Author Topic: Collective Bargaining  (Read 10483 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Collective Bargaining
« on: February 17, 2011, 02:53:51 PM »
So, we have Wisconson appearing to try and do away with it, and we have a possible CA proposition that may be giving that option to the voters.  Why is this bad?  Intiially it was a noble and appropriate endeavor within the private sector, in order to prevent those "types" of employers, management, and corporations, from trying to severely take advantage of their employees.  Unions have their place.......in the private sector

We're not talking Private sector here.  We're talking Public Employee unions.  Those that are employed by the government, and payed for by tax payers.   It is precisely the cushy union facilitated perks, salaries, and benefits, with pension plans that put nearly every employee in the private sector to shame, that was "ok" when the economy was humming.  Low and behold, when the economy tanked, guess who's been stuck with the bar tab as these lucrative public union salary & pension plans still need to be paid for......the tax payers.  While the private sector continues to lay off thousands upon thousands, and 401k's have been decimated, GOVERNMENT jobs, under Obama have actually increased, with all their cushy salaries, free healthcare, and pension plans that we, the tax payers, still legally have to pay for

So, what's wrong with Collective Bargaining being done away with, for Public Employees, given the state of current reality and our economy?  Does Greece ring a bell for anyone?
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2011, 03:00:51 PM »
It is the right of every worker to form a union and to bargain collectively. Therefore taking away that right is wrong.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #2 on: February 17, 2011, 03:26:57 PM »
Please cite for me in the Constitution, or even Florida state law, that one has a right to a Union.  Sure, you can form one......unless its illegal to do so. 

And I have no problem with those that want to form a Union in the private sector.  This is specifically dealing with the Public sector, where the "greedy employer" is the Government, but its the "tax payers" that pay all the benefits, perks, salaries, and pension
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7966
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2011, 03:46:58 PM »
I see no problem having union is private or public sectors. but the real question is how collective bargaining be so powerful that it hurts a government? I mean isn`t it the governments fault to allow police officers to do outsource overtime and actually lose money by allowing it? the key word is bargaining.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2011, 04:21:36 PM »
MADISON, Wis. ? A Wisconsin state senator says the 14 Democratic lawmakers who are boycotting a vote on a controversial anti-union bill have left the state.

Sen. Jon Erpenbach says the group wants to force negotiations over the Republican-backed bill, which would strip most public employees of their collective-bargaining rights.

Erpenbach told The Associated Press that he and his colleagues had left Wisconsin, but he would not say where.

He said the plan is to slow down the bill because it's "tearing the state apart."

Senate Republicans can't vote on the bill unless at least one Democrat is present. Police could be dispatched to retrieve them, but it was unclear if they would have the authority to cross state lines.

What's their problem?

If Dems are concerned how terrible this law would be, they simply vote against it, and if it still passes, they then run ad after ad, like the GOP did against Obamacare, subsequently getting relected with majorities and a Dem governor next election cycle, with which they then can repeal the supposedly terrible law.

Unless of course, they're concerned that the majority of the electorate also agrees with the pending legislation.  That can then justify the cowardly act
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Christians4LessGvt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11090
    • View Profile
    • "The Religion Of Peace"
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2011, 05:07:05 PM »


Unions want to overturn election result

Feb. 16, 2011

Say you generally liked Gov. Scott Walker's move to rein in government labor
costs but had a few doubts on his method. The last few days should have
cleared that up nicely.

The public-sector union tantrums, meant to make lawmakers wobble, have an inadvertent message for the rest of us: Voters can vote all they want. You can elect a cheapskate governor and a Legislature to match. But come the moment, unions will have the last, loudest word.

They'll have it if takes marches. They'll have it if it takes what amounts to an illegal strike, with so many Madison teachers calling in sick Wednesday that the district closed schools. If it takes showing up for a we-know-where-your-family-is protest on Walker's Wauwatosa lawn while he was at work, the unions are sure they can outshout any election result.

This is exactly why Walker is right to limit the unions' power over government spending.

Walker, remember, is not removing unions' fundamental power to bargain for wages. He is demanding that state workers put 5.8% of their wages toward retirement and that they cover 12.6% of their health care premiums, which would still have them paying more than $100 less a month than the average schmoe. He is also proposing that elected officials determine the shape of employee benefits without having to bargain them, and this as much as the added cost has unions crying "unfair."

They insist this is the end of unionization in government, something to which they have as much right, they say, as anyone else.

But they miss a bedrock difference. Unions in the private sector are a way of organizing private interests, those of employees, against other private interests, those of a company's owners, for economic gain and for protection against unfairness. In government, workers are already protected against unfairness by civil service laws, and Walker has supported expanding those. Economically, government unions pit a private interest, that of employees, against the public's interest, that of taxpayers and voters.

We see the result. Walker's moves are prompted by the state's vast deficit. The alternative, he says, is to lay off thousands. Nonsense, charge the marchers: Just raise taxes. Unions and allies have for years been demanding more sales taxes, new business taxes and higher taxes on other people's incomes, all to keep the state flush and generous. We're taxed enough already, said a voting majority in November. Not yet, insist the unions that have become the largest players in Wisconsin politics precisely to counter any such voter sentiment.

Anyway, union leaders were conceding the pension and health care premiums by this week. They said they knew they'd have to pay more eventually - so when unions in December said such payments were tantamount to slavery, it must have been just maneuvering. Bygones, say unions, as long as Walker leaves them the power to set health benefits via bargaining. Leave that, they say, and it's peace.

Yeah? Recall how we got here. How is it that only in desperation will unions accept a deal that still leaves them better off than everyone else? How did we achieve not just next year's $3.3 billion deficit but the decade of structural deficits before? Easy: It's because labor costs for years have been outstripping taxpayers' capacity. That in turn was caused by officials, elected in a union-dominated political environment, buying labor peace via benefits, where it's harder for voters to see the costs adding up.

If the Legislature takes the 5% and 12% and doesn't reform collective bargaining, the 5% and 12% soon will be won back by unions. Any further savings are out the window. Walker talks of moving to consumer-driven benefits, as many companies have done, to restrain medical costs. That's anathema to unions, who will resist it contract by contract. Without bargaining reform, government costs will have taken only a pause in their ascent.

Union activists in Madison Tuesday spoke apocalyptically of "class war," hinting wildly at general strikes and takeovers of the Capitol. They correctly see their control of the state slipping and must figure that if they bring 13,000 shouting people to Madison, they can overrule the election.

Any worried legislators should keep in mind that Walker drew about five times that many votes in Dane County alone in November.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/116355379.html
« Last Edit: February 17, 2011, 05:17:42 PM by Christians4LessGvt »
"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - Ronald Reagan - June 12, 1987

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2011, 06:17:22 PM »
C makes a great point, in pointing out that the legislation in question in Wisconsin, and the one being considered in CA, appears NOT to actually make it illegal the opportinuty to unionize, merely that as state employees, that they actually support some of their own perks, and not allow it to be purely the tax payers on the hook

"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16139
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2011, 06:19:43 PM »
I did not realize that state, local and federal employees did not pay taxes. How can that be?

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2011, 06:23:07 PM »
That's strange, who said that??    ???
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16139
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #9 on: February 17, 2011, 06:51:33 PM »
Quote
C makes a great point, in pointing out that the legislation in question in Wisconsin, and the one being considered in CA, appears NOT to actually make it illegal the opportinuty to unionize, merely that as state employees, that they actually support some of their own perks, and not allow it to be purely the tax payers on the hook

So when you are referring to taxpayers you are also including public employees.

I don't have a problem with employees individually or collectively negotiating for the best pay and benefits possible.

Management is responsible for know what that magic cost number is and not crossing it.

Seems to me that management, in the form of elected officials are the ones who dropped the ball on this issue. And since we elect then the ultimate responsibility falls back on us. So when assigning blame be sure to point the finger inward.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2011, 07:16:40 PM »
So when you are referring to taxpayers you are also including public employees.

Of course.  Why wouldn't I??


I don't have a problem with employees individually or collectively negotiating for the best pay and benefits possible.

I have a problem when those negotiating such contracts "promise" that there will be no burden placed on the tax payers, that said "best pay & benefits possible" will be completely taken care of with current investments

That problem is then compounded when said recipients of the "best pay and benefits possible" tell those who then ARE stuck paying that pay & benefits, to go pound sand, when those investments go belly up.


Seems to me that management, in the form of elected officials are the ones who dropped the ball on this issue.

BIG TIME.  These contracts don't get done without the signature of the Governor.  and guess what....they're no longer in office, and the tax payers get screwed.  Time for further legislative or Proposition efforts, like the ones going on Wisconsin and possibly in CA to fix what the elected officials pulled

And FYI Bt, when these elected officials pull this crap, its ususally done outside of earshot to those that elected them, not to mention done when there was no burden to the taxpayers, and with mininal MSM attention provided, so to try and dump this on the electorate is pretty weak

"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7966
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #11 on: February 17, 2011, 07:32:46 PM »
lol!!!!!!!!

Seems to me that management, in the form of elected officials are the ones who dropped the ball on this issue. And since we elect then the ultimate responsibility falls back on us. So when assigning blame be sure to point the finger inward.

that`s what I`m trying to say.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16139
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #12 on: February 17, 2011, 07:56:30 PM »
Quote
And FYI Bt, when these elected officials pull this crap, its ususally done outside of earshot to those that elected them, not to mention done when there was no burden to the taxpayers, and with mininal MSM attention provided, so to try and dump this on the electorate is pretty weak

Then i suggest you take the responsibility to keep yourself informed as to what your representatives are up to. Don't blame the MSM for not spoon feeding you the "facts" Find them out for yourself. The tools are all there.








sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #13 on: February 17, 2011, 08:20:54 PM »
Me, Joe citizen, not having voted for the fella in the 1st place, hardly is privvy to the backroom shenanigans that had said Governor sign off on these cushy pension plans for Public employee union members. that are now currently crippling our state
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16139
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Collective Bargaining
« Reply #14 on: February 17, 2011, 08:29:41 PM »
Sure you are. I suggest you check into open records and sunshine laws.
And perhaps have your legislators phone number on speed dial.

But i suspect that you are happy just complaining about the situation. I think that you have already conceded that the unions and the politicians that love them are better organized, smarter and have deeper pockets than those who oppose lavish pensions and total disregard for the public's tax burden.

The old saying was you can't fight city hall. That is correct only if you don't get into the ring.