Collective Bargaining and Government Power

So glad we've almost made it
So sad they had to fade it
Everybody wants to rule the world
--Tears for Fears

It has been argued that government power would increase if collective bargaining were not permitted among public sector workers. How valid is this claim?

Consider two scenarios. In the first one, collective bargaining is permitted. Government officials and public sector unions agree to a contract that pays each worker $100,000 annually in wages and benefits, guarantees annual wage increases over the life of the contract, and permits employess to retire at age 50 with full benefits.

In the second scenario, collective bargaining is not permitted. Absent public sector unions, government officials get tough and decrees that government workers will be paid $5,000 annually with no benefits.
Under which scenario does government accrue more power?

In the first scenario, the creation of well paying government jobs attracts workers who would otherwise be employed in the private sector. Government payrolls swell relative to the private sector. Productive capacity in the private sector decreases.

Moreover, negotiated work agreements put political favor for sale. Insidious relationships develop between politicians and public sector unions. Union workers, who are also voters, back candidates who support union objectives. SIG city.

To pay public sector workers, government must appropriate property from others. As payrolls grow, so do taxes. Freedom of some is compromised as government takes control of more property in order to pay public sector workers. If/when taxes become politically unpalatable, government borrows to cover the shortfall as public sector payrolls consume more resources. Debt grows, placing additional burden on private sector citizenry.

There can be no doubt that government power flourishes in the first scenario at the expense of individual freedom.

In the second scenario, low wages attract few people. Government payrolls shrink relative to the private sector. Productive capacity of the private sector grows.

Absent a rich stable of public sector workers, markets for political favor and the SIGs that thrive in them decline. Markets for political favor require government control of economic resources. If politicians were unable to take property from some and give it to others, then markets for political favor could not exist.

When public sector payrolls are low, government loses control of economic resources. Should government try to appropriate property from the citizenry, government lacks the strong armed workers vital to force compliance. Absent capacity for force, government power declines.

Removing collective bargaining from the public sector seems unlikely to increase government power. More likely, government power will be reduced.