Wisconsin senators pass no collective bargaining for public workers.
 

After waiting 3 weeks for the Democrats to return from Illinois to vote on Governor Walkers budget repair bill, the Republicans amended the original bill to take out "fiscal issues" and passed a bill to strip collective bargaining rights from public workers. A quorum of 20 wasn't needed and the bill passed 18-1.

Check it out here: http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/

All hell is breaking loose in Madison. The democratic senators, most still in Illinois, are claiming it an injustice and the union is calling for a strike by all union employees.

More to follow but it's about time. How long should the Dems have been able to keep the state hostage? Wisconsin was in a budget crises and couldn't afford to wait any longer for the loser 14 senators to return.

About time someone stood up to the unions. Hard working taxpayers are sick and tired of paying for the new elite - union public workers!

Congratulations Governor Walker and taxpayers of Wisconsin.

This isn't fair!! The Wisconsin Republican's are fighting like ........like......well, like Democrats!!!; and who expected that?!!!

I think President Obama should...
 

I think President Obama should put in a No Fly Zone over Wisconsin before the bombing and rioting start... like the dem politician said.. sometimes you have to go out on the street and get a little bloody. I pray not and urge peace on all sides... but I suspect not.
And worse than that.. can you imagine how justified the poor and unemployed will feel to join the tragedy if it ignites over public employee negotiating rights?
JJ

Wisconsin
 

This is a very scary situation. This has nothng to do with unions it has to do with the rights of citizens of this country to earn a fair wage, be respected for what they do.

Florida is about to be placed in the same situation that Wisconsin is in. Governeor Scott thinks he purchased a company when he purchased the State of Florida. He does not own the state, the citizens of the state of Florida own the state. Be prepared, Florida is on its' way to becoming a third world country, Hopefully they have awakened a sleeping giant that will not stand for this.

I dunno. Unions were to protect workers, but now and again their power became so great they almost ruined companies, such as International Truck and Engine company that until the huge strike in the 70's was one of the top ten most powerful and widespread businesses in the world. Management shouldn't have all of the power but neither should organized crime that controlled the unions in many areas.

People who work for the government shouldn't have different and better rights than those in the private sector.

There needs to be some checks and balances but this seems extreme.

But I believe in democracy. We will see what the voters say.

I truly do not understand the hatred for unions by some people. They would make us believe that public employees are solely responsible for everything that is wrong with America. Wall street and corporate giants rip us off for countless billions pay nothing and yet it's the unions. I'm not drinking that Kool-aid ever. If workers are not allowed to negotiate they are slaves to that company. Even companies without unions(Pfizer)negotiate. It's a sad day for American labor and The USA in general.

Public Employees do not have a right to unionize.
 

Public Employees do not have a right to unionize. It was granted by an elected body and PARTS or ALL of it can be withdrawn by the elected body. The federal gov employees do not have the right to union and half the states already have significant restrictions on those rights. The unions and employees have no right to become disruptive, and intimidating, or run out of state. They should take their issue to the voters in the next election.

The REASON Wisconsin elected reps want to limit.. NOT END.. the collective bargaining rights is because they have a 3 billion dollar deficit that was caused IN PART by the current collective bargaining rights. It does not fix the problem to accept the belated offer to reduce benefits but leave in effect the imbalance in collective bargaining rights by public employees that IN PART caused it.. they must fix the imbalance. How can those employees complain when they have higher salaries and benefits than the taxpayers that pay their salaries? They should not.
It is wrong for unions to have a law that requires new hirees to pay union dues when they never got to vote on the union.. then take that money and give it to politicians that the worker opposes.. and then bargain with the politician they supported with their dues to get sweet deals on pay and benefits. It is wrong and must be changed.
JJ

I am not anti-union and am a retired Teamster myself, and thus I am not for the ending of collective bargaining rights which are the foundation of a union of workers. My comment above was purely political as the Republicans played this a little dirty, which is unusual for them and has, until now, been a fairly standard Democrat tactic in my opinion.

The public sector unions problem has been that they don't want to have any of the problems of the private sector impact them, and people are taking notice. This is because the suffering public is paying for all the wage and benefits of the public employee while having less of these benefits themselves. The last thing the unions need is more animosity from the public directed at them, but that is the path they have chosen.

They should have agreed to givebacks from the beginning and maybe they could have negotiated the retention of their bargaining rights in good faith. The unions could have generated much good will this way. Then, if and when, the economy turned around, and their political backers were again in office, they could have had their benefits restored much easier than is done in the private sector.

I just watched Michael Moore on msnbc tonight on RM show. This is going to get very ugly with his call for a national uprising.
JJ

Richielion: My thoughts exactly. There is a difference in Public and private unions. I know when we ask for too much in the private unions I may just be out of a job. I remember some 15 years ago there was a chance that we would have to give up concessions or possibly have our plant close.
It never came to that point but I couldn't believe how many members were against concessions.

Public Employees-collective bargaining
 

:shrug:I'm confused. According to most on this forum public employees should not have collective bargaining. Most think it is improper for Unions to take taxpayer earned $ (dues) and use it for political purposes. The part of this statement I disagree with is after a employee earns their pay, should we be able to tell them how to spend it? Public employees provide services, yet every year they are expected to give back more to help whatever political agenda the current administration has . Here in Florida, public employees have not received a raise in 5 years, yet are expected to continue doing more for less. Most are trying to find a way to pay their bills with the same amount they earned 5 years ago. Public employees live in the area they work, spend their wages locally, pay taxes like everyone else, yet are looked at and treated like 2nd class citizens. The normal public employee does not earn a lot of money, that is reserved for management. Most forget that in a economic downturn more people are in need of more public services, food stamps, medical, etc. That translates into more work for the public employee not less. You, the general public, expect to be treated with courtesy and respect when you have need for public services, you expect them to always act professionally but yet be subject to constant ridicule because of the job they have. You expect the public employees to balance the budget out of their paychecks and give back more every year. I probably the only one on this forum that supports the public employee because I can see how easy it is for everyone to blame the public employee. This is why I can see the need for public employees to have collective bargaining, so they can concentrate on providing services we need and not to have to play politics every day on the job. Why is it OK for the NFL to have a collective bargaining agreement with the NFL owners to ensure fair compensation and benefits but the public employees should just be happy they have a job??

army one,I could not have said it better. All of this union bashing is just a smokescreen to get rid of money that usually goes to the Democratic party so the repubs and their corporate backers can totally rid themselves of whats left of the middle class. I'm really surprised someone doesn't tie high gas prices to the unions. Oh wait Wall street speculators aren't unionized so why blame them?

Wisconsin
 

Scott Walker had an article published in WSJ today and begn with the story of Megan Sampson who was awarded "Outstanding First Year Teacher in Wisconsin (2010). a week later she was layoffed due tot the FIFO method employed by the Teachers Union. In another article six or more bus drivers eaaarned in excess of $100,000 in 2009. A total for six of $1.9 million in 2009 and that does not take into account the generous benefits which in Wisconsin costs come close or equal to their compensation. Collective bargaining for public employees is an oxymoron because their employer is the taxpayer who is absent during negotiations and whom rely on public figures who rely on unions to get them reelected. Go Scott Walker

:BigApplause::BigApplause:

When NFL owners negotiate with..
 

When NFL owners negotiate with their employees, their desire is to bargain to keep the owners own profits as high as possible.
When politicians who were financially supported by and elected by unions, their desire is to make the unions happy so they get more financial support from the union and the union vote, and the give unreasonable deals to the unions using taxpayer money, NOT THEIR OWN.
That is the problem and that is why unions should not be allowed to bargain with the politicians they financially and voter support.
BUT.. worse than that.. is unions refuse to require annual vote on the union by their members even though new employees get NO say in whether they are a member of the union..
and WORSE YET... the union confiscates money from that disenfranchised worker involuntarily from the worker paycheck BEFORE they even see it, they use that confiscated money to influence the politician as outlined above,
AND WORSE yet they want to intimidate and coerce union membership through pressure and refusal to allow secret ballots..
AND WORSE YET AGAIN.. unions negotiate most strongly for the workers who break the rules or are the least productive, rarely to increase compensation for the hardest workers.. in fact they come down HARD on the best workers to increase the need for more workers.. and in many parts of the country they have literally driven the companies out of town with strikes and rules.. my family have been a victim of these problems.
and FINALLY the owner of a unionized business can close the plant and move elsewhere, or close the plant and open up later with new employees if they cannot afford the union demands... the PUBLIC SECTOR cannot move and they cannot close, ... and because politicians are negotiating with other people (taxpayer) money, it is just easier to cave into demands... take the union money and votes.
JJ

Federal Government employees unions
 

Actually, JimJoe, Federal Government employees do have the right to belong to a union. There are several major unions such as American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE). Government unions do not have the right to strike. They represent employees in disputes about job conditions, job performance ratings, and disciplinary procedures.

Employees are not required to belong to a union; it is entirely voluntary - and a non-union employee gets the same benefits as a union employee - and can even be represented by a union official at a hearing.

Labor Relations is a major part of the Federal Human Resources office in any government agency.

I am not saying they are not needed but as a former HR Officer, the union officials did block a lot of the programs that were for the good of the government. You probably will not find one HR employee who says they liked working with the unions.

Thanks for the info but..
 

Thanks for the info but I note that those rights have little or nothing to do with wages and benefits which is what the problem is.

I have to be honest, I'm sitting here watching TV coverage at this very moment. From the videos, some of the people protesting in the cap don't look much like teachers to me at all. At least no teacher I've ever had.

They look more like scruffy rabble rousers who are protesting just for the fun of protesting. A group of young twenty somethings sitting on the floor pounding on 5 gallon plastic containers? Are they our teachers? Future teachers? Out of state union activists perhaps?

The capitol looks totally trashed to me... by "public" employees?

Regarding the bill that passed last night. I thought the democrats / unions liked the Pelosi / Reid style of legislation? Apparently not. Oh wait, they only like it when they do it.

Funny, one of the democratic senators who skipped town said and I paraphrase, if you value democracy you should be gravely concerned. Really? This coming from an elected official who ran out of state with 13 others to prevent a "democratic" vote?

Beam me up Scotty.

Just watching the news again and they showed a protester getting dragged away from in front of a door by the police.

You know what he yelled to the news camera?

"Hi mom, hi mom."

What the heck is going on up there?

In the company I worked for the workers agreed to wage givebacks, and temporary suspension of pension credits, coupled with severely reduced pension contributions by the company, when they do resume. This was done so that the company could have a chance to recover and continue in the business which supports 25,000 families with another 11,000 on lay-off hoping to come back.

We can't go to the keepers of the public treasury and demand our compensation remains the same; while the house of cards is tumbling around us, like the workers in the public sector unions have long expected. Like you said, we had to work with the company to come to a solution with no relief coming from anyone but us.

The Democrats have long made promises to the Teamster's Union and almost never come through when it counts. The biggest one was former President Bill Clinton's arm twisting and back room dealing to get NAFTA passed, after promising us he would do the exact opposite while campaigning.

Now Democrat President Barack Obama has agreed to give Mexico the unlimited access of our roads for their trucking industry. Again a major blow to the transportation workers in America, and Teamsters in particular, who'll have to compete with vastly underpaid Mexican truckers.

I'm not arguing the merits of either affront to the Unions; only that it happened, and that it perpetrated against us by our so called "friends".

It's not about the budget. When the unions caved to the financial demands Walker made, he should have taken his victory. But that wasn't good enough for him.

I'm no fan of unions. I don't like the way that (especially public) unions can make it virtually impossible to fire someone for incompetency. But to take away the right to collectively bargain just seems wrong to me.

Heck, I just saw a clip of Ronald Reagan, from 1980, stating that where workers are not allowed to collectively bargain, tyranny is found.

I know some teachers locally - lived next door to one for many years. Many of the good teacher are frustrated to no end by the incompetents and burnouts who "game the system".

I'd love to see proper reform. To me that would be the best of both worlds and a compromise I could certainly live with.

Here in NH we offer the teachers a choice when it comes to cutbacks. You either give up certain things (like increasing the co-payments on health insurance) or a number of teachers jobs are eliminated to make up the shortfall. It's the union's choice. Shared sacrifice or targeted sacrifice. Apparently, in Manchester NH, the teacher's union is choosing targeted sacrifice.

Wait a second!!
 

WAIT A SECOND!!
Why do teachers get to decide if the compensation goes down or there are fewer teachers?? That is crazy. Some of the best young teachers will be laid off to over pay the union protected seniority. COME ON.
The only logical response to excessive compensation in an economic crisis is reduced compensation.. not hurt the kids by getting rid of teachers to maintain the unreasonable compensation for some obtained through the incestuous relationships between unions and politicians. The public would be far better off with less compensation for teachers and more teachers!

I get it....don't pay the teachers anything,they don't deserve a fair wage. They should not be allowed to negotiate anything unless it's to give something back that they earned in negotiations. Let those greedy teachers take what we the taxpayer give them which as we all know will be zero.

Wisconsin
 

Early on I was forced into two trade unions which both had practices that intentionally cut production while continuing to demand higher wages and benefits. Google where Americian students rank in the world and last I read it was 29th. When the auto industry collapsed the UAW was handed approx 30% of the stock. When the auto industry began making headway the UAW demanded all concessions back. I know because I was about to buy a GM product until I read that little diddy in the paper. The GM salesman acknowledged that GM was strapped with this burden

Someone mentioned Reagan in another post recall that he fired about 8000 air traffic controllers because they didn't understand the problem associated with collective bargaining. If you feel airport security is a problem now wait until the TSA chooses their union. I spent most my career in Human Resources and fought hard for employees but never did I ask them to slow down production. My main objection to public unions is that it is an oxymoron for public unions to demand collective bargaining. The previous New Jersey governor advocated for public unions and he was the guy who was suppose to be watching out for taxpayers. But as we all know union dues feed campaigns and guys like Corizine know that they need unions to be relected. So there is no one to watch out for the interests of taxpayers. The best result for everyone is that good teachers get paid based on their performance as do employees in all other industries. As an HR guy and long time operations manager I saw what happended when incomptent employees were not dealt with effectively. Not surprising was the fact that their co-employees complained the most because they were adversely affected by this poor performance. So I am pleased that Scott Walker has shown intestinal fortitude regarding this issue. If you get the Daily Sun Ann coulter's Sunday column effectively addresses this topic. finally I believe that teachers would do much better without a union,that is of course if they are competent.

Did I say...
 

Did I say dont pay them anything did I?
How about they pay half their health care premium and half their retirement. Is that too much, considering most of the people who pay taxes to pay their salary have to pay ALL their health care and ALL their retirement, and they work 12 months instead of 9 months in the year, and they dont get off at 3pm, or get inservice days, and xmas vacation, and spring break, and all the rest.
JJ

I would love to see them rid of tenure as I am sure many of the better qualified teachers feel. :thumbup:

JimJoe,if it is such a good gig,why doesn't everyone teach? Simple because most people cant, they are not talented enough and many of those that are find out the pays stinks,working conditions are awful and their BS degree and Masters are worth far more in the private sector.

FDR was opposed to these public unions and for good reason !!!

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/in...#axzz1GKY7O76e
Roosevelt was opposed to publicemployees striking which is far different than the issue of whether public employees should have the right to negotiate.

There are some very good arguments on this thread and this whole thing needed to be looked at. I am not big on huge confrontations like the governor did, but it sure got everyone's attention.

This from FDR....

""... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...

"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable."



You can hang your hat on the small reference to strike, but I suggest you read and, in context, take in the entire quote ESPECIALLY...

"The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ..."

lots of references but for this...

http://www2.hernandotoday.com/conten...nions-a-no-no/

In this article, a good history lesson for some...you find reference to the Democratic tactic of using this action, ie. public sector unions to get votes and for context, this article was written in late 2010 BEFORE Wisonsin and before the Nov elections......this also....


"Most of us don't have a sense of where this is all heading. On the private sector side, Sen. Bob Casey, D-Penn., proposed a massive bailout for underfunded union pension plans in March. Private pension funds are estimated to be underfunded by $165 billion. This legislation would create a special fund for unions within the Pension Benefits Guarantee Corporation (PBGC), courtesy of taxpayers, as an "obligation of the United States" rather than an obligation of the PBGC through its insurance premiums."

I'm happy with the amount of discussion this post generated.

Being in Wisconsin, I got to see first hand the disgusting behavior of the democratic senators who fled the state; the teachers who called in sick so they could protest in Madison; the doctors writing excuses to teachers protesting without any exam; and the unruly out-of-state union goons who were only there to cause trouble!

Governor Walker's "Budget Repair Bill" and his two year budget go hand-in-hand. Significant cuts will be required by all government entities and school boards due to less aid from the federal and state government. By removing collective bargaining, Governor Walker has given these munincipalities and school boards the tools to help control costs and truly negotiate benefits and wages.

Several school boards rushed to negotiate "sweetheart" deals with their unions before the bill could be voted on and passed. The City of Green Bay negotiated an "emeritus" agreement with retired teachers where, if they work ten days days a year for three years, they will receive one years pay! Thirty days of work for a years salary! The City of Madison passed an even better deal for their teachers but you don't even have to work an hour! Unbelievable! These are extreme example but they happened because greedy unions and irresponsible school boards, working together, tried to beat Governor Walker's bill! And who pays for this - the taxpayers!

I just hope people really see what happened in Wisconsin and see the greed and corruption of the public unions.

Finally, the national Democrats have sent all their heavy hitters into Wisconsin to work on recall efforts of the Republican senators that voted to pass the bill. Any idea who is orchestrating this?

Stay tuned. The circus has NOT left the state yet!

As always the union response is pretty predictable...if you dont agree we will "hurt" you in some way...you are either with us or against us...

"March 10, 2011
Mr. Tom Ellis, President
Marshall & Ilsley Corporation
770 N. Water Street
Milwaukee, WI 53202
SENT VIA FASCIMILE AND REGULAR MAIL
Dear Mr. Ellis:
As you undoubtedly know, Governor Walker recently proposed a “budget
adjustment bill” to eviscerate public employees’ right to collectively bargain in
Wisconsin. ..

As you also know, Scott Walker did not campaign on this issue when he ran for
office. If he had, we are confident that you would not be listed among his largest
contributors. As such, we are contacting you now to request your support.

The undersigned groups would like your company to publicly oppose Governor
Walker’s efforts to virtually eliminate collective bargaining for public employees in
Wisconsin. While we appreciate that you may need some time to consider this
request, we ask for your response by March 17. In the event that you do not
respond to this request by that date, we will assume that you stand with
Governor Walker and against the teachers, nurses, police officers, fire fighters,
and other dedicated public employees who serve our communities.

In the event that you cannot support this effort to save collective bargaining,
please be advised that the undersigned will publicly and formally boycott the
goods and services provided by your company. However, if you join us, we will
do everything in our power to publicly celebrate your partnership in the fight to
preserve the right of public employees to be heard at the bargaining table.
Wisconsin’s public employee unions serve to protect and promote equality and
fairness in the workplace. We hope you will stand with us and publicly share that
ideal.

In the event you would like to discuss this matter further, please contact the
executive Director of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, Jim Palmer,
at 608.273.3840.

Thank you in advance for your consideration. We look forward to hearing from
you soon.

James L. Palmer, Executive Director
Wisconsin Professional Police Association
Mahlon Mitchell,President
Professional Professional Fire Fighters
Jim Conway, President
International Association of Fire Fighters Local 311
John Matthews, Execuctive Director
Madison Teachers, Inc.
Keith Patt, Executive Director
Green Bay Education Association
Bob Richardson, President
Dane County Deputy Sheriffs Association
Dan Frei, Prersident
Madison Professional Police Officers Association

http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charlie...04.html?blog=y

Using the word IDEAL while extorting is a new approach !!

Lets not forget this is a 2 way street. It is extortion when large corporations demand tax breaks and other sweetheart benefits to move into your town and then when the benefits are up they leave and start the same extotion process in another town. Then if their outrageous demands are not met again they blame the unions and off they go to another city or worse to another country. Check out what Pfizer did to New London,CT for all you anti-union pro business people,it's not pretty.

I did forget one point. If we want our workers to give up some of their hard earned money and benefits why aren't we asking the corporations to give up some of their profits so they might hire unemployed Americans who need a job? No,instead we continue to give them bigger tax breaks,for what I don't know,or maybe it has something to do with campaign donations. For all you seniors out there check out what the governor of Michigan has in store for you. If some of you think this is just about unions you are sadly mistaken. This is a war against what is left of the middle class and we are losing.

Let’s look at what Pfizer did to New London. In 2001 Pfizer came to New London. New London wanted the high tech, high paying jobs Pfizer that Pfizer would create. In return, New London agreed to have Pfizer pay only 20% of normal property taxes for ten years.

Pfizer proceeded to build a $294 million facility and hired or brought in 1400 people with good paying jobs. Later Pfizer bought Wyeth, another drug manufacturer. Wyeth had facilities that could accommodate the Pfizer operation. Pfizer then consolidated its operations in nearby Groton, CT – 4.1 miles down the road. No one had to move, no one was fired and property tax payments to New London did not change. Pfizer remains New London’s largest taxpayer.

I guarantee you that the $294 million for construction that went into the plant was a boom for New London. I guarantee you that the jobs that did not leave continue to benefit both New London and Groton. Please show me what Pfizer, “…did to New London, CT that was not that pretty.”

I dont get it..
 

I dont get your point. A lot of people like me are not just in favor of reforming public sector unions. We do NOT want government favoring anyone.. especially using tax money to bribe businesses with grants and tax abatements is wrong. Every business should compete on a level playing field with current business in that area. I resent my government confiscating my tax money from me and then GIVING (redistributing) it to anyone.. it is wrong.. that is socialism.. period!!
JJ

Extortion?
 

Giving tax incentives to businesses to move into an area is hardly extortion. It smart for the business to ask for them and smart for the local government to provide them. It means employment for the area from not only the people working there but also the money these people then spend in the community.

Extortion is the unions being able to demand, and get, whatever they want because they control the school boards, government bodies and elected officials. Who's looking out for the taxpayers?

People are waking up and seeing what the unions "bring" to public workers and taxpayers!

isconsin
 

The realistic fact concerning corporations is that they come into existence to make a profit and anything short of immoral, unethical or illegal benefits a community. Corporations create good paying jobs and do reward competent people via performance evaluations systems that prove their value. I could offer criticism to the system but in the end it works best. On the other side we have union leaders who continually make demands for increases in pay and benefits primarily to justify their existence and with no corrosponding increase in productivity or quality. I have witnessed union employees intentionally slowing down so they could get overtime. A nuclear plant being built in upstate New York was over budget and substantially behind schedule for completion. The culprit. Union employees were making so much money on that job they did not want it to end. so the day welders would come in and weld pipe and at night the welders would come in and break welds. At least that is what the local paper printed.

As an human resources officer I was assigned to a subsidiary we acquired. I found my staff being underpaid. I voluntarily gave up 10% pay increases for three years because I believed pay should be commensurate with performance. The senior management team I worked with were elitist and so I was rewarded with providing good example as being referred to as that HR guy having a "blue collar mentality". They didn't miss my point. I missed the point. Corporations are based on profit, incentives and the like. It is its life blood and while it plays well in the movies sentimentality doesn't work in corporations opportunities do and as long as the people taking advantage of those opportunities do so morally ethically and honestly it is the american way and we are better for it. I will say in my behalf that I always believed that my focus should be about the work and doing the best that I could and the rewards would follow and in the end that proved true.

I strongly believe that quality teachers will be better off on their own and that the education system will vastly improve once the unions lose their hold on schools and politicians.

Very well said Rubicon. Thank you.

:BigApplause: