Wisconsin anyone?

You...I'm in Jersey and just waiting for the outcome cause I know Gov Christie is going to take it to the extreme if Wisconsin Rep. win. They are willing to conced a lot more then most of the NJ unions so we are screwed if Wisconsin falls. Yes I'm civil service and I work for a school district but still get paid less then I should for what I get. Should have stayed with EDS.

blargoe

I wouldn't touch state/local government with a 10-foot pole today if I were looking for a job, with the way, all over the country, that governments be seem to be scrambling to close these huge deficits. God help those of you who are in this situation.

ericcumbee

i personally hope they bust every public employee union. makes me glad that i live in a right to work state.

now i understand why my parents and little brother who are public school teachers despise teachers unions.

eansdad

ericcumbee wrote: »

i personally hope they bust every public employee union. makes me glad that i live in a right to work state.

now i understand why my parents and little brother who are public school teachers despise teachers unions.

If it wasn't for unions no one would have any of the "extras" that both public and private offer. Sure some have gone and abused the union power (UAW and NEA come to mind) but instead of fixing the system or even using what is available people would rather deny basic workers rights to these people simple because "the system isn't fair". Instead of putting controls and resonable wage guides on political appointed positions and using current laws and guidelines to remove bad teachers and poor performing employees they would rather take away working rights for all of them.

In NJ we see what is going on in Wisconsin and are holding our breath because what ever happens will effect not only Wisconsin but every other state as well. And unfortunatly it will not fix the problems with the system but only help to make them worse. You will see a lot of older/higher wage earners lossing their jobs regardless of how well they do their job. You will see people with the least amount of connections lossing jobs and promotions and better connected people being given disproportiante salaries and jobs.

It is easy to blame the unions for all that they have gotten for their members but the one thing to remember is that there was another side that granted everything to them.

ericcumbee

eansdad wrote: »

It is easy to blame the unions for all that they have gotten for their members but the one thing to remember is that there was another side that granted everything to them.

well yeah when unions finance and staff half of our elected officials re-election campaigns, its easy to get generous gifts from the public coffers, especially when they can just take more money from people that vote for the "other guys".

i dont dispute the contributions to society that unions have made in the past but in all honesty in my opinion they are outmoded these days.

SteveLord

ericcumbee wrote: »

i dont dispute the contributions to society that unions have made in the past but in all honesty in my opinion they are outmoded these days.

I feel the same way. I seriously doubt today workers would suddenly be forced to not use safety equipment and work an extra 20-40hrs a week just because the man in the suit said so.

I am part of this union because of my job classification only. I don't actively participate or contribute. I never would......since I wouldn't know exactly where all my money was going.

eMeS

SteveLord wrote: »

I feel the same way. I seriously doubt today workers would suddenly be forced to not use safety equipment and work an extra 20-40hrs a week just because the man in the suit said so.

Really?

Here's just one example:

BP's Dismal Safety Record - ABC News

MS

erpadmin

I had a feeling this conversation would show up, especially since we do have some TEers from WI.

So as to not polarize the debate to one side or other (and I do have an obvious interest in this in the same way eansdad does), let's recap what's going on and let's (attempt to) also minus all the FOX and MSNBC from the equation, as well as the regionalism (I am well aware of how most Southerners feel about unions...that's why "y'all" have Nissan, Toyota, and many other foreign automakers in the anti-Union South.

)

The public unions in WI have already stated they would pay more into their pensions and health care. What's at issue is Gov. Walker is adamant about removing collective bargaining. If he is successful, many other states (New Jersey especially) will do the same thing. Collective bargaining is what allows workers to make sure working conditions are fair. (Not working 100+ hours a week just because, or working in conditions with poor lightning when your eyesight is already failing). Collective bargaining, when WI had originally introduced it, was what made MANY of us (private and public sector workers) have standard working hours, paid sick and vacation time, health benefits, etc., etc. )

Now mind you, unions were a great idea when they weren't a vehicle of a certain political party. However, the one good thing they did do for public employees was to get benefits for public workers that have always COMPENSATED for the fact that we don't get 15%-25% bonuses at the end of the year. When I worked in the private sector, I did enjoy sweet bonuses. However, this was all in the 90s, when the economy was great and no one cared about the public worker or his/her pension. Then all of a sudden, people started getting canned and losing their sweet bonuses (I was one of them). So yeah, I jumped on the public service bandwagon. I'm union, but I am not that union worker that plays solitaire all day or whatever stereotype you think public workers do. I'm part of a team that makes sure students, faculty and staff can access their data through our ERP system, which thankfully, I gained that knowledge IN the public sector and can take that useful knowledge in the private sector making about 30k more, if I so wish.

If WI succeeds in collective bargaining getting canned, you're gonna see a lot of angry people on the streets and NO ONE is going to want to work in the public sector. That much I know. This is why the country is watching WI very closely. The public sector is not the enemy here.

And by the way....if they do get rid of collective bargaining, say goodbye to your two-week vacation...regardless of the sector you're in. This WILL effect private sector employees down the road.

eMeS

erpadmin wrote: »

I had a feeling this conversation would show up, especially since we do have some TEers from WI.

So as to not polarize the debate to one side or other (and I do have an obvious interest in this in the same way eansdad does), let's recap what's going on and let's (attempt to) also minus all the FOX and MSNBC from the equation, as well as the regionalism (I am well aware of how most Southerners feel about unions...that's why "y'all" have Nissan, Toyota, and many other foreign automakers in the anti-Union South. )

The public unions in WI have already stated they would pay more into their pensions and health care. What's at issue is Gov. Walker is adamant about removing collective bargaining. If he is successful, many other states (New Jersey especially) will do the same thing. Collective bargaining is what allows workers to make sure working conditions are fair. (Not working 100+ hours a week just because, or working in conditions with poor lightning when your eyesight is already failing). Collective bargaining, when WI had originally introduced it, was what made MANY of us (private and public sector workers) have standard working hours, paid sick and vacation time, health benefits, etc., etc. )

Now mind you, unions were a great idea when they weren't a vehicle of a certain political party. However, the one good thing they did do for public employees was to get benefits for public workers that have always COMPENSATED for the fact that we don't get 15%-25% bonuses at the end of the year. When I worked in the private sector, I did enjoy sweet bonuses. However, this was all in the 90s, when the economy was great and no one cared about the public worker or his/her pension. Then all of a sudden, people started getting canned and losing their sweet bonuses (I was one of them). So yeah, I jumped on the public service bandwagon. I'm union, but I am not that union worker that plays solitaire all day or whatever stereotype you think public workers do. I'm part of a team that makes sure students, faculty and staff can access their data through our ERP system, which thankfully, I gained that knowledge IN the public sector and can take that useful knowledge in the private sector making about 30k more, if I so wish.

If WI succeeds in collective bargaining getting canned, you're gonna see a lot of angry people on the streets and NO ONE is going to want to work in the public sector. That much I know. This is why the country is watching WI very closely. The public sector is not the enemy here.

And by the way....if they do get rid of collective bargaining, say good buy to your two-week vacation...regardless of the sector you're in. This WILL effect private sector employees down the road.

Rep given..this is exactly correct as I see it. The unions have offered to pay for health care and contribute more to their pensions, and collective bargaining is not really a budgetary issue.

If these states take this away, expect it to dramatically affect private sector employees. What is basically being said is that it will be illegal to organize and negotiate as a group.

Big corporations really don't need any additional benefits.

Edit: except I couldn't give rep because it said I need to spread some around first....

MS

Turgon

Just an observer here from across the pond. What exactly is happening and what is at stake? Out of curiosity what is the split in terms of workforce in public/private sector in the USA?

erpadmin

Turgon wrote: »

Just an observer here from across the pond. What exactly is happening and what is at stake? Out of curiosity what is the split in terms of workforce in public/private sector in the USA?

Forget a long post, this would be a book to try to explain this, but I'm gonna try to at least point you in the right direction, without going into the history of labor/unions (what you guys call guilds) in the United States and what's going on today in the US political landscape. However, I'm gonna try to give you the short-short version.

Every state in the United States has Public Employees that work for their respective states who are represented by a variety of unions.
These unions use the collective bargaining process to negotiate terms with their employers (in this case, the States and what we're talking about, Wisconsin.)
The Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, is attempting to rid the collective bargaining process so that all levels of government (cities/towns, state offices, state universities, and all government agencies in general) can, in essence, mandate what can be cut, how long employees work, determine the length of sick/vacation, and anything else that is normally discussed through collective bargaining.
Workers are protesting this, because they know that if the collective bargaining process is gone, it won't be long before all the gains labor (workers) have gained in the last 50-100 years are thrown out the window.
The rest of the country (US) is watching this because if Wisconsin succeeds in doing killing collective bargaining, other states will follow suit and unions, essentially, will lose whatever power they have in collectively bargaining. This can mean a longer workday, less vacation and sick time, less pay (though the governor swears that wages won't be affected....), and any other gains that labor has made.

Mind you, this is an in-a-nutshell explaination of the current situation, as I understand it.

SteveLord

eMeS wrote: »

Really?

Here's just one example:

BP's Dismal Safety Record - ABC News

MS

An example of what happens when a union does not exist? If you can prove that, I'll go along with it.

For the record, I am not a supporter of either side. Although I reap in the great benefits I have, I do understand it's only fair for the public to be concerned about their investment. (Many forget, that we state employees still pay taxes. And not all of us are funded by the tax payer.) I fear what happens when they open up certain things. Government only continues to take more. If for example, I pay $50 into healthcare this year....next year, they'll come up with an excuse to raise it to $100, and then $200 and so on and so forth. Just like every tax that was ever created.

shodown

Unions have to adjust to the times which is appears they are doing. Gov Walker is just being a hard head about it. He tried before in Milwaukee, by firing all union security guards at some city buildings and it blew up in his face by costing more money in the end.

As the US continues to learn we can't live the high life anymore we all have to tighten down. With that said getting rid of peoples rights to negotiate is taking it a step to far if its about balancing the budget. What I think this is about is Republicans getting rid of the tools Democrats have as there base. Getting rid of Unions (which is a long known democratic stronghold) will weaken the money that a lot of dems get and in turn weaken how many votes they can get. Like others have said above if WI falls then a lot of other states will in turn take the same action. If your home state has even mentioned following it you need to be in the street right now. A country wide show of force will get these people to back down. I think this matters if your a public employee or not.

eMeS

SteveLord wrote: »

An example of what happens when a union does not exist? If you can prove that, I'll go along with it.

That's not exactly what I'm saying. What I am saying is that given the opportunity, corporations will take shortcuts, even if those shortcuts jeopardize human life. I said that because you indicated that you thought workers would not be suddenly forced to discard safety for profit, when in fact without some effective hedge in place against corporate abuse, that's exactly what happens.

As far as whether a union prevents that or not, I think the answer is that it's one of the many ways that that type of thing can be prevented. If someone refuses to take a shortcut that is a safety risk they could be fired, with a union in place that's less likely. It's simply a hedge against corporate power; we have way too much power in large corporations in this country at the moment.

SteveLord wrote: »

For the record, I am not a supporter of either side. Although I reap in the great benefits I have, I do understand it's only fair for the public to be concerned about their investment. (Many forget, that we state employees still pay taxes. And not all of us are funded by the tax payer.) I fear what happens when they open up certain things. Government only continues to take more. If for example, I pay $50 into healthcare this year....next year, they'll come up with an excuse to raise it to $100, and then $200 and so on and so forth. Just like every tax that was ever created.

I tend to agree with you here, with the caveat that in the absence of effective hedges against power, big business tends to sh*t where they eat. Unions, for all of their faults, are one form of a hedge against big business excess.

BTW, for those who think that what happens in Wisconsin will ultimately dictate rights that private sector employees have, that's not really the case. Even in right to work states we have the right to collectively bargain and form unions, which is provided for by the National Labor Relations Act. Part of what I fail to understand about all of this is why republicans are hell-bent on taking this away from public sector employees, but are not touching it from a private sector perspective.

MS

erpadmin

eMeS wrote: »

BTW, for those who think that what happens in Wisconsin will ultimately dictate rights that private sector employees have, that's not really the case. Even in right to work states we have the right to collectively bargain and form unions, which is provided for by the National Labor Relations Act.

[sarcasm]Yes, because we see how well that's working out for employees at Wal-Mart.....[/sarcasm]

eMeS

erpadmin wrote: »

[sarcasm]Yes, because we see how well that's working out for employees at Wal-Mart.....[/sarcasm]

Yep, good example of a corporation that is way out of control.

Here's the thing...We're all free to vote with our dollars, and in this case I do.

I still don't understand why the Republicans would specifically target huge groups of people who are very likely to vote.

MS

msteinhilber

I don't think this is what the OP had in mind when they made this thread. But since it's already thoroughly derailed into the union debate, I'll add my $.02.

I'm not really for unions myself. Frankly, I view both unions and corporations as one of the same in many ways. In both instances there is someone or a group of people at the top who desire money and power. In a perfect world, people wouldn't be so willing to keep getting sh*t on instead of doing something about it. What I mean by that is if a company treats their employees like dirt, move on. In my opinion, if the majority of people did this - companies would have a harder time treating people poorly.

erpadmin

eMeS wrote: »

I still don't understand why the Republicans would specifically target huge groups of people who are very likely to vote.

MS

MS, you and I both know why....

erpadmin wrote: »

Now mind you, unions were a great idea when they weren't a vehicle of a certain political party.

shodown wrote: »

What I think this is about is Republicans getting rid of the tools Democrats have as there base. Getting rid of Unions (which is a long known democratic stronghold) will weaken the money that a lot of dems get and in turn weaken how many votes they can get.

The mistake that Republicans are making though is that they are attempting to destroy unions without offering a better "enticement", if you will, for the rest of the masses. The money Republicans are getting from big corporations alone will NOT win elections by themselves....they have to know that.

eMeS

erpadmin wrote: »

MS, you and I both know why....

Well, I think I know why, but it still seems suicidal. People are already talking about recalling the governor of Wisconsin, especially after that phone call recording that was released.

MS

msteinhilber

eMeS wrote: »

Well, I think I know why, but it still seems suicidal. People are already talking about recalling the governor of Wisconsin, especially after that phone call recording that was released.

MS

There are also groups organizing efforts to recall eight of the democratic senators who have fled the state in an effort to hold off passage of the bill. Fortunately for Governor Walker, he hasn't been in office for a year so the recall process can't formally begin until next January. Beginning to draw attention to the prospects of recalling Governor Walker is premature in my opinion. Sure now is an opportune time for those who would like to see him gone to organize the effort given the circumstances, but it's not going to do them any good. Instead they should focus on continuing to make their voices heard instead of wasting efforts to push for a recall when he is ineligible, save that for when that can make a difference if that's what they so desire.

veritas_libertas

At risk of being trashed (and getting involved in a political thread

) I will comment on all this mess. I lived in the Great Lakes area for over 20 years and have seen the general attitude of the area (mostly in Michigan but I did live in Indiana for a couple of years). They cling to government and union jobs. I believe a lot of this is connected to the old manufacturing base that use to be prosperous. People are losing jobs everywhere and they are understandably distraught. I use to be a Civil Process Server in Michigan and the last few years were very prosperous for those of us who served Morgage Forclosure Notices. The town I grew up in has more than died.

I'm just giving my opinion from living in the area and I know many will differ.

eMeS

msteinhilber wrote: »

There are also groups organizing efforts to recall eight of the democratic senators who have fled the state in an effort to hold off passage of the bill. Fortunately for Governor Walker, he hasn't been in office for a year so the recall process can't formally begin until next January. Beginning to draw attention to the prospects of recalling Governor Walker is premature in my opinion. Sure now is an opportune time for those who would like to see him gone to organize the effort given the circumstances, but it's not going to do them any good. Instead they should focus on continuing to make their voices heard instead of wasting efforts to push for a recall when he is ineligible, save that for when that can make a difference if that's what they so desire.

I would think that would be very risky for the republicans at this point.

I didn't know about the 1 year thing. That kind of makes sense, but it also kind of doesn't.

MS

blargoe

Yeah, I don't understand how whatever happens in WI with the public sector unions is going to have a such tremendous impact on factory workers, or coal miners, or wherever else unions are involved in the private sector... or for that matter, how this automatically means that other governments will ban collective bargaining... gotta assume any Dem controlled state is not going down that road, no matter how large of a deficit they are working with... and in WI, this will certainly cost this governor his political future.

eMeS

veritas_libertas wrote: »

I use to be a Civil Process Server in Michigan and the last few years were very prosperous for those of us who served Morgage Forclosure Notices.

Actually this makes me want to buy you a beer even more....I'll bet you have some interesting stories to tell...

MS

unclerico

Im not one to be politically correct or very diplomatic so I'll just go ahead and say it: bust the unions and make them work like the rest of us. You people claim its the republicans that are schills for big business when in fact it is the opposite. There are plenty of large orgs that donate heavily to the dems. The reason that government workers should have no collective bargaining rights is because government is a monopoly. You, as a citizen, have no choice where to get your services from in your state. The trash that is public education in this country is a direct consequence of unionization. These people have no worries about getting fired for any reason short of killing a student. You've got teachers forcing their students to make signs to carry in a protest that they know nothing about and calling it a history lesson. On to pay and other compensation; the average public sector worker makes 50% more than the private sector guy doing the same job. Okay maybe not the same job because the private sector guy will do things out of his job description without fear of making the other guy look bad. These people all get paid with our tax dollars so I think we should have a say in what they can and can't do. Oh and the thinking that this outcome will all of the sudden make companies take away your vacations is
ridiculous. This has been a long time coming and I can't wait for it to go through. Fiscal sanity will be restored!