Public Employees Protesting WI Governor

[Denny Crane]

I know, because political debate on an Internet sports forum is one of the most respected & highly regarded forms of intellectual discourse. Not being taken seriously on one might very well ruin careers and/or cause miscarriages(even in men) from the shame.

Goodness me sir, doth we have a "gimmicky poster" on these boards? Such strong words, yet put forth so elegantly! Doesn't sound like a personal attack at all good chap.

I do believe there are enough questions surrounding the Governor's desire to crush the union, as well as letting his Koch Industry pals in on no-bid sales of public power plants, that it should merit some debate. At least the stand off is bringing to light some of the icky background info on the Governor.

I hope people debating on an Internet sports forum go out and vote with even a tiny bit of better understanding of the issues.

 

[Klinky]

I think debate is good. So where are the Democratic members of the WI Senate to make these points? The people of Wisconsin spoke loudly and clearly in their vote this past November. I find it ironic that the party with the root word "democracy" are the ones seemingly afraid of it.

From what I understood(perhaps I am wrong) is that the Democrats technically could vote completely against it and it would still have passed. It was being "rushed" through. The only real way to try to get a debate going was to walk out.

I am not sure what no-bid power plant purchases has to do with balancing the budget, nor does removing collective bargaining actually equal any immediate monetary gains. It's an idealogical victory.

What's probably going to happen is that they will lose collective bargaining, take a pay cut & still see large layoffs. If the economy picks up again, they will no longer have the ability to negotiate higher salary & more cream can rise to those at top. A lot of times when this stuff is taken away, you'll probably never see it again. "The Man" is quick to take & slow to give.

 

[MrJayremmie]

"The Man" is quick to take & slow to give.

The way this plays out will be an excellent demonstration of this.

It seems to me that the Wisconsin Governor is way too ideologically driven (as you can tell by the prank phone call) and is exerting more power than he should be. If this guy ever became president I would worry about some serious Fascism.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I am not sure what no-bid power plant purchases has to do with balancing the budget,

I don't know, I'd say that the "ideological" aspect is that maybe the ideologues think that, in a state with a 3.6B deficit, they shouldn't spend money running power plants. Maybe they should spend money running the government, and let whatever corporate interests pay down the deficit with their power plant purchases do so in accordance with private market principles? I'm not saying it's right or wrong, or that I know the loss/profit margin of said plants, but I don't know that it's on the high road to fascism to try to balance the budget.

nor does removing collective bargaining actually equal any immediate monetary gains. It's an idealogical victory.

Again, correct me please if I'm wrong, but the gov't wanted to invoke the 7% "pay cut" to pay for services, and the union said that the gov't couldn't do so without bargaining. So they decided that removing the ability for the union to block budget decisions was an immediate monetary gain. Again, I'm not advocating whether it's right or wrong (that's for the posts above), but that to say it doesn't equal immediate monetary gains is not correct.

 

[maxiep]

From what I understood(perhaps I am wrong) is that the Democrats technically could vote completely against it and it would still have passed. It was being "rushed" through. The only real way to try to get a debate going was to walk out.

Democracy sucks sometimes. The vote would likely go against the teachers' union, and likely by a party line vote (19-14). The answer isn't to take your ball and go home. For the record, the WI House (or whatever the lower chamber is called) just finished 58 hours of debate on the issue. Only now will it be presented to the Senate. You're falling for Democratic talking points.

I'm right of center, with Libertarian leanings. I took it in the ass on Obamacare. If the GOP would have walked out and denied a vote in the House and the Senate, I would have called them out as well. That's not how a representative government is supposed to function.

I am not sure what no-bid power plant purchases has to do with balancing the budget, nor does removing collective bargaining actually equal any immediate monetary gains. It's an idealogical victory.

I can't say what no-bid contracts do, other than to say I'm against them. However, I can tell you specifically what removing collective bargaining for benefits and pensions do: it diffuses the ticking pension time bomb. Are you aware that with collective bargaining that the State of Wisconsin can only purchase health insurance through the WI state teachers' union? De-linking them allows WI to competitively bid health care. And by de-linking collective bargaining from pensions, you get rid of the easy giveaways union-supported politicians have been giving to the unions that create future benefits that the taxpayer doesn't see for decades in the future. Finally, the government will no longer be responsible for withholding union dues from teacher paychecks. The union will have to do it themselves. Since when is government responsible for transfering money to a private organization that doesn't provide a direct benefit?

WI is not getting rid of collective bargaining for salaries; it's only for benefits. I can't for the life of me figure out how that's unreasonable.

What's probably going to happen is that they will lose collective bargaining, take a pay cut & still see large layoffs. If the economy picks up again, they will no longer have the ability to negotiate higher salary & more cream can rise to those at top. A lot of times when this stuff is taken away, you'll probably never see it again. "The Man" is quick to take & slow to give.

Right now the union is putting itself in front of the rank and file. WI will have to lay off a few thousand workers because union-supported Democrats are willing to sacrifice rank and file jobs to maintain their power and their cash flow. It's shameful behavior.

The answer for the Democrats is to get back in the fight. Have the debate in the chambers of the state house and on the campaign trail. All they have to do is win back the majority they had before November and they can repeal everything this Governor and state legislature is trying to do. THAT's how our government is supposed to work.

 

[maxiep]

The way this plays out will be an excellent demonstration of this.

It seems to me that the Wisconsin Governor is way too ideologically driven (as you can tell by the prank phone call) and is exerting more power than he should be. If this guy ever became president I would worry about some serious Fascism.

Yeah, I wonder what that would look like...oh, wait...

 

[BrianFromWA]

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20110225/US.Providence.Teachers/

The school board of the state's financially troubled capital city has voted to send termination letters to all of its nearly 2,000 teachers after city officials said the move would give them "maximum flexibility" to make budget cuts.

State law requires school departments to notify teachers by March 1 if they'll be laid off the following school year.

Providence teachers received notices of potential layoffs before the board met Thursday night and voted 4-3 on sending termination letters. The notices don't mean the teachers will lose their jobs, but the vote means some of them could at the end of the year. The vote give the city the opportunity to terminate as many teachers as it deems necessary for budgetary reasons, but the city hasn't indicated how many that could be.

Providence Teachers Union President Steve Smith had said earlier the decision was "beyond insane" and created chaos and anxiety among teachers.

More than 700 teachers packed the Providence Career and Technical Academy gymnasium Thursday to tell school officials their hearts were broken, their trust was violated and their futures as teachers were jeopardized, The Providence Journal newspaper reported.

The financial problems in Providence, the state's biggest city, have caused enough alarm at the state level that Gov. Lincoln Chafee has instructed two of his top fiscal officers to meet with city officials. A recent audit showed Providence, which has about 175,000 residents, had nearly depleted its rainy-day fund and overspent its budget last year by more than $57 million.

Mayor Angel Taveras last month created a Municipal Finances Review Panel to review the city budget across all departments. The panel will offer recommendations to the mayor in the next two weeks.

Taveras said in a statement that although he was sensitive to the uncertainty and anxiety that many teachers felt when they received the layoff notices, "putting Providence back on solid financial footing will require shared sacrifice across our community."

 

[BrianFromWA]

just as a reference point: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/20/boeing-layoffs-in-long-be_n_811605.html

Dwindling domestic demand for C-17 cargo planes will force Boeing Co. to slash 1,100 jobs at its U.S. plants, most of them in Long Beach where the aerospace giant has cut 13,000 jobs since the 1990s, the company said Thursday.

The 900 jobs in Long Beach and 200 jobs at plants in Mesa, Ariz., Macon, Ga., and St. Louis will be cut by the end of next year.

The cuts include accountants, midlevel management, engineering, research and assembly line workers. Affected workers will receive 60-day notices beginning Friday, with layoffs staggered monthly through 2012.

Downsizing is necessary to slow the C-17 production schedule – from 14 aircraft annually to 10 – and keep plants operating with a smaller work force while international orders are sought for the plane, Boeing said.

"I've been working on the C-17 for 20 years and I personally know a lot of the great people who work on this, so it's weighing heavily on me," C-17 program manager Bob Ciesla said in a statement. "But it's simply something that needed to be done."

 

[maxiep]

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20110225/US.Providence.Teachers/

What part of "we're broke" don't government employees not understand? It's not like we don't want to pay them; we can't afford it. It's not one school district, it's not one state, it's coast-to-coast.

The public unions are going to have to come to the table and make some serious, and permanent, concessions. One of those concessions will have to be to move from a defined benefit to a defined contribution retirement program. They're going to have to contribute to their health care. And their pay will have to be tied to CPI.

If they don't like it, they can try to find a job in the private sector.

 

[porkchopexpress]

just as a reference point: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/20/boeing-layoffs-in-long-be_n_811605.html

The problem with that example is that the downsizing that is needed is due to a 29% drop in demand. You can't really compare it to the teacher situation in Providence. A more apt example would be if if they cut those same 1100 workers, but production needed to remain flat, or more likely go up. Sure, you can cut here and there and won't see any ill effects, but if you slash your work force by that much, while increasing your output, the quality will suffer immensely.

 

[maxiep]

The problem with that example is that the downsizing that is needed is due to a 29% drop in demand. You can't really compare it to the teacher situation in Providence. A more apt example would be if if they cut those same 1100 workers, but production needed to remain flat, or more likely go up. Sure, you can cut here and there and won't see any ill effects, but if you slash your work force by that much, while increasing your output, the quality will suffer immensely.

I don't see how. We've increased school administration and reduced class sizes over the past 40 years and there has been no increase in performance. Perhaps the answer is to cut back. Reduce electives, focus on the basics. Get rid of tenure and make it easier to fire bad teachers. Cut the bureaucracy. Throwing money at the problem isn't working; it's time to try something new.

 

[porkchopexpress]

I don't see how. We've increased school administration and reduced class sizes over the past 40 years and there has been no increase in performance. Perhaps the answer is to cut back. Reduce electives, focus on the basics. Get rid of tenure and make it easier to fire bad teachers. Cut the bureaucracy. Throwing money at the problem isn't working; it's time to try something new.

We've reduced class sizes over the past 40 years? Not saying it's not true, but I've never heard that. Does this factor in special needs? If so, then it's a pretty misleading statistic. I know in my experience (I know empirical data isn't the best), many of my classes didn't have much room for more kids. Not sure how we could have been much higher in the past. Can you provide a link for this? Again, not saying you're not right, just want to read up on it.

I'm not saying throwing money is the right solution or that being able to fire bad teachers shouldn't be easier. I'm just saying it is not comparable to a company that is reducing it's output (for that product) by nearly a third.

 

[maxiep]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...6164290717724956.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read

 

[maxiep]

We've reduced class sizes over the past 40 years? Not saying it's not true, but I've never heard that. Does this factor in special needs? If so, then it's a pretty misleading statistic. I know in my experience (I know empirical data isn't the best), many of my classes didn't have much room for more kids. Not sure how we could have been much higher in the past. Can you provide a link for this? Again, not saying you're not right, just want to read up on it.

I'm not saying throwing money is the right solution or that being able to fire bad teachers shouldn't be easier. I'm just saying it is not comparable to a company that is reducing it's output (for that product) by nearly a third.

http://www.ednews.org/articles/class-size-where-belief-trumps-reality.html

 

[porkchopexpress]

http://www.ednews.org/articles/class-size-where-belief-trumps-reality.html

The author compares the system today, where everyone must be educated, to the system of the nineteenth century where only the wealthy could go to school. Not exactly apples to apples. His more recent comparison of teachers that "commonly had 30-35 students" 45 years ago and "many classes of 25" today, are purposefully vague. There can be many classes of 25, but the average could still be 30. You could commonly have a class of 30-35, but the average be something less than that. Both are probably true statements, but neither is a hard statistic. Plus he doesn't discuss the effect special ed on average class size. If you have a school of 1000 with 40 teachers (so his 25 students per class), but one of those teachers teaches only 5 special needs students, the affect of removing those students and single teacher is about .5 students per class. That seems small, but the gap between his "stats" from today and 45 years ago is only 5 students.

 

[maxiep]

The author compares the system today, where everyone must be educated, to the system of the nineteenth century where only the wealthy could go to school. Not exactly apples to apples. His more recent comparison of teachers that "commonly had 30-35 students" 45 years ago and "many classes of 25" today, are purposefully vague. There can be many classes of 25, but the average could still be 30. You could commonly have a class of 30-35, but the average be something less than that. Both are probably true statements, but neither is a hard statistic. Plus he doesn't discuss the effect special ed on average class size. If you have a school of 1000 with 40 teachers (so his 25 students per class), but one of those teachers teaches only 5 special needs students, the affect of removing those students and single teacher is about .5 students per class. That seems small, but the gap between his "stats" from today and 45 years ago is only 5 students.

How does that make my contention any less true?

 

[maxiep]

An excellent review of all the ways public unions aren't analagous to private sector unions.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo203.html

 

[Klinky]

Democracy sucks sometimes. The vote would likely go against the teachers' union, and likely by a party line vote (19-14). The answer isn't to take your ball and go home. For the record, the WI House (or whatever the lower chamber is called) just finished 58 hours of debate on the issue. Only now will it be presented to the Senate. You're falling for Democratic talking points.

I'm right of center, with Libertarian leanings. I took it in the ass on Obamacare. If the GOP would have walked out and denied a vote in the House and the Senate, I would have called them out as well. That's not how a representative government is supposed to function.

Except the GOP did stall and tried all sorts of stuff to slow down the passing of Obamacare.
http://sbynews.blogspot.com/2009/12/gop-stalls-push-for-obamacare-in-senate.html

They didn't just "take it in the ass for democracy".

I can't say what no-bid contracts do, other than to say I'm against them.

Then why is such a big provision in this bill & how is it going to save money? Wouldn't we want to get top dollar by having a healthy bidding process? Perhaps it's just to make it easy for a fat cat to help his fat cat friends, meanwhile causing a ruckus over the unions being corrupt & drunk with power, holding the state budget hostage with their lavish lifestyles.

However, I can tell you specifically what removing collective bargaining for benefits and pensions do: it diffuses the ticking pension time bomb.

Renegotiate the pension program. Not sure why collective bargaining has to be destroyed to attempt to renegotiate? Probably because it "takes too long" and would ruin him of an idealogical victory.

Are you aware that with collective bargaining that the State of Wisconsin can only purchase health insurance through the WI state teachers' union? De-linking them allows WI to competitively bid health care.

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/lo...cle_78dbd12c-3fa5-11e0-9aed-001cc4c002e0.html

About 65 percent of the state's school districts contract with WEA Trust, covering about 35 percent of school employees. Several large districts, including Green Bay, Madison and Milwaukee, don't offer the plan.

Cullen Werwie, Walker's spokesman, said the $68 million figure is based on a 2005 study by the conservative-leaning Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, using updated information from last year.

Scott Niederjohn, author of the study, said the institute compared what districts pay with what they would pay if employees had the cheapest state health plan option; those plans vary by county.

But districts already have flexibility, Lyons said. They can negotiate out of requirements to offer WEA Trust or choose WEA Trust packages with higher deductibles or co-payments to reduce costs, he said. Unions likely would oppose such moves, however.

Not so cut & dry.

And by de-linking collective bargaining from pensions, you get rid of the easy giveaways union-supported politicians have been giving to the unions that create future benefits that the taxpayer doesn't see for decades in the future.

Again, not seeing why you can't renegotiate programs w/o destroying collective bargaining. Organizations/people give to political parties they feel help their cause. Nothing is new here.

Finally, the government will no longer be responsible for withholding union dues from teacher paychecks. The union will have to do it themselves. Since when is government responsible for transfering money to a private organization that doesn't provide a direct benefit?

Who really cares who takes the money out. It's hard to escape union dues. That's fine if they swap around who's responsible, but does this save anyone massive amounts of $$$?

WI is not getting rid of collective bargaining for salaries; it's only for benefits. I can't for the life of me figure out how that's unreasonable.

Because they are linked to each other. You pay more for your benefits, you have less salary. Compensation includes benefits. Pensions are essentially an agreement to defer wages until a later date. If a state mismanages their pension fund then they put the taxpayers on the line. There was already some flexibility in the system as far as choosing who your health provider is, changing that doesn't mean people are going to get better healthcare at a lower cost. If everyone took a cheaper plan(with probably reduced benefits), yes that would save money by providing a lesser service.

If indeed only benefits are being hampered then I guess the union will just need to renegotiate higher salaries to cover some of the costs caused by reduced benefits. Ultimately the whole point of removing collective bargaining on any portion of the union seems idealogical rather than practical.

Right now the union is putting itself in front of the rank and file. WI will have to lay off a few thousand workers because union-supported Democrats are willing to sacrifice rank and file jobs to maintain their power and their cash flow. It's shameful behavior.

There is also the possibility that reducing/removing benefits & possible wages cuts will make it harder to live on those jobs. There is no guarantee removing collective bargaining is going to net immediate savings or save any immediate jobs. Yet it could hamper the ability for teachers to negotiate in the future.

The answer for the Democrats is to get back in the fight. Have the debate in the chambers of the state house and on the campaign trail. All they have to do is win back the majority they had before November and they can repeal everything this Governor and state legislature is trying to do. THAT's how our government is supposed to work.

Many of the rights granted to people over the last century are due to people standing up and trying to bring attention to situations. Workers rights, women's rights civil rights. Not all policy is shaped or decided from within the chambers of the government.

 

[Sug]

A very good article on how the pensions are funded.

When it comes to improving public understanding of tax policy, nothing has been more troubling than the deeply flawed coverage of the Wisconsin state employees' fight over collective bargaining.

Economic nonsense is being reported as fact in most of the news reports on the Wisconsin dispute, the product of a breakdown of skepticism among journalists multiplied by their lack of understanding of basic economic principles.

Gov. Scott Walker says he wants state workers covered by collective bargaining agreements to "contribute more" to their pension and health insurance plans.

Accepting Gov. Walker' s assertions as fact, and failing to check, created the impression that somehow the workers are getting something extra, a gift from taxpayers. They are not.

Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers.

How can that be? KEEP READING

 

[maxiep]

Except the GOP did stall and tried all sorts of stuff to slow down the passing of Obamacare.
http://sbynews.blogspot.com/2009/12/gop-stalls-push-for-obamacare-in-senate.html

They didn't just "take it in the ass for democracy".



Then why is such a big provision in this bill & how is it going to save money? Wouldn't we want to get top dollar by having a healthy bidding process? Perhaps it's just to make it easy for a fat cat to help his fat cat friends, meanwhile causing a ruckus over the unions being corrupt & drunk with power, holding the state budget hostage with their lavish lifestyles.



Renegotiate the pension program. Not sure why collective bargaining has to be destroyed to attempt to renegotiate? Probably because it "takes too long" and would ruin him of an idealogical victory.



http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/lo...cle_78dbd12c-3fa5-11e0-9aed-001cc4c002e0.html







Not so cut & dry.



Again, not seeing why you can't renegotiate programs w/o destroying collective bargaining. Organizations/people give to political parties they feel help their cause. Nothing is new here.



Who really cares who takes the money out. It's hard to escape union dues. That's fine if they swap around who's responsible, but does this save anyone massive amounts of $$$?



Because they are linked to each other. You pay more for your benefits, you have less salary. Compensation includes benefits. Pensions are essentially an agreement to defer wages until a later date. If a state mismanages their pension fund then they put the taxpayers on the line. There was already some flexibility in the system as far as choosing who your health provider is, changing that doesn't mean people are going to get better healthcare at a lower cost. If everyone took a cheaper plan(with probably reduced benefits), yes that would save money by providing a lesser service.

If indeed only benefits are being hampered then I guess the union will just need to renegotiate higher salaries to cover some of the costs caused by reduced benefits. Ultimately the whole point of removing collective bargaining on any portion of the union seems idealogical rather than practical.



There is also the possibility that reducing/removing benefits & possible wages cuts will make it harder to live on those jobs. There is no guarantee removing collective bargaining is going to net immediate savings or save any immediate jobs. Yet it could hamper the ability for teachers to negotiate in the future.



Many of the rights granted to people over the last century are due to people standing up and trying to bring attention to situations. Workers rights, women's rights civil rights. Not all policy is shaped or decided from within the chambers of the government.

The GOP Senators didn't run away. They debated. They lost the vote, but if poll numbers are to be believed, they won the argument. 2010 was a huge GOP victory, largely because of the perceived overreach of Obamacare. Why can't Wisconsin Democrats do the same? Have the debate. If they lose, so be it. They can rescind the legislation when they take back the Legislature and the Governorship. That's how Democracy works.

All you other points are just so much noise. Wisconsin can't afford to pay the benefits. The state is broke and there are no more financial wells from which to draw money; the State has been bled dry by the unions. It's not about the $138B deficit this year; it's about the $3.6B debt going forward. And it's not just about the state union, there are thousands of local jurisdictions that have to adhere to these collective bargaining of benefits.

I don't know why you believe that Democracy only has to move one way--to more government, higher taxes, more bureaucracy. It's a pendulum. It moves one way, it moves back. Have faith in the good people of Wisconsin. If you're so sure you're right, let the problem be solved at the ballot box. The citizens of Wisconsin get to decide their future. Right now they've decided through their votes that they would like to modify the agreement between the teachers and the State.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

Let's just cut public education all together and let the private sector figure it out. I'm so angry at teachers right now I can't see straight. I'm looking at you, Sug, you worthless scumbag. Stop stealing from good people like PapaG.

 

[maxiep]

Let's just cut public education all together and let the private sector figure it out. I'm so angry at teachers right now I can't see straight. I'm looking at you, Sug, you worthless scumbag. Stop stealing from good people like PapaG.

I guess when logic isn't on your side, your last resort is deflection.

 

[barfo]

Let's just cut public education all together and let the private sector figure it out. I'm so angry at teachers right now I can't see straight. I'm looking at you, Sug, you worthless scumbag. Stop stealing from good people like PapaG.

The cool thing is that this would solve multiple problems. Not only would it get rid of those pesky teachers, but the kids would all have lots of free time, so we could put them to work in the factories, which would lower wages dramatically and let us compete with China on their terms. And since those lazy teachers like spending time with kids, they can work in the factories too. And - get this - we'll have a bunch of unused school buildings, so they can be turned into... factories! That way the kids won't have to commute to some distant workplace, so we can extend their work hours a little more.

Think of it... a world where "Made in the USA" has the same cachet as "Made in China" does now.

barfo

 

[BrianFromWA]

That's just for the smart ones. The others...

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

I guess when logic isn't on your side, your last resort is deflection.

I don't have a side in this fight, I'm just trolling PapaG because he's a big doody-head. Carry on with your srs bz.

 

[barfo]

Last night I tried to figure out how much of Sug's salary PapaG actually pays. It's difficult to be precise, but I figure it's something less than a penny.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Last night I tried to figure out how much of Sug's salary PapaG actually pays. It's difficult to be precise, but I figure it's something less than a penny.

barfo

Double it and you'll include Sug's benefits.

 

[PapaG]

I don't have a side in this fight, I'm just trolling.

Good idea. Stick to your strengths, because your ignorance on societal and political issues is frankly an embarrassment.

Anyhow, today is apparently deadline day in WI. Either the Fleebaggers show up, or up to 1.2k state jobs are slashed because there won't be a passed budget to pay for them.

 

[PapaG]

Last night I tried to figure out how much of Sug's salary PapaG actually pays. It's difficult to be precise, but I figure it's something less than a penny.

barfo

It didn't take any effort at all to figure out how much of my salary and individual retirement benefits Sug pays.

ZERO

 

[maxiep]

I'm struck about how the roles have changed, with each side representing the same people, the same constituencies, but different positions.

It used to be that representing unions was standing up for the rights of the downtrodden, the working person against The Man. Today, the unions are The Man. They're the privileged ones. They're demanding that they keep benefits that only they have, while taxpayers continue to struggle and tighten their belts. Their idea of "compromise" is still to pay half the amount for their pensions and their health insurance as the people paying for them.

I hope Gov. Walker and the GOP stands firm. It's too bad that the union would rather flush 1,200 of their jobs than give up collective bargaining for their pensions and health care--not salary--just benefits. This isn't a conflict between the government and the union; it's a conflict between the union and the taxpayers. I choose the taxpayers.