces to ensure consistent testing and deployment. The approach reflected by sheinbaum‘s governance model shows how accountability can be maintained while expanding public investment in technology, which helps public confidence and sector readiness.

Objectives include diversifying supply chains, reducing reliance on a single vendor, and building domestic capacity in defence technology. Washington should prioritize drone detection and counter-drone systems, standardize interoperability across public agencies, and ensure privacy protections accompany this growth. The cape-to-coast framework anchors work from coastal hubs to inland centers, tying testing, certification, and enforcement to field deployment and real-world use. This focus also strengthens professional training and ensures that enforcement personnel have the right tools and guidance to handle rapid tech advances.

Potential outcomes cover stronger deterrents against threats, clearer procurement rules, and a public perception of prudent governance. If these elements hold, states will take up common standards, public trust rises, and governments can coordinate more effectively with the military and industry. An aligned strategy would also reduce overreliance on a single technology stack, expand partnerships with allies, and create an objective path for ongoing evaluation of capability and impact. The administration would gain a credible framework for decisions that seek an advantage through responsible use of technology while minimizing risk to civil liberties.

How the US Helped Colombia Break Cali and Medellin Cartels: Tactics and Lessons Learned

Adopt an intelligence-led enforcement plan that links US federal assets with Colombian defence and police services, governed by a cross-agency board to coordinate operations and data sharing. This approach yields measurable savings and targets the most influential traffickers, while focusing on preventing recruitment in Cali and surrounding regions.

Core Tactics that Shaped the Break

• Intelligence fusion between US agencies, Colombian authorities, and regional partners created a precise enforcement path, allowing rapid prioritization of the most dangerous traffickers and their networks.
• Asset tracing and seizures cut the cartel’s cash flow, aligning with fiscal goals and shifting the balance away from protection finances toward legitimate business models.
• Targeted operations against traffickers used coordinated deployments, real-time information from intelligence sources, and a disciplined clip on supply lines to disrupt the most active routes.
• Cross-border collaboration with Mexicos and Mexicans authorities, alongside Canadian partners, expanded the intelligence base and expanded toolkits for interdiction, extradition, and information sharing.
• Public-private and community services programs reduced perceived reliance on drug networks, offering alternatives in high-risk areas where conflicts previously flourished.
• Witness protection, disciplined information-sharing protocols, and careful media handling protected employees and facilitated longer, steadier investigations.

Lessons Learned and Practical Recommendations

1. Formalize an alliance with a dedicated board to oversee intelligence sharing, enforcement operations, and policy alignment across US federal agencies and Colombian defence and justice sectors.
2. Maintain a continuous funding stream that supports enforcement and training, ensuring fiscal savings from disrupted networks are reinvested in community services and prevention.
3. Center operations on Cali and Medellin within a long-term plan, pairing hard-target actions against cartels with social programs that reduce recruitment of vulnerable youth.
4. Build a privy data-sharing framework that protects privacy while enabling timely access to actionable intelligence for collaborators in Canada, Mexico, and Colombia.
5. Prioritize intelligence-led raids and financial investigations to undermine the most profitable segments of the drug trade, focusing on traffickers and their networks rather than isolated operations.
6. Develop formal training and exchange programs for federal, regional, and local employees to sustain expertise and resilience across changing crime patterns.
7. Keep a broad view that includes zeroing in on shipments and concealment methods (including unusual consignments like aluminum) to prevent new routing tactics from taking hold.
8. Support social services and job creation initiatives that reduce the appeal of illicit income and improve the overall resilience of affected communities here and there.

Trump’s Plan to Deploy the Military Against Cartels: Legal Framework and Risks of a Forever War

Recommendation: Limit deployment with a sunset clause and annual reporting, tying authority to measurable outcomes and civilian oversight. washington should anchor the authorization in law, with clear metrics and a defined end date, so this approach avoids a years-long commitment. In cali and other transit hubs, reliance on public forces has grown, but this plan must be time-bound, not open-ended. This keeps the focus on drugs and traffickers while preserving democratic control.

Legal framework: The War Powers Resolution and Title 10 authorities should anchor any action, with a detailed mission statement approved by congress and a strict ceiling on forces deployed at any time. Coordination with colombian partners and other latin governments is essential to target the largest traffickers and disrupt the routes for drugs. An official said that oversight should be robust, with professional input from the center and the intelligence community, and updates to washington. That approach would align with long-standing norms, though years of experience show the need for restraint. Sheinbaum’s neighbors have emphasized non-military tools, a point that should be considered in design. That right balance can guide how this plan evolves in practice, here and there, over time.

Risks: A military deployment carries mission creep, civilian harm, and budget overhang, and it can become a political cudgel that ignores root causes. There is a risk that traffickers adapt, shifting operations into urban corridors in colombian cities and other latin corridors. There could be blowback against us interests if coalition partners grow wary; threats to civil liberties and long-term trust in washington are real, and there is danger that the center of gravity shifts away from public safety toward escalation. This is not a simple deployment, and there is a need to monitor the implications for local communities in cali, public life, and regional diplomacy.

Policy actions: Pair interdiction with source-country work: fund law enforcement, extradition, and financial tracking against traffickers; expand intelligence-sharing with colombian forces; invest in demand-reduction programs and public-health partnerships; align with local governments; ensure strict chain-of-command and civilian control; track metrics and publish annual reports. Latin nations should see that this strategy leverages diplomacy alongside the military component, reducing the duration of reliance on force and strengthening regional collaboration to disrupt the networks that feed drugs and narcotics into the largest markets.

Implementation steps: Step one, secure bipartisan authorization; step two, form a professional joint task force; step three, set a sunset and exit strategy; step four, publish evaluation data; step five, coordinate with latin governments and partners, including cali and the government under sheinbaum; step six, maintain center on public safety and human rights; step seven, monitor threats and adjust as needed. Here and there, weve outlined concrete actions on ports, corridors, and urban centers where traffickers operate, with clear takeaways for the next years and the ongoing debate in washington and beyond.

Treasury Board AI Registry in Government and Public Sector Union Proposals for Spending Review

Recommendation: Launch a centralized Treasury Board AI Registry to evaluate all AI-enabled spending requests before funding approval. The registry should reside within the federal government’s policy unit and govern cross-agency reviews across the national sector, ensuring action is guided by a standardized rubric where possible and addressing perceived risk.

To drive measurable outcomes, the registry will operate as a dedicated unit working with washington policy teams and an alliance with unions and departments seeking positive value among partners. When a proposal targets service improvement or cost reduction, the registry will clip inefficiencies and provide a clear decision path for the budget team. This unit acts as a bridge that aligns department priorities and helps the federal government take coordinated action. Among this effort, a team-based approach keeps stakeholders informed, and the action plan remains practical and auditable.

Cross-border supplier engagement plays a key role. The unit will pursue supplier diversification with mexico and colombian firms, expanding the pool of mexicos and colombian partners to reduce reliance on a single region and to build resilience against tariff shifts and supply-chain disruptions. The registry will also screen suppliers to deter traffickers and illicit actors, ensuring compliance and traceability throughout the chain. A privacy cape bounds data handling, protecting sensitive information while enabling rigorous review. This cross-border approach, here in washington and beyond, aligns with national security objectives and economic policy within the sector.