Wis. GOP bypasses Dems, cuts collective bargaining

[ugonow]

The dems suggested taking out the non budget items such as collective bargaining rights.

[rockon]

We should all remember that a very small percentage of private sector employees or federal employees even have or want "collective bargaining" rights. So it's not that they are being stripped of some right that most others have. No they are just being told to get in step with reality and accept the results from having a government that promotes dependency instead of personal accountability and responsibility. Also remember that if they are being mistreated they can always quit and enjoy the freedom and benefits of working in the private sector.

[workpublic]

rockon,

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Mar 10, 2011 11:11:01 GMT -5 rockon said:

It's easier to make a case that public workers should not be at a bargaining table. If they don't think their compensation is adequate they should go get a job in the private sector and really show their boss who's in charge.

Yep. Karma for YOU!

[Deleted]

I have heard the runaways were asking for absentee ballets meaning they were not planning on coming back any time soon so they decided not to wait any longer.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

I have heard the runaways were asking for absentee ballets meaning they were not planning on coming back any time soon so thay decided not to wait any longer.

ROFLMAO

[Bluerobin]

BS! All private sector employees would opt for collective bargaining if they could. Problem is big bad employer would relocate if union organizing was successful.

[Mkitty is pro kitty]

"We have open records laws in the state of Wisconsin. They have to notice [the vote] at least two hours if not 24 hours before they pass it," Sen. Jon Erpenbach told NBC 5 Thursday morning. "They didn't do that."

Source: www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Wis-Vote-May-Be-Illegal-117727938.html#ixzz1GDiJ1DBX

It doesn't matter if it were financial or not.

If they don't think their compensation is adequate they should go get a job in the private sector and really show their boss who's in charge.

Or, if you think their pay is too much, get a teaching job and give yourself a pay cut. If enough whiny conservatives do it, they could save the state millions. See y'all in about four years, buh-bye!

And wouldn't the boss be in charge whether or not they get that job? Why would they do need to do that?

Despite what many of the Democratic faithful are failing to realize, there is a serious defection to the "middle political base" by millions of supposed Democrats.

This is just a guess, but you're not millions of Democrats, are you? Disregarded as unsubstantiated opinion.

"Wisconsin Poll: Support for Budget Cutting, Not for Weakening Collective Bargaining Rights"

"A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Wisconsin voters shows that just 39% favor weakening collective bargaining rights and 52% are opposed. At the same time, 44% support a 10% pay cut for all state workers. Thirty-eight percent (38%) are opposed. That’s partly because 27% of Wisconsin voters believe state workers are paid too much and 16% believe they are paid too little. Forty-nine percent (49%) believe the pay of state workers is about right."

www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_state_surveys/wisconsin/wisconsin_poll_support_for_budget_cutting_not_for_weakening_collective_bargaining_rights

... and that's Rasmussen. Maybe you'll find numbers more to your liking at Huffington Post.

[floridayankee]

Mar 10, 2011 10:12:12 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Apparently the quorum requirement was only required for budget items. The senators simply removed the collective bargaining portion from the budget bill and passed it separate.

Yes, that's my understanding too. Apparently the dissenting legislator was pointing out a smaller more technical point which he thought was out of order. There is somuch attention on this right now though, that if something was amiss you would think it would be in the open.

The one repub that noted against the bill simply said he voted his conscious. Perhaps you're thinking of Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca? He claimed the meeting was a violation of WI's open meeting laws. The senate clerk confirmed the meeting was held legally though.

Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca, the lone Democrat present on the special committee that put the bill in position to pass the Senate, shouted that the meeting was a violation of the state's open meetings law.

"The jig is now up," Barca said. "The fraud on the people of Wisconsin is now clear."

The Senate's chief clerk said hours later the meeting was properly held. Fitzgerald said he cleared the Senate's action with the Legislature's attorneys, the nonpartisan Fiscal Bureau and bill drafters.

This is most likely going to be a wait and see holds up issue.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

"We have open records laws in the state of Wisconsin. They have to notice [the vote] at least two hours if not 24 hours before they pass it," Sen. Jon Erpenbach told NBC 5 Thursday morning. "They didn't do that."

Source: www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Wis....l#ixzz1GDiJ1DBX

It doesn't matter if it were financial or not.

One argument they could make is that the bill has been public for over a month. They simply voted on one unchanged provision of a bill that has been public for a very long time. I'm not saying it will hold up, I'm saying that's what they can say about it.

Look, this is the legislative equivalent of "possession is 9/10ths of the law". In major, controversial legislation there is always a lot of screaming and yelling by the other side-- healthcare, anyone? The Democrats at one point were talking about ramming ObamaCare through via budget reconcilation; and at one point they weren't even going to vote on it, they were just going to "deem it passed". So, members of the Democratic Party should know there are a variety of ways to pass a bill- and once it has passed, it's "too bad, so sad" from there on out.

To shorten it up for the opposition: Walker and the Republicans won. The Democrats lost. This is law now, and they will have to see if they can defeat Republicans in the next election and then pass legislation repealing it. They might do just that, but they'll have to wait.

[jkapp]

Mar 10, 2011 13:02:48 GMT -5 Bluerobin said:

BS! All private sector employees would opt for collective bargaining if they could. Problem is big bad employer would relocate if union organizing was successful.

I'm a private worker and I would NEVER want someone else making my decisions for me. I was in a union job for a very short time - never again...worthless organizations.

[safeharbor37]

I think that Wisconsin also operates on the "Government by, of and for the people." basis. The whole question here is do the people run the government or does the government [including all employees, elected and non-elected] run the people.
Some day try to do what the state workers unions and their allies are doing, by yourself. You'd be warned, then dragged off unceremoniously to jail. You see, the teacher's union, et. al. are just thugs violating the law [with which you'd be charged if you disrupted the state government operation]. Unions [because they control campaign contribution, campaign workers and votes] are allowed to violate the laws that individual citizens are required to obey ~ because they act collectively.
The union/government combination is little more than an inevitably corrupt political machine ~ like Chicago and others. The people are subject to arbitrary actions by political entities for which they have no defense. Fortunately, in this instance, the people of Wisconsin seem to be trying to take their inherent rights back from the corrupt cabal of Democrats and Government Unions.

[jkapp]

"Wisconsin Poll: Support for Budget Cutting, Not for Weakening Collective Bargaining Rights"

>>"A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Wisconsin voters shows that just 39% favor weakening collective bargaining rights and 52% are opposed. At the same time, 44% support a 10% pay cut for all state workers. Thirty-eight percent (38%) are opposed. That’s partly because 27% of Wisconsin voters believe state workers are paid too much and 16% believe they are paid too little. Forty-nine percent (49%) believe the pay of state workers is about right."<<

Actually you'll find the way the questions are worded will make a big change in the results of these polls. For instance, there were more favorable results for union workers when they were described as "public workers" but if you changed it to "government workers" the favorability dropped dramatically.

This shows how useless these polls can be...

[Deleted]

But it was Rasmussen! They always word to favor the right...


And unions giving money to dems is horrid... but Kock buyins Walker is a-ok...

[magichat]

Mar 10, 2011 14:17:35 GMT -5 oped said:

But it was Rasmussen! They always word to favor the right...


And unions giving money to dems is horrid... but Kock buyins Walker is a-ok...

You still don't get it yet do you Oped, the union money is tax money, compared to private money from the Kochs. Let me make it simply for you, which pot of money is taken at the tip of a gun?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Howard Fineman worries Democrats, students, union members overracting...

Of course we know they're just being themselves, but Fineman worries Republicans have baited them, and they've taken the bait. I personally know Republicans aren't that smart. They've only benefitted accidentally from Democrats just being themselves...

www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007220&docId=l:1375358618&isRss=true

Of course, nobody is "painting" anybody here. Obama and his regime ARE washed up 60's style radicals.

HOWARD FINEMAN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, this story is no longer, if it ever was, really about Wisconsin. It`s about the power of unions and Republicans` effort to destroy them if they can, politically, for reasons I explained the other week, concerning treasury of unions and firepower that unions have in elections.

But now, it`s beyond money and organization, Lawrence. What this is about are Republican strategists and Republicans leaders, whether it`s Rick Perry, who`s head of Republican Governors Association out of Texas, or Karl Rove in American Crossroads, or the Koch brothers, or Haley Barbour -- anybody else is involved in national Republican strategy. What they want to do here is to try -- number one -- to goad the people in Wisconsin into overreacting.

The strategy for the Republicans in 2010 is to portray Barack Obama and his allies as a sort of `60s style -- `60s style bunch of radicals out to upset American values. And they`re going to try to force the president to come out and defend the workers in Wisconsin. He`s been very quiet. They want him out there on the front lines.

And they are in a college town of Madison, Wisconsin, where they want the students and the unions and the Democrats to take the bait of this provocation and over react in a way that will sell poorly in swing states in 2012.

In Virginia, in North Carolina, in Indiana, in Colorado, in Florida, all of them swing states, all of them with relatively low percentage of unionized public workers and unionized workers generally. That`s what`s going on. That`s the big picture here.

And now the Democrats are the ones who have to be the grown ups, because the Republicans have been the ones to issue the provocation. This is very serious stakes, having everything to do with the 2012 election.

Scott Walker is almost immaterial. He will be a hero in the halls of Republican conservatism. He`ll be a hero at the republican convention. I seriously doubt he`ll be on the ticket.

But he is doing what the real leaders of the Republican party want done.

[ed1066]

Mar 10, 2011 14:46:59 GMT -5 @magichat said:

Mar 10, 2011 14:17:35 GMT -5 oped said:

But it was Rasmussen! They always word to favor the right...


And unions giving money to dems is horrid... but Kock buyins Walker is a-ok...

You still don't get it yet do you Oped, the union money is tax money, compared to private money from the Kochs. Let me make it simply for you, which pot of money is taken at the tip of a gun?

I just don't understand some people's inability to distinguish between these things. There are differences between the appropriate uses of public money and private money, just as there are distinct and important differences between:

LEGAL immigrants and ILLEGAL immigrants
PUBLIC unions and PRIVATE unions
TAXPAYERS and SHAREHOLDERS

As I indicated on another thread, there seems to be a mental block about these things in some people, and the affliction seems to fall distinctly along political affiliation lines for some reason...

[Bluerobin]

Jkapp, as a private employee, you know darn well your negotiation rights consist of take it or leave it. No negotiation.

[safeharbor37]

Jkapp, as a private employee, you know darn well your negotiation rights consist of take it or leave it. No negotiation.

The above not really true. It is if you are working for the government generally, but when I was hiring I had 10% to offer if I wanted to ~ and could justify it. I think that's generally true in government employment, but it's certainly true in private hiring, particularly when the boss is the owner.
I think you may be right about potential employees with minimal skills, particularly if there are a number of applicants with similar qualifications. In general, if you don't have special qualifications, you can't expect special consideration or salary supplements.

[Bluerobin]

Safe, an accountant is an accountant and only worth so much. Take it or leave it.

[rockon]

As well a public servant is only worth so much and they need to exercise reasonable restraint or the hands that feed them will run out of money. The problem with negotiating with public servants is that there is no jeopardy for them when they demand more in negotiations then is fair or reasonable relative to their counterparts in the private sector who by the way pays for their wage and benefits. I believe over 85% of the working people do not have the collective bargaining rights they are demanding including federal employees so they really are demanding things that most people do not have.

[Bluerobin]

rockon, Some moron politician agreed to those public servant contracts. I had a friend who negoiated for the fire fighters. He told me they always asked for things they did not want, just to have some items they could conceed on. The mayor just never caught on and they got lots of benefits they didn't really want. Guess the politicians were just dumb.
I give Walker less time in office than Palin. This time next year, and he will be recalled. He just doesn't get it. Despite polls showing most support the public servants, he claims to have the support. This guy is related to Charlie Sheen.

[Bluerobin]

How could it be a public meeting if the public was locked out? Didn't I see news clips with cops holding the public away from the doors? I really think this is going to be tied up in court for a few years. Should be interesting.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Mar 11, 2011 9:17:31 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

The one repub that noted against the bill simply said he voted his conscious. Perhaps you're thinking of Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca? He claimed the meeting was a violation of WI's open meeting laws. The senate clerk confirmed the meeting was held legally though
Yes, thank you FL Yankee, that is now my understanding as well. Again, this thing is so publicized that if there were any impropriety, it would/ will come out.

Maybe. My point is that it really doesn't matter if there was anything improper. It's law now. The only way it changes is if Democrats can defeat Republicans AND then pass collective bargaining legislation again.

They've only had collective bargaining "rights" for two years- which tells me that it passed in the Obama wave. It's not unlikely that Wisconsin will oust a few vulnerable Republicans-- it's a swing state that definitely leans Democrat.

However, large enough majorities to get something this controversial through. This is complicated by the fact that voters generally vote their pocket books, and getting them to agree to higher taxes to pay government workers nearly twice what the voters themselves earn is a really tough sell in ANY political climate-- remember Obama ran as a "centrist" promising "middle class tax cuts"...

We'll see what happens, but the fact for the time being is Wisconsin has itself a new law. Deal with it.

[jkapp]

Mar 11, 2011 8:47:38 GMT -5 Bluerobin said:

rockon, Some moron politician agreed to those public servant contracts. I had a friend who negoiated for the fire fighters. He told me they always asked for things they did not want, just to have some items they could conceed on. The mayor just never caught on and they got lots of benefits they didn't really want. Guess the politicians were just dumb. .

Ummm...yes, some dumb politicans did agree to those contracts - the politicians that were bought and paid for by the UNIONS!! Imagine that conflict of interest

[Bluerobin]

The resulting lawsuits should prove interesting. One question I have is can a law void an existing contract, or just future ones. I am sure that will be debated. Also, was it an open public meeting? Glad I don't live in WI, as this is going to get expensive.

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2011 9:39:50 GMT -5 Bluerobin said:

Glad I don't live in WI, as this is going to get expensive.

But probably a lot less expensive than the continuation of collective bargaining.

[Bluerobin]

jma, more expensive if the unions prevail. Cost of suit, plus cost of benefits denied. Like I said, it is going to be interesting.

[safeharbor37]

Safe, an accountant is an accountant and only worth so much. Take it or leave it.

I wasn't suggesting that anyone be paid more than he/she was worth.

How could it be a public meeting if the public was locked out? Didn't I see news clips with cops holding the public away from the doors? I really think this is going to be tied up in court for a few years. Should be interesting.

It is the responsibility of the "cops" to maintain order. "Public" doesn't preclude maintaining order or require that any and everyone be allowed in the room.
Of course the union thugs will screach that their "rights" are being denied. That's what all thugs do when they're required to behave in a civilized fashion.
The voters of Wisconsin will get the government they deserve. At the present it appears that they are willing to vote in a government that will meet their needs over the demands of corrupt public unions that they be allowed to continue to suck the public coffers dry.

[bean29]

blue,

I am quite sure there is no intent to void contracts currently in existence. There was a rush by public unions to ratify contracts in the works for just this reason. Any existing contract will stand for the lenght of the ratified contract.

Dems won't get this back. The union % of the voting public is not great enough. Once taxpayers realize the stupid stuff they were paying for, it's all over but the crying.

A co-worker gave me a list of stuff collective bargaining brought union workers:

In 2009, the city of Madison's highest paid employee was a bus driver who earned $159,258 including $109,892 in overtime, guaranteed by a collective bargaining agreement. In total, seven city of Madison bus drivers made more than $100,000 per year in 2009.

Under the Green bay School District's collectively bargained Emeritus Program, teachers can retire and receive a year's worth of salary for working only 30 days in a three year period. This is paid in addition to their already guaranteed pension and health care payouts.

At the average annual salary for a Green Bay teacher of $51,355 this amounts to a daily rate of pay of $1,711.83 or an hourly rate of $213.98...

Maidson has a similar Emeritus program - work 0 days of work and be entitled to additonal pension payout of $9,884.18 just for enrolling.

Also union contracts guaranteed state employees an extra five hours of pay per week, whether paged or not. They estimated for an employee earning $50,000/year it amounted to $6,000 in extra pay.

There were 13 outrageous expamples listed. It was attributed to WI State Senator Alberta Darling on Tues March 8, 2011. I checked her web site and did not find a link there so I am not sure where it really came from.