Wis. GOP cuts collective bargaining...

[Karinyc]

I was going to say I'm disheartened, but it's more like disgusted.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_wisconsin_budget_unions;_ylt=AgvAq1hHSX25BuiM7A MebwCs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNwbHQ2YjA4BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMT EwMzEwL3VzX3dpc2NvbnNpbl9idWRnZXRfdW5pb25zBGNjb2Rl A21vc3Rwb3B1bGFyBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMQRwdANob21lX2Nva2 UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDc2NvdHR3YWxrZXI-

I know there are differing view points over this, but I really don't see the positive here :(

[kijip]

If this is a budget thing why is it exempting some unions? I know it is because those unions supported the election of the governor but the double talk here is ridiculous. I also think that in a highly mixed and purple state like Wisconsin that it will be interesting to see what happens in the next election.

[elizabethkott]

Disgusting. Just disgusting.
I think he's exempting the police and the firefighters for PR purposes. Public backlash would be way bigger if he's seen to be taking pensions and benefits away from heroes who protect the public than if he's just stripping them away from teachers, factory workers and other unionized branches of the public sector.
Just disgusting. And horribly transparent.

[crl]

:nodno:

Catherine

[wellyes]

How is it that conservatives are so effective? It baffles me... or, I guess I should say that it baffles me how ineffectual the rest of the political spectrum seems in comparison. All I heard on the news today was this story - as Paul Krugman said, it's just bizarre that an effort to make teachers the new boogeyman (a la welfare queens) is *working*. This and campaign to defund NPR. It's amazing to me that this is what people are up in arms about. The right is really controlling the national conversation these days.

[arivecchi]

I do think it is sad that a large portion of the middle class focuses on these red herrings and vote for people who are completely against their economic interests.

As Jon Stewart says, they are all up in arms over those teachers living high on the hog with their multiple pencils and endless supply of apples (LOL) but they do not bat an eye at extending tax cuts for the wealthy.

Baffling indeed....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/04/jon-stewart-teachers-walls-street-fox_n_831243.html

[JBaxter]

So what does that actually mean for the teachers/goven't workers? They will have to pay more for their health care & pensions. The individual county/regions will be able to negotiate pay benefits? My uncle is a Teamsters Trustee and I haven't gotten to sit and chat with him about this situation yet.

Ok found what I was looking for..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_wisconsin_budget_unions

The measure approved Wednesday forbids most government workers from collectively bargaining for wage increases beyond the rate of inflation. It also requires public workers to pay more toward their pensions and double their health insurance contribution, a combination equivalent to an 8 percent pay cut for the average worker.
Police and firefighters are exempt.

Ok I wish they would see what DH's company went through he took a 8 % pay cut all VP's and above to 12% every one had 4 weeks of furlough per year. It save a ton of people from getting laid off our medical has gone down in coverage and gone up in employee participation 2009 they did not match 401K. 2010 was better but I guess what Im trying to say is that what they "gave up" doesnt look so bad from where DH's company was.

NPR well they seem to dig their own grave.

[kijip]

I do think it is sad that a large portion of the middle class focuses on these red herrings and vote for people who are completely against their economic interests.



:yeahthat: times 1000. And it is not just the middle class. The working class and working poor have been effectively sold the same bill of goods. It is maddening beyond belief.

[kijip]

As Jon Stewart says, they are all up in arms over those teachers living high on the hog with their multiple pencils and endless supply of apples (LOL) but they do not bat an eye at extending tax cuts for the wealthy.

Baffling indeed....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/04/jon-stewart-teachers-walls-street-fox_n_831243.html

I loved this. Especially when the same commentators are arguing that a quarter of a million is near poverty with kids and then that teachers make too much. The double standard is staggering.

We are not all at far from income disparity on par with the third world level countries. A few more elections and terrible decisions and anyone who is not truly wealthy can start to worry about their own families ability to maintain anything approaching their current standard of living.

Some food banks have started hiring security guards. If that does not say something about ever rising desperation, I don't know what does.

[ha98ed14]

:yeahthat: times 1000. And it is not just the middle class. The working class and working poor have been effectively sold the same bill of goods. It is maddening beyond belief.

Does anyone else feel actual contempt for those that sell the bill of goods? It might just be me; I'm angry about a lot of things these days, but I actually feel loathsome towards conservatives.

[Laurel]

A few more elections and terrible decisions and anyone who is not truly wealthy can start to worry about their own families ability to maintain anything approaching their current standard of living.


This. I completely fear and (unfortunately) expect this.

[kijip]

Does anyone else feel actual contempt for those that sell the bill of goods? It might just be me; I'm angry about a lot of things these days, but I actually feel loathsome towards conservatives.

I don't feel loathsome towards individual voting conservatives. I do feel tremendous animosity to the people actually running this show, and I do feel strongly that it is a show.

For years now wedge social issues have overshadowed the economic realities of people's voting. It is no secret that contingencies within the GOP leadership are fully aware that the social issues are being used as bait for the plain bad economic priorities. Now villianizing have-a-littles like teachers to the have-nots largely created by this shrinking middle class is the next step.

I feel like we are close to the last stop on this bus and if we don't turn it around, we are all falling off the cliff together.

Ask yourself what will happen in your state when thousands of unemployable people lose access to some pretty meager survival services as states are forced to slash programs further. For those who say the nonprofit and church sector will fill the void. No, we won't. We can't, there are not the resources to do so and that is even if donations were to rise steeply when in most places they are not rising at all. People will get very hungry and cold. Hungry and cold enough to commit crimes over it. People will go without medications needed to treat severe mental and physical illness. People will die over this.

The good old days many people long for? Lower gap between the rich and poor and a more progressive tax structure.

[kijip]

The right is really controlling the national conversation these days.

Because they are consistent and unashamed. Their positions make for better sound bytes and sell better. Because they are kicking the Democrats butts on thinking strategically. Few are ashamed to say, I am conservative. Yet on the other side we can't even decide what to call ourselves. also the impact of campaign finance laws can not be underestimated. When a small group of people own the representatives of a large group of people we can't expect a lot.

As a liberal, I have decided to change that on a very microlevel and thus my new signature.

Also, we apparently need our own reality tv show. :tongue5:

[niccig]

Ok I wish they would see what DH's company went through he took a 8 % pay cut all VP's and above to 12% every one had 4 weeks of furlough per year. It save a ton of people from getting laid off our medical has gone down in coverage and gone up in employee participation 2009 they did not match 401K. 2010 was better but I guess what Im trying to say is that what they "gave up" doesnt look so bad from where DH's company was.

NPR well they seem to dig their own grave.

I thought they had already agreed to all of these cuts, agreed to pay more into pension and health fund. The one sticking point was collective bargaining - if they already agreed to cuts for budget purposes why keep on for the collective bargaining, other than to bust the union? Which, by the way, I thought it was illegal to stop unionizing? Or is this watering it down so much people won't join?


I do wonder what the fall out from this will be. I was reading some polls that majority of people did not agree with Walker...wonder how they'll react to the people that they elected to represent them, doing the complete opposite of what they wanted?

[citymama]

I do think it is sad that a large portion of the middle class focuses on these red herrings and vote for people who are completely against their economic interests.

As Jon Stewart says, they are all up in arms over those teachers living high on the hog with their multiple pencils and endless supply of apples (LOL) but they do not bat an eye at extending tax cuts for the wealthy.

l (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/04/jon-stewart-teachers-walls-street-fox_n_831243.html)

Ain't that the truth.

This is incredibly sad. I think this is going to end up being a really bad move for Walker and the GOP.

[brittone2]

I do think it is sad that a large portion of the middle class focuses on these red herrings and vote for people who are completely against their economic interests.


:yeahthat:

It absolutely baffles me.

[jenfromnj]

The measure approved Wednesday forbids most government workers from collectively bargaining for wage increases beyond the rate of inflation. It also requires public workers to pay more toward their pensions and double their health insurance contribution, a combination equivalent to an 8 percent pay cut for the average worker.
Police and firefighters are exempt.

Ok I wish they would see what DH's company went through he took a 8 % pay cut all VP's and above to 12% every one had 4 weeks of furlough per year. It save a ton of people from getting laid off our medical has gone down in coverage and gone up in employee participation 2009 they did not match 401K. 2010 was better but I guess what Im trying to say is that what they "gave up" doesnt look so bad from where DH's company was.



I feel like this is EXACTLY the kind of reaction that Walker & Co (and those with the same agenda in other states) WANT us (and by us, I mean those other than the uber-rich) to have. The whole "well, we don't have X (raises, modest health insurance contributions, etc), so why should those darned greedy teachers"--divide and conquer the middle class.

It's as though people have given up on the "ideal" that everyone deserves reasonable access to healthcare, to earn a living wage for their hard work, and other crazy things like that. Instead of saying "hey, we all deserve that, and I want it, too", so many people are now saying "well, I don't have that, so neither should the teachers/govt workers". I just think that's sort of "mission accomplished" in many ways for Walker and those like him.


I do think it is sad that a large portion of the middle class focuses on these red herrings and vote for people who are completely against their economic interests.

As Jon Stewart says, they are all up in arms over those teachers living high on the hog with their multiple pencils and endless supply of apples (LOL) but they do not bat an eye at extending tax cuts for the wealthy.



:yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat:


The flood gates seem dangerously close to being busted open IMO.

[WolfpackMom]

I feel like this is EXACTLY the kind of reaction that Walker & Co (and those with the same agenda in other states) WANT us (and by us, I mean those other than the uber-rich) to have. The whole "well, we don't have X (raises, modest health insurance contributions, etc), so why should those darned greedy teachers"--divide and conquer the middle class.

It's as though people have given up on the "ideal" that everyone deserves reasonable access to healthcare, to earn a living wage for their hard work, and other crazy things like that. Instead of saying "hey, we all deserve that, and I want it, too", so many people are now saying "well, I don't have that, so neither should the teachers/govt workers". I just think that's sort of "mission accomplished" in many ways for Walker and those like him.



:yeahthat: Not only that but now these teachers can't try and get raises beyond inflation. If you do well in the private industry, you can get a raise, get promoted, get bonuses etc. and you can ask for them and make your case. That wont happen here. Sure, I dont have great healthcare, I probably pay more and get less than these workers, and our company did no raises at all last year, and the past 3 years have barely been inflation raises, but I have options. I can go elsewhere (whereas a teacher can just go to another school and have the same issues), I can make my case for more money (which if I dont leave I will be doing next month at my job). I at least have the opportunity to earn respect and admiration for a job well done, where as these teachers, no matter how great they are just get trampled on. In private industry people would think its ridiculous if raises were only for inflation or if you didnt get an annual holiday bonus, why is it ok for other people to have to deal with that - because its not you?

jenfromnj is totally right in what she is saying, they want to pit people against each other. Its a have and have nots situation, as well as a have nots so you shouldnt have any either situation.

:thumbsdown:

[JBaxter]

I feel like this is EXACTLY the kind of reaction that Walker & Co (and those with the same agenda in other states) WANT us (and by us, I mean those other than the uber-rich) to have. The whole "well, we don't have X (raises, modest health insurance contributions, etc), so why should those darned greedy teachers"--divide and conquer the middle class.

It's as though people have given up on the "ideal" that everyone deserves reasonable access to healthcare, to earn a living wage for their hard work, and other crazy things like that. Instead of saying "hey, we all deserve that, and I want it, too", so many people are now saying "well, I don't have that, so neither should the teachers/govt workers". I just think that's sort of "mission accomplished" in many ways for Walker and those like him.

.

I guess I had that reaction because DH's company went through it. I think it would be insane in this economy not to expect to pay more for pension/healthcare DH didnt have a raise for a while not cost of living not anything and they accepted a pay cut & furlough days. If there isnt the money to fund things how can you pay for stuff?

Ok that was my reaction when I read it.

Now I dont think it was right the way they did it but how long were the democratic reps missing?

So what is better concessions or firing people or raise taxes.

[bubbaray]

I think firing people would be better than wholesale slaughter of union rights which were NEGOTIATED over many years.

I am just stunned that this is happening. The whole "if I don't have it, you shouldn't either" mentality is going to drive the USA into the ground.

[bubbaray]

I think it would be insane in this economy not to expect to pay more for pension/healthcare DH didnt have a raise for a while not cost of living not anything and they accepted a pay cut & furlough days. If there isnt the money to fund things how can you pay for stuff?




What is getting missed here is that the Wis. unions AGREED to significant increases in worker's payments for health care and pensions.

This is NOT about the money. Its about union busting, plain and simple.

[brittone2]

What is getting missed here is that the Wis. unions AGREED to significant increases in worker's payments for health care and pensions.

This is NOT about the money. Its about union busting, plain and simple.

Yes. And in tough times increased employee contributions to health care, etc. might be part of the negotiations, but that's different from removing the ability to bargain at all IMO.

[jenfromnj]

I guess I had that reaction because DH's company went through it. I think it would be insane in this economy not to expect to pay more for pension/healthcare DH didnt have a raise for a while not cost of living not anything and they accepted a pay cut & furlough days. If there isnt the money to fund things how can you pay for stuff?

Ok that was my reaction when I read it.

Now I dont think it was right the way they did it but how long were the democratic reps missing?

So what is better concessions or firing people or raise taxes.

I understand what you are experiencing in terms of your DH's company--we have endured several rounds of pay cuts here, as well. But that doesn't change m opinion that what's going on in WI is horrifying and is a step closer to obliterating the middle class as we know it.

But to your points above, from everything I've read, just a couple of points:

1. All reports are that the public workers WERE willing to make numerous concessions, and give on things like the amount they pay into their healthcare and pension. They were holding fast on the collective bargaining thing because it will PERMANENTLY prevent them from having raises over inflation--it creates an inherently unequal playing field.

2. It's my understanding that the Democrats were gone to prevent this very measure from occurring. The bill was (properly, IMO) characterized as budgetary in nature, and those bills require a quorum--and essentially, no Dems, no quorum. But Republicans "decided" (and the legality and procedural correctness of that decision are currently being looked at, I'll spare everyone my opinion so as not to turn this into a giant bitching post) to recharacterize it and thus, in their opinion the vote could take place without a quorum. There was no indication that this was going to occur prior to the actual vote, which seems contrary to every idea of sunshine laws and open government action of which I'm aware, and my former life in BigLaw made me pretty familiar with those things.

[BabbyO]

I thought they had already agreed to all of these cuts, agreed to pay more into pension and health fund. The one sticking point was collective bargaining - if they already agreed to cuts for budget purposes why keep on for the collective bargaining, other than to bust the union? Which, by the way, I thought it was illegal to stop unionizing? Or is this watering it down so much people won't join?


I do wonder what the fall out from this will be. I was reading some polls that majority of people did not agree with Walker...wonder how they'll react to the people that they elected to represent them, doing the complete opposite of what they wanted?

They have agreed to cuts and in the case of my brother's union, haven't received a raise in 4 years while increasing their contributions to insurance and pension each of those 4 years. People forget, in many cases public workers start with a lower salary but pay less into their benefits...that is the trade off.

I work in the private sector and I've been at companies where we've had to contribute SIGNIFICANTLY more toward health insurance and had to take pay cuts...but we've always started with a higher base salary.

What honestly ticks me off the most is that the people who voted for Walker in the first place didn't see this coming. Really....it was clear to me that this was coming if he got elected.

It makes me sick. I have family that will be greatly affected by this...2 govt jobs in the same household...they are afraid they will be losing their house. I expect that DH and I aren't far behind if things keep up like this.

[jenfromnj]

Yes. And in tough times increased employee contributions to health care, etc. might be part of the negotiations, but that's different from removing the ability to bargain at all IMO.

THIS is the crux of the issue for me.

The very essence of freedom of contract (and these types of contracts, in the case of teachers, for example, exist for the protection of both sides--would you really want your kid's teachers to be freely able to up and leave mid-year to take a better job?) is the equality of bargaining power on both sides.

This measure makes it impossible IMO to achieve that. That alone is a huge problem to me.

[arivecchi]

We are not all at far from income disparity on par with the third world level countries. A few more elections and terrible decisions and anyone who is not truly wealthy can start to worry about their own families ability to maintain anything approaching their current standard of living.

Exactly.

Let's all race to the bottom. The less salary and benefits all around the better! :cheerleader1:

And to top it off, let's do it while gutting legislative procedures!

[vonfirmath]

THIS is the crux of the issue for me.

The very essence of freedom of contract (and these types of contracts, in the case of teachers, for example, exist for the protection of both sides--would you really want your kid's teachers to be freely able to up and leave mid-year to take a better job?) is the equality of bargaining power on both sides.



Except that -- when public government unions bargain, there is NOT equality of bargaining power on both sides

In a private business, you have people on both sides trying to protect their own interests. In the government, one side is NOT protected at all -- the taxpayers. The people "bargaining" against the unions are not bargaining using their own money. They are bargaining using someone else's money, and they often get DONATIONS from those they are bargaining "against" so there is incentive to lean toward the unions.

FDR -- no conservative -- would be on the side of the Wisconsin governor today. "... 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 ..."

What is more, in a many states government unions already do NOT have the right to collectively bargain (and in others it was granted only very recently, and changes frequently), so there is nothing sacred about this "right"

Here's an article about it: http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=553067

[jamesmom]

Does anyone else feel actual contempt for those that sell the bill of goods? It might just be me; I'm angry about a lot of things these days, but I actually feel loathsome towards conservatives.

:yeahthat: All this just makes me sick.

[septmama2b]

Because they are consistent and unashamed. Their positions make for better sound bytes and sell better. Because they are kicking the Democrats butts on thinking strategically. Few are ashamed to say, I am conservative. Yet on the other side we can't even decide what to call ourselves. also the impact of campaign finance laws can not be underestimated. When a small group of people own the representatives of a large group of people we can't expect a lot.

As a liberal, I have decided to change that on a very microlevel and thus my new signature.

Also, we apparently need our own reality tv show. :tongue5:

:yeahthat:

I love your signature.

I hate how ineffective the Democratic party has become. I'm so disillusioned. I really thought that after electing Obama, and taking over the House and the Senate that we'd have the chance to undo some of the damage done under the Bush administration, and enact some progressive policies that would benefit the country now and for future generations.

Instead of being bold when they had a clear mandate, they rolled over on every front, and now we are in worse shape then ever. It's all about protecting corporate power and increasing their profits, no matter who is in charge.

Between the union busting, the bad mouthing teachers, and the roll back on reproductive rights, it's hard to even read the news these days.

[zag95]

I think the whole Wisconsin thing is totally sick. This is really not about budgets...... it's about power. Interesting that some groups are not affected (firefighters is what I read)-so it's OK for heroes to have bargaining rights (esp heroes who support elected gov) but not other folks?

I'm sorry, but as a public school teacher, I've had to be a hero in lockdowns trying to calm down the alternative youth of America, I've had to break up a cat-fight between girls, I've had to help bust up drug sales in my evening program (with the help of cops) and have had to help a student in the midst of an epileptic seizure. Is my job any less important that someone elses? Clearly in Wisconsin it is. Public workers bedamned.

I am so nauseated and fearful about this situation. As the daughter of a nurse(non-profit hospital) and public school teacher, I grew up in a union household. My husband is also a teacher- with all of these attacks on public education and public workers are very sad. I am concerned daily about our family livelihood.

[Karinyc]

FDR -- no conservative -- would be on the side of the Wisconsin governor today. "... 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 ..."

What is more, in a many states government unions already do NOT have the right to collectively bargain (and in others it was granted only very recently, and changes frequently), so there is nothing sacred about this "right"

Here's an article about it: http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=553067

Umm...I don't think so. At least I can't say with utmost certainty. He's not around for us to ask him. That quote is taken completely out of context. He opposed strikes by federal public employee unions. The landscape of this country & its outlook on unions changed in the postwar era . A little background here:

http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2011/02/18/fdr_and_wisconsin

and here is the letter in its entirety where you find the quote. If you read the bolded parts you can see that when the quote is taken out of context it's completely misleading:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/21/948033/-Wisconsin:GOP-Lying-About-FDR-Again

[JBaxter]

I guess everyone will have to wait and see if this does create a balanced budget.

Maybe an OT question but would this eliminate tenure for teachers? I reading that the top new teacher lost her job only because they had to make cuts and she was last hired. Would what they did allow for merit based employment retention?

[mommylamb]

This is really not about budgets...... it's about power.



Yup, exactly. It's about making unions irrelevant because they cannot serve the purpose that they're intended to serve (collective bargaining). Irrelevant unions lose their members = Lose their union dues = Cannot contribute to PACs = Democrats lose elections = The real purpose of this law, which has nothing to do with balancing a budget.

[Globetrotter]

I think firing people would be better than wholesale slaughter of union rights which were NEGOTIATED over many years.


Yes, I think that we need to look at reforming work rules, not get rid of unions altogether! However, the folks who don't want unions are using the current uproar over work rules (or at least that is what I see IRT teachers - and it IS a real issue) as their opportunity to get rid of unions. That's not right.

[mousemom]

Has anyone actually looked at what the bill will do?

It doesn't stop teachers from getting pay raises - it just means that if they negotiate a pay raise above the rate of inflation, it must be approved by the taxpayers. If teachers argue they deserve a 100% pay raise, they can get that raise if the majority of taxpayers agree with it. This means that their ultimate employers (the taxpayers) get to decide if they merit huge boosts in pay. That doesn't seem like it is unreasonable.

It doesn't end unions - what it requires is that unions must hold secret votes every year to stay certified. If the employees are in support of the union, they would vote to stay certified every year so this has no effect on the unions.

It does mean that employees cannot be forced to pay union dues unless they want to. Those that still want to pay their dues are not prohibitted from paying. If people support their union, they will continue to pay their dues.

It does prohibit them from negotiating for benefits, which is comparable to the private sector. I don't get to negotiate for my healthcare or 401k benefits.

[jenfromnj]

Except that -- when public government unions bargain, there is NOT equality of bargaining power on both sides

In a private business, you have people on both sides trying to protect their own interests. In the government, one side is NOT protected at all -- the taxpayers. The people "bargaining" against the unions are not bargaining using their own money. They are bargaining using someone else's money, and they often get DONATIONS from those they are bargaining "against" so there is incentive to lean toward the unions. [/QUOTE]

I'm not sure how you can say that the taxpayers aren't being "protected at all". Isn't it the very purpose of elected officials to represent and protect the interests of the people? People elect politicians with the express understanding that said politicians will be responsible for deciding how gov't money (theirs and that of others in their state/county/etc) is spent. Now, if you think that the politicians responsible for deciding how your money is spent, aren't doing their job, then that's another issue, and anyone who thinks so should do what they can to get that person voted out of office.


FDR -- no conservative -- would be on the side of the Wisconsin governor today. "... 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 ..."



I disagree with your take on FDR's position on this, but karinyc already said much of what I was going to say on the topic, so I'll leave it at that.

[larig]

I already discussed and de-bunked the FDR thing in the last 26 page thread about WI last time.

And right back at ya--Ronald Reagan would be pro collective bargaining...

In a Labor Day address in 1980, Ronald Reagan said:
"These are the values inspiring those brave workers in Poland … They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsHXJr8tqP0&feature=player_embedded

At one point conservatives pointed to our unions as a sign of our freedom.

He continues...at 38 seconds in--"freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. you and I must protect and preserve freedom here or it will not be passed on ..."

[ha98ed14]

Has anyone actually looked at what the bill will do?

It doesn't stop teachers from getting pay raises - it just means that if they negotiate a pay raise above the rate of inflation, it must be approved by the taxpayers. If teachers argue they deserve a 100% pay raise, they can get that raise if the majority of taxpayers agree with it. This means that their ultimate employers (the taxpayers) get to decide if they merit huge boosts in pay. That doesn't seem like it is unreasonable.



YES IT DOES!!!!! It means that teachers have a fixed salary for the rest of their professional lives. Essentially this law eliminates any "room for advancement" from the teaching profession. What idiot would go into a profession in which they are guaranteed to be making the same salary in their 5th year that they are in their first? AND it is a guarantee because no one wants to pay more in taxes so someone else can have a raise. People are not altruistic.

Don't tell me that because the salary is adjusted for inflation that that constitutes a raise! That's a joke if that is what you are implying. Do the tax payers get to vote on if the police or firemen get a raise??? NO! And no one has to vote on when YOU get a raise. You get a raise when you're boss things you should get one. Forgive me if I don't think that tax payers should have the final say if a teacher should get a raise. I think it should be up to the district on what they want to do with their money, and how they want to employ their teachers. If teachers don't like that district as an employer, they can move on.

Teach for America exists because the "best and brightest" were not choosing to go into teaching, so someone came up with the idea to recruit them. That was before this law. If laws like this become the norm, I can guarantee you that the only people stupid enough to go into teaching will be the those with zero other job prospects. Do you really want desperate people teaching your kids? I'd rather have people who felt comfortable and confident in their personal lives teaching my kid.

[Moneypenny]

Has anyone actually looked at what the bill will do?

It doesn't stop teachers from getting pay raises - it just means that if they negotiate a pay raise above the rate of inflation, it must be approved by the taxpayers. If teachers argue they deserve a 100% pay raise, they can get that raise if the majority of taxpayers agree with it. This means that their ultimate employers (the taxpayers) get to decide if they merit huge boosts in pay. That doesn't seem like it is unreasonable.

It doesn't end unions - what it requires is that unions must hold secret votes every year to stay certified. If the employees are in support of the union, they would vote to stay certified every year so this has no effect on the unions.

It does mean that employees cannot be forced to pay union dues unless they want to. Those that still want to pay their dues are not prohibitted from paying. If people support their union, they will continue to pay their dues.

It does prohibit them from negotiating for benefits, which is comparable to the private sector. I don't get to negotiate for my healthcare or 401k benefits.

And what these things do is essentially make it impossible for the union to do anything for the employee which makes the employee not want to pay dues or support the union. It is strategy for eliminating unions and it works.

I am a Wisconsin state employee but not represented by a union. When this all started, I looked back at my salary record. In the last 10 years, there were 6 years where we didn't receive a raise. The other 4 years, our raises were 1% or less. During that time we paid more for health care each year. The last 2 years we have also had unpaid furlough days. People don't know we did these things because we didn't complain because we knew they needed to be done.

I have no problem paying more for health care and retirement, but you need to realize that the low cost we pay now was negotiated by the administration (often republican administrations) in lieu of pay raises back when it was cheaper for the government to make these contributions on our behalf than to pay us more in salary. By limiting our raises to the CPI (and really, who thinks the taxpayers would ever vote to allow a larger increase?), we will never make up what is lost here. Many of my friends in the private sector had large cuts a couple of years ago and are now getting 10%-20% pay raises because things are improving. State employees will never get those raises. It won't be a temporary situation to be reversed when the economy is better.

[arivecchi]

Here is what the bill really does:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/115726754.html

Fact check summary of battle:

http://factcheck.org/2011/03/wisconsins-baffling-budget-battle/

Now if the true meaning of the bill is to reduce deficits by limiting "outrageous union rights", why exempt the police and firefighter unions?
Could Walker be any more transparent? The bill is simply an excuse to weaken the Democratic base in the State of WI in the name of balancing the budget.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/25/opinion/25krugman.html?_r=1&scp=9&sq=wisconsin%20budget%20bill&st=cse

[JBaxter]

Here is what the bill really does:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/115726754.html

Fact check summary of battle:

http://factcheck.org/2011/03/wisconsins-baffling-budget-battle/

Now if the true meaning of the bill is to reduce deficits by limiting "outrageous union rights", why exempt the police and firefighter unions?
Could Walker be any more transparent? The bill is simply an excuse to weaken the Democratic base in the State of WI in the name of balancing the budget.

Cant say for sure but firefighter and police typically have shorter retirement eligibility A 60 yr old teacher or state employee would not have the issue of doing their job like a policeman or fireman who are expected to put their life on the line every day in heroic acts. Prison guards and military are on a similar retirement eligibility. Our first responders are in a different class... That may just be my take on it but in Maryland prison guards have a 20 yr retirement eligibility.

[marymoo86]

YES IT DOES!!!!! It means that teachers have a fixed salary for the rest of their professional lives. Essentially this law eliminates any "room for advancement" from the teaching profession. What idiot would go into a profession in which they are guaranteed to be making the same salary in their 5th year that they are in their first? AND it is a guarantee because no one wants to pay more in taxes so someone else can have a raise. People are not altruistic.

Don't tell me that because the salary is adjusted for inflation that that constitutes a raise! That's a joke if that is what you are implying. Do the tax payers get to vote on if the police or firemen get a raise??? NO! And no one has to vote on when YOU get a raise. You get a raise when you're boss things you should get one. Forgive me if I don't think that tax payers should have the final say if a teacher should get a raise. I think it should be up to the district on what they want to do with their money, and how they want to employ their teachers. If teachers don't like that district as an employer, they can move on.

Teach for America exists because the "best and brightest" were not choosing to go into teaching, so someone came up with the idea to recruit them. That was before this law. If laws like this become the norm, I can guarantee you that the only people stupid enough to go into teaching will be the those with zero other job prospects. Do you really want desperate people teaching your kids? I'd rather have people who felt comfortable and confident in their personal lives teaching my kid.

Pretty much any one in the private sector's 'raise' is a cost of living adjustment. I haven't seen raises given outside of 3-4% in years unless the person is being promoted to a higher level job/more responsibility.

In the case of a teacher - unless promotion is a possibility, why would there be more of a raise than the COL year after year?

[egoldber]

Pretty much any one in the private sector's 'raise' is a cost of living adjustment.

I am a federal employee. In the past, I got a COL adjustment (about 1-2%) and then an increase based on my performance review. This year they did not do the COL adjustment and we have yet to hear about the performance based increases. We probably won't get those either. But public employees certainly are able to get performance based increases just like private sector employees. The difference is the base salary is generally lower than private sector.

[JBaxter]

Pretty much any one in the private sector's 'raise' is a cost of living adjustment. I haven't seen raises given outside of 3-4% in years unless the person is being promoted to a higher level job/more responsibility.

In the case of a teacher - unless promotion is a possibility, why would there be more of a raise than the COL year after year?

Some teacher get "step raises" for years of service or education advancement. I have no issues with the education ( completing a masters etc). Merit based raises would be nice for teachers who are good at their job and are not just taking up space doing the motions.

[ha98ed14]

Pretty much any one in the private sector's 'raise' is a cost of living adjustment. I haven't seen raises given outside of 3-4% in years unless the person is being promoted to a higher level job/more responsibility.

In the case of a teacher - unless promotion is a possibility, why would there be more of a raise than the COL year after year?

I'm sorry, but I don't buy that. My sister works for a bank and before that an insurance company. She's gotten merit raises in both jobs simply for being there for a few years AND doing her job well. No increase in responsibilities. I'm sorry, You're wrong. I have friends with the same experiences.

As for the promotion/ increase in responsibilities: Does the teacher have to take on a bigger class size to get a raise? Maybe they should get a raise if they go from teaching 1st grade to 5th grade...

ETA: I'm walking away. I can hear myself. I'm getting way too emotional about it. I'm sorry you can only see it your way, and I'm sorry that I can only see it mine.

[marymoo86]

I'm sorry, but I don't buy that. My sister works for a bank and before that an insurance company. She's gotten merit raises in both jobs simply for being there for a few years AND doing her job well. No increase in responsibilities. I'm sorry, You're wrong. I have friends with the same experiences.

As for the promotion/ increase in responsibilities: Does the teacher have to take on a bigger class size to get a raise? Maybe they should get a raise if they go from teaching 1st grade to 5th grade...

ETA: I'm walking away. I can hear myself. I'm getting way too emotional about it. I'm sorry you can only see it your way, and I'm sorry that I can only see it mine.

I am not wrong those are my experiences in MY industry as I do the budget planning I would know first hand not anecdotally. Perhaps to equate that with all industries is misguided as those that are not experiencing a downturn are probably in a position to do so. I would think any change in job with more education and more responsibility should garner increased pay. Just to get more money b/c of time served doesn't make sense to me.

[JBaxter]

I'm sorry, but I don't buy that. My sister works for a bank and before that an insurance company. She's gotten merit raises in both jobs simply for being there for a few years AND doing her job well. No increase in responsibilities. I'm sorry, You're wrong. I have friends with the same experiences.

As for the promotion/ increase in responsibilities: Does the teacher have to take on a bigger class size to get a raise? Maybe they should get a raise if they go from teaching 1st grade to 5th grade...

ETA: I'm walking away. I can hear myself. I'm getting way too emotional about it. I'm sorry you can only see it your way, and I'm sorry that I can only see it mine.

Thats great for your sister but her company HAD the money to give. Looks like right now Wisconsin does not which IS the problem to start with. The private sector is sucking it up so why shouldnt the state employees have to do the same? Wisconsin is broke and cuts have to be made in a lot of areas.

[egoldber]

And again, the teachers agreed to those cuts. But I don't see why this means they have to give away their right to bargain collectively.

[marymoo86]

Thats great for your sister but her company HAD the money to give. Looks like right now Wisconsin does not which IS the problem to start with. The private sector is sucking it up so why shouldnt the state employees have to do the same? Wisconsin is broke and cuts have to be made in a lot of areas.

Additionally in the private sector, if the money isn't there. Neither are raises or bonuses. Those get cut and benefits get more expensive too. I seriously doubt that would fly by the unions.

Didn't Indiana do these years ago? Wonder why the furor over Wisconsin, the way it was done? - I don't recall this for Indiana.

[ha98ed14]

I am not wrong those are my experiences in MY industry as I do the budget planning I would know first hand not anecdotally. Perhaps to equate that with all industries is misguided as those that are not experiencing a downturn are probably in a position to do so. I would think any change in job with more education and more responsibility should garner increased pay. Just to get more money b/c of time served doesn't make sense to me.

Ok, well you said "private sector" and banks and insurance are definitely private sector. So you're not wrong; you're inaccurate.

[arivecchi]

I have been in large companies in the private sector my entire career and while actual "raises" are negligible, increases in compensation are usually effected through stock grants, stock options and bonuses.

In any case, that is irrelevant IMO.

State employees usually start at much lower salaries with the understanding that they get greater benefits and more stability than in the private sector.

While there are certainly abuses in that system, IMO they do not exceed the abuses one can point to in the private sector.

Regarding firefighters and policemen being exempt, you cannot cherry-pick which unions you want to gut. Are the WI health system employees and teachers any less valuable than policemen and firefighters? Apparently so.

[brittone2]

And again, the teachers agreed to those cuts. But I don't see why this means they have to give away their right to bargain collectively.

Yep, this is what I come back to time and time again.

[ECMom]

Some teacher get "step raises" for years of service or education advancement. I have no issues with the education ( completing a masters etc). Merit based raises would be nice for teachers who are good at their job and are not just taking up space doing the motions.


Concur.......Public and private sector raises should be based on performance, not because you belong to a particular group.

[marymoo86]

Ok, well you said "private sector" and banks and insurance are definitely private sector. So you're not wrong; you're inaccurate.

Wow, just wow.

Perhaps inaccurate in terms of your sisters situation but given the state of the economy the past few years, I feel comfortable that is the case for the majority which was the idea behind my statement. Of course there is always exceptions.

[marymoo86]

I have been in large companies in the private sector my entire career and while actual "raises" are negligible, increases in compensation are usually effected through stock grants, stock options and bonuses.

In any case, that is irrelevant IMO.

State employees usually start at much lower salaries with the understanding that they get greater benefits and more stability than in the private sector.

While there are certainly abuses in that system, IMO they do not exceed the abuses one can point to in the private sector.

Regarding firefighters and policemen being exempt, you cannot cherry-pick which unions you want to gut. Are the WI health system employees and teachers any less valuable than policemen and firefighters? Apparently so.


I generally agree with you here. The only thing I would argue is that the unions are generally able to elect their bosses who are more friendly to negotiations especially in terms of pensions/benefits that don't have to be paid immediately - leaving future politicians and taxpayers to foot the bill. To me that is the major issue. There
is a lot of money spent to get favorable politicians elected at the state level. Of course it happens with corporations too - donating to both parties (and its not right) .

ETA - re: firefighters/police. Aside from the possible donation angle, the only other reason I would see to exclude this group is due to the whole put your life on the line aspect of the job. Although, safety is not a given for teachers these days either unfortunately.

[ECMom]

I'm sorry, but I don't buy that. My sister works for a bank and before that an insurance company. She's gotten merit raises in both jobs simply for being there for a few years AND doing her job well. No increase in responsibilities. I'm sorry, You're wrong. I have friends with the same experiences.

As for the promotion/ increase in responsibilities: Does the teacher have to take on a bigger class size to get a raise? Maybe they should get a raise if they go from teaching 1st grade to 5th grade...

ETA: I'm walking away. I can hear myself. I'm getting way too emotional about it. I'm sorry you can only see it your way, and I'm sorry that I can only see it mine.


Hmm......I seriously hope the banking/mortgage industry isn't giving out anything more than COL adjustments considering the economic downfall they have caused and the amount of bailout $ they have received.

[ha98ed14]

Wow, just wow.

Perhaps inaccurate in terms of your sisters situation but given the state of the economy the past few years, I feel comfortable that is the case for the majority which was the idea behind my statement. Of course there is always exceptions.

I came back to edit and delete the last sentence, but you already quoted me. But anyway, you stand by your position and I'll stand by mine and we'll part ways on that. I hope the economy and political climate gets better for all of us very, very soon.

[JBaxter]

Wow, just wow.

Perhaps inaccurate in terms of your sisters situation but given the state of the economy the past few years, I feel comfortable that is the case for the majority which was the idea behind my statement. Of course there is always exceptions.

But it all goes back to IF they have money but when they dont you can get blood from a stone.

[ECMom]

Pretty much any one in the private sector's 'raise' is a cost of living adjustment. I haven't seen raises given outside of 3-4% in years unless the person is being promoted to a higher level job/more responsibility.

In the case of a teacher - unless promotion is a possibility, why would there be more of a raise than the COL year after year?


Even before the economic downturn, I saw only 3-4.5% with COL & merit increase as an engineer & engineering manager in manufacturing. If the profit wasn't there, the raise wasn't either. Of course, that didn't stop the cost of benefits from rising. The only exception was a promotion, which generally meant 6-8%

[ha98ed14]

Hmm......I seriously hope the banking/mortgage industry isn't giving out anything more than COL adjustments considering the economic downfall they have caused and the amount of bailout $ they have received.

Well in my sister's case, she dis disaster modeling for insurance companies to figure out their exposure and liablity. For the bank, she does location analysis. She's a data geek, but a good one. No bonuses, just performance raises over the past 10 years. In the last year, she did take a 5% paycut from the bank she works for, so no one at her bank is handing out raises in this economy.

In my PP I was objecting to Moo's notion that it was an acceptable status quo for the taxpayers to have to vote on whether teachers should get more than a COL raise. That isn't something that is "just for now while the economy is bad". That's a law and it will stay that way in WI unless there is legislation to change it. It's born of the fact that people in private sector think teachers are living high on the hog on these fat salaries and amazing benefits. It's just not true. No one seems to take issues with the police officers who, rather than hiring part time officers so that everyone works 40 hours, they give themselves tons of overtime and the pay and half that goes with it. Some of them were making double their annual salaries just in overtime. This was going on in our town and city council is still fighting to stop them doing it. I love our officers, but this is an abuse of the system IMO. But no one is willing to talk about that. The WI legislation left the police and firemen's unions alone. I think 9/11 is still too fresh; no politician will touch our "first responders", but as someone said in this thread, there is a new campaign to make teachers out to be the new welfare queens.

[maestramommy]

Some teacher get "step raises" for years of service or education advancement. I have no issues with the education ( completing a masters etc). Merit based raises would be nice for teachers who are good at their job and are not just taking up space doing the motions.

That would be nice. Unfortunately in our state teachers do not get step raises. Not only that, even when the union reaches an agreement with the school board and a contract is finalized, it still has to be approved by the voters. Last year our teachers' contracts were voted down by the townspeople. Since then a mediator has had to be called in because negotiations have broken down. One citizen managed to get a petitioned warrant article giving the teachers a COLA raise on our election ballot. For weeks parents have been working to get people to the polls. Two days ago it was voted down by a margin of 13 votes. 13 votes out of 4000. So for the second year in a row, our teachers are not getting raises, when they are already paid less and getting better results than competing districts. I noticed when we moved here that teachers in NH seem to get paid less than in other states. The whole thing makes me ill. In addition our state legislature is projecting a $2 million shortfall for our district, which I have no idea how the school board plans to deal with it. If anything like what is happening in WI starts happening here I don't know what we will do.

I know your points about "what about people in the private sector?" They have been echoed around town for weeks. Dh's company did have furlough, and paycuts, then finally layoffs. But the reality is public school teachers make so much less than corporate workers (at least around here) with the same level of education and experience, not to mention they don't get merit pay or bonuses when things are going well, that the argument borders on absurd. Our teachers do get good benefits, but that too appears to be about to change. Who the heck is going to want to teach any more when not only does it not pay enough to get by (many young teachers have had to take a second job), but you get vilified as extortionists when trying to get absolutely no more than what is due, actually much less?

ETA: I don't mean you are absurd for talking about the private sector. I just think the comparison is not a good one because we are talking about two very different things. Although I realize that teachers unions are individual to the state, and not all are equal, or equally good.

[JBaxter]

That would be nice. Unfortunately in our state teachers do not get step raises. Not only that, even when the union reaches an agreement with the school board and a contract is finalized, it still has to be approved by the voters. Last year our teachers' contracts were voted down by the townspeople. Since then a mediator has had to be called in because negotiations have broken down. One citizen managed to get a petitioned warrant article giving the teachers a COLA raise on our election ballot. For weeks parents have been working to get people to the polls. Two days ago it was voted down by a margin of 13 votes. 13 votes out of 4000. So for the second year in a row, our teachers are not getting raises, when they are already paid less and getting better results than competing districts. I noticed when we moved here that teachers in NH seem to get paid less than in other states. The whole thing makes me ill. In addition our state legislature is projecting a $2 million shortfall for our district, which I have no idea how the school board plans to deal with it. If anything like what is happening in WI starts happening here I don't know what we will do.

I know your points about "what about people in the private sector?" They have been echoed around town for weeks. Dh's company did have furlough, and paycuts, then finally layoffs. But the reality is public school teachers make so much less than corporate workers (at least around here) with the same level of education and experience, not to mention they don't get merit pay or bonuses when things are going well, that the argument borders on absurd. Our teachers do get good benefits, but that too appears to be about to change. Who the heck is going to want to teach any more when not only does it not pay enough to get by (many young teachers have had to take a second job), but you get vilified as extortionists when trying to get absolutely no more than what is due, actually much less?

I dont think they should get vilified by any means but with a 2 million short fall where is the even COL raise coming from? It really sucks all round.

[maestramommy]

I dont think they should get vilified by any means but with a 2 million short fall where is the even COL raise coming from? It really sucks all round.

Well, it obviously isn't. However, the contracts of all the support staff (custodians, parapro, clerks, cafeteria staff, etc) were all approved in this same election. Which means THEY will get their COL raises. It was only the teachers that got voted down. Each ballot item was present with it's tax consequence ( how many cents it would raise the rate), and Dh pointed out that even all those raises and maintenance projects (which also got approved) present a much smaller tax increase than teachers' salaries alone. I don't know if these items have to be added to the operating budget (which was also approved) before we get our final tax rate, but none of it takes the projected shortfall into account, something the school board has warned the townspeople about. $2 million is the worst case scenario, so it might not come to that. But Concord was already planning on decreasing their contribution eventually to $0 so that all the burden will fall on individual towns. The fiscal conservative group in this town has been fighting tooth and nail against any kind of tax increase, but I think they just don't get it. They think money is being wasted, but they persist in voting for reps and senators who make such decisions, simply because they have an R after their name.

[JBaxter]

Well, it obviously isn't. However, the contracts of all the support staff (custodians, parapro, clerks, cafeteria staff, etc) were all approved in this same election. Which means THEY will get their COL raises. It was only the teachers that got voted down. Each ballot item was present with it's tax consequence ( how many cents it would raise the rate), and Dh pointed out that even all those raises and maintenance projects (which also got approved) present a much smaller tax increase than teachers' salaries alone. I don't know if these items have to be added to the operating budget (which was also approved) before we get our final tax rate, but none of it takes the projected shortfall into account, something the school board has warned the townspeople about. $2 million is the worst case scenario, so it might not come to that. But Concord was already planning on decreasing their contribution eventually to $0 so that all the burden will fall on individual towns. The fiscal conservative group in this town has been fighting tooth and nail against any kind of tax increase, but I think they just don't get it. They think money is being wasted, but they persist in voting for reps and senators who make such decisions, simply because they have an R after their name.

Ok THAT situation isnt right. If the "non teaching" got col then everyone should. But all that was put on a ballot? Glad its not that way around here eeek

[wellyes]

Recent NY Times article about a wealthy suburb fighting $100-$200 tax increases to fund very popular improvements to public schools. Wealthy as in average property tax is $43,000/year. It is crazy irrational thinking:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/business/09bronxville.html?scp=1&sq=tax%20raise%20teachers&st=cse

[bubbaray]

I would think that the bill likely exempts police and fire because they vote Republican. I can't say that with certainty because my knowledge of US voter behavior is years out of date since I studied it in school. That is my recollection, though -- first responders tend to vote along conservative (law & order) lines compared to other union members.

[elbenn]

I think there needs to be budget cuts, but I don't know whether taking away collective bargaining for wages is right. I do know that federal employees don't have collective bargaining rights as to wages. I saw a panel of experts on Meet the Press, and they discussed how federal employees don't have the right to collectively bargain for wages. It was a very interesting panel--it might shed light on some of these issues if you can find it online.

On that same Meet the Press, Gov. Walker was interviewed and he said that even though the union said it would accept the cuts, each individual precinct would have to agree (I think there were thousands) and the local budgets that were being turned in did not reflect the cuts, so he felt like just because the union was saying that, it wouldn't actually happen.

[maestramommy]

Ok THAT situation isnt right. If the "non teaching" got col then everyone should. But all that was put on a ballot? Glad its not that way around here eeek

Oh yes, every damn thing that results in a tax increase has to be voted on. All part of the "people power" way of doing things in NH! Sometimes it's good, but in the last couple of years we're seeing how it's not.

We already don't have state sales or income tax. So property tax is the major way of raising revenue. Sooooo, in more affluent towns there are people that are very much attached to their money and can't see past their own personal benefit. It's not only retired folks on a fixed income that vote these things down. Many of them in fact, support tax increases for ed. But there are quite a number of much wealthier folks WITH kids that either want the top quality ed without paying for it, or send their kids to fancy private schools, so they don't want to pay twice. There are also parents of kids in the system who just don't care, because their own kids are doing just fine, and their world is just fine, etc.

NH may be a very small state but in many ways it (imo) is a reflection of the larger United States. The only difference is what the word "conservative" means here, vs. in other parts of the country. :p

[kijip]

I would think that the bill likely exempts police and fire because they vote Republican. I can't say that with certainty because my knowledge of US voter behavior is years out of date since I studied it in school. That is my recollection, though -- first responders tend to vote along conservative (law & order) lines compared to other union members.

Judging from all the police and fire union members and banners at the protests over this in Wisconsin, I don't know that Walker and the Wisconsin GOP can count on their returned support. Union members generally get that they rise and fall together.

[bubbaray]

Judging from all the police and fire union members and banners at the protests over this in Wisconsin, I don't know that Walker and the Wisconsin GOP can count on their returned support. Union members generally get that they rise and fall together.


I get that -- I do think that Walker has miscalculated the response that this will have. Will be interesting to see.

The flip side of all of this is that perhaps what is happening in Wisconsin will engage the voters (and not in the way that Walker predicted).

[Moneypenny]

Judging from all the police and fire union members and banners at the protests over this in Wisconsin, I don't know that Walker and the Wisconsin GOP can count on their returned support. Union members generally get that they rise and fall together.

I'm not sure who exactly Walker and the GOP is counting on to support them in the future. There isn't a single poll that indicated a majority of Wisconsinites support removing collective bargaining rights. His 2011-13 budget proposal includes a nearly $1 billion dollar cut to K-12 public education and a large cut to the UW System. So, he's pissed off teachers and public workers, anyone who sends their kid to public school, and anyone who wants their kid to get an affordable college education in this state. Even hard core Republicans are not pleased with him. I live in the most Republican county in the state and the support for him has diminished greatly in the last couple of weeks.

[septmama2b]

I get that -- I do think that Walker has miscalculated the response that this will have. Will be interesting to see.

The flip side of all of this is that perhaps what is happening in Wisconsin will engage the voters (and not in the way that Walker predicted).

We can only hope so. It would be nice liberals to show that they have a spine, and stand up to these kinds of actions. I don't have my hopes up though.

[JBaxter]

Anyone following the Wisconsin debate. In the bill they are ready to vote on they inserted language that IF there is a state wide strike ( which I think they are expecting) the Governor can declare state of emergency and anyone not showing up to work for 3 days in "the state of emergency" will be fired. Wow. The news program also stated it is illegal for may of the workers to strike.

[arivecchi]

I don't think Walker has the ability to see the forest from the trees here.... but I think if this type of erosion of teachers' rights continues, the education system will end up like the one in the country where I grew up. In my country of origin, you do anything in your power to avoid the public school system because it is pretty much worthless. The haves (including most of the middle class) go to private school and the have nots go to public school.

[Moneypenny]

Anyone following the Wisconsin debate. In the bill they are ready to vote on they inserted language that IF there is a state wide strike ( which I think they are expecting) the Governor can declare state of emergency and anyone not showing up to work for 3 days in "the state of emergency" will be fired. Wow. The news program also stated it is illegal for may of the workers to strike.

Yes, I believe that was in the original version of the bill as well. I can say that I have heard no plans whatsoever of striking other than some TAs at some universities considering it (whether they will do it or not remains to be seen, obviously).

[septmama2b]

I don't think Walker has the ability to see the forest from the trees here.... but I think if this type of erosion of teachers' rights continues, the education system will end up like the one in the country where I grew up. In my country of origin, you do anything in your power to avoid the public school system because it is pretty much worthless. The haves (including most of the middle class) go to private school and the have nots go to public school.


It is already like that in the urban areas of most major cities. We moved downtown last year, and though there is an elementary school across the street, none of the kids in my neighborhood go there, they all attend private schools.

[mommylamb]

I don't think Walker has the ability to see the forest from the trees here.... but I think if this type of erosion of teachers' rights continues, the education system will end up like the one in the country where I grew up. In my country of origin, you do anything in your power to avoid the public school system because it is pretty much worthless. The haves (including most of the middle class) go to private school and the have nots go to public school.

Not that I was planning on switching professions, but in this atmosphere of vilify the teachers, there is no way in hell I would ever want to be a teacher. I don't see why anyone would. As a parent, this makes me very afraid. We bitch and bitch about the education system in this country and then turn around and make teachers into the enemy.

[arivecchi]

I definitely think the Republicans overplayed their hand. Now, the recall talk will only intensify....

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/us/11wisconsin.html?hp

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/117735163.html

[JoyNChrist]

Not that I was planning on switching professions, but in this atmosphere of vilify the teachers, there is no way in hell I would ever want to be a teacher. I don't see why anyone would. As a parent, this makes me very afraid. We bitch and bitch about the education system in this country and then turn around and make teachers into the enemy.

:yeahthat:

My degree is in Spanish education. I'm thanking my lucky stars I have a successful small business.

[elbenn]

So if most federal workers don't have collective bargaining for wages, I really am curious if there is a reason why it is more important to have collective bargaining for wages on a state level versus on a federal level. Can anyone explain this?

[dogmom]

I'm just biding my times as an RN, I'm sure we'll be next on the chopping block as people in public sector/non profits that make too much money. Those bunch of lazy living high on a hog health care workers.

My Father is a retired postal worker. I remember in the 80's, Reagan wanted to bust the union. The union wasn't going to allow a contract without COL increases. (We had just come out of the inflationary 70's, it was sort of important.) My Dad had drawn strike duty times, it was going to midnight, the whole family figure we would be on strike the next day, and then the government caved, gave the union everything it wanted. (They would have settled for less.) My Dad was, WTF? Then two months later they busted PATCO (air traffic controllers). The thought in the NALC union was that some business people did the math about how much a postal strike would cost businesses. (Before email, fax mostly)

I remember watching the news about it and they quoted how much the "typical" postal worker made per hour. I looked at my dad with the number with the expression my face like, "Then why do you work a second job so we can go on vacation in the summer." And my Dad was, "That's NOT what I get paid, they figure in a lot of benefits and I'm not even sure how they got that number." All I know is my Dad worked a very long time and retired from the Post Office about ten years ago. He never made over 45K a year, and that was with working a lot of overtime. He has had 5 surgeries directly linked to his job. (Bone spurs from both feet, carpal tunnel both hands from casing mail, and just got a knee replacement at 69.) I've never known a harder working guy than my Father, I have trouble thinking he is the cause of our problems.

[bubbaray]

I actually feel loathsome towards conservatives.


Saying this gently, but I think this is a dangerous road to start down.

The complete polarization of the political spectrum in the US is a big part of the problem, folks. At some point, someone (the voiceless majority???) needs to step up and say that partisan politics is NOT HELPING the situation. Education is not improving, healthcare (esp. for the un or under insured) is not improving, the war on drugs is not improving, international relations are not improving and the economy sure isn't improving.

[citymama]

So true, dogmom. The madness of the Walker/R plan is they're going after te individuals and professions that are the heart, soul and lifeblood of our society - teachers, nurses, public sector workers. For too long, the Rs have hoodwinked the working class into voting against their economic interest by playing up religious issues and emphasizing nonexistent values divides to further their economic agenda (that benefits their wealthy donors). I think the WI debacle might galvanize the working class and middle class to fight back to defend their economic interests.

[Laurel]

I don't think Walker has the ability to see the forest from the trees here.... but I think if this type of erosion of teachers' rights continues, the education system will end up like the one in the country where I grew up. In my country of origin, you do anything in your power to avoid the public school system because it is pretty much worthless. The haves (including most of the middle class) go to private school and the have nots go to public school.

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure destroying decent public education is part of the plan here.

[bubbaray]

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure destroying decent public education is part of the plan here.


But, why? That is what I don't understand. Everything I have read is that first world countries need an educated workforce for the future, not a barely literate one. How does destroying education serve anyone's interest? Surely not everyone who contributed to Walker's campaign owns a private school.

[wellyes]

But, why? That is what I don't understand. Everything I have read is that first world countries need an educated workforce for the future, not a barely literate one. How does destroying education serve anyone's interest? Surely not everyone who contributed to Walker's campaign owns a private school.

Privatization and smaller government will always reduce better results than bloated socialist bureaucracy, is the theory.

[mousemom]

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure destroying decent public education is part of the plan here.

"decent public education" seems to be quite an oxymoron - Just yesterday a story broke that said:

"The Obama administration estimates that 82% of the nation's public schools could fall short of federal standards this year, grades that are not only embarrassing but also mean government intervention for some of them."

I would not consider 8 out of every 10 schools failing to be a decent education system...it should be viewed as a national disgrace!

[Laurel]

Privatization and smaller government will always reduce better results than bloated socialist bureaucracy, is the theory.

Yep. Plus I think some in power are hoping for the death of critical thought (not that our public system is getting amazing results with that currently). No critical thought=obedient work force.

[maestramommy]

Yep. Plus I think some in power are hoping for the death of critical thought (not that our public system is getting amazing results with that currently). No critical thought=obedient work force.

this strikes me has highly ironic, given that it's usually R's and Tea partiers that constantly sound the alarm about an impending Communist state.

[JBaxter]

this strikes me has highly ironic, given that it's usually R's and Tea partiers that constantly sound the alarm about an impending Communist state.

Impending socialist state ;)

[maestramommy]

Impending socialist state ;)

That too. But I HAVE heard numerous times about how we are being run by Marxists, and that this country is going to turn into a Communist state. As someone who grew up hearing endless stories about China (and I STILL hear them) I think Laurel's statement says quite a bit.

[Karinyc]

Communist, Socialist, Marxist, New World Order...it's all the same. Labels that fall under fear-mongering & polarizing people. There are enough groups to blame & enough blame to go around. I really feel the "pundits" so-called "journalists", political commentators and bloggers who speculate and make their $ spewing this garbage should be held accountable. If the people they supposedly support come into power then their flow of income & ratings would greatly diminish, imo. That's why I don't feel it's the present administration (or the previous one for that matter) and its policies that has polarized people but the aforementioned groups/individuals. Just walk into a bookstore anyday of the week. Tons of $ in speculation & promoting senseless rhetoric. And lack of critical thinking on behalf of the public (or at least the most vocal).

[arivecchi]

Deleted post :)

[boolady]

Never mind. I'm not getting sucked into this one again.

[vludmilla]

Recent NY Times article about a wealthy suburb fighting $100-$200 tax increases to fund very popular improvements to public schools. Wealthy as in average property tax is $43,000/year. It is crazy irrational thinking:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/business/09bronxville.html?scp=1&sq=tax%20raise%20teachers&st=cse

I know this area quite well. I live three blocks away from the edge of the town/school district. One of the disturbing things that I read was quotes from some of the extremely wealthy residents about the unsustainability of the teacher's benefits and wage plans. I'll admit that the teachers in Bronxville are extraordinarily well compensated but Bronxville residents like to be considered extraordinary people in an extraordinary town. In a place where most of the residents earn well in excess of 500k per year and many earn 7 figure incomes you would think that they wouldn't begrudge their teachers a tiny fraction of the level of compensation that they enjoy.

[ha98ed14]

I know this area quite well. I live three blocks away from the edge of the town/school district. One of the disturbing things that I read was quotes from some of the extremely wealthy residents about the unsustainability of the teacher's benefits and wage plans. I'll admit that the teachers in Bronxville are extraordinarily well compensated but Bronxville residents like to be considered extraordinary people in an extraordinary town. In a place where most of the residents earn well in excess of 500k per year and many earn 7 figure incomes you would think that they wouldn't begrudge their teachers a tiny fraction of the level of compensation that they enjoy.

:yeahthat:

[larig]

Never mind. I'm not getting sucked into this one again.

Yeah, I posted my one response. I, an uber-lefty liberal, let Ronald Reagan speak for me.

BTW, boolady, love the new avatar. What a cutie.

[gatorsmom]

:yeahthat:

It absolutely baffles me.

It doesn't baffle me at all. The simple fact is that many people don't understand what is happening. Most of my mothers' sisters and brothers and their families are working-class poor and they don't understand the situation at all. Trying to discuss the situation is like beating your head against the wall. They believe what they hear on TV and pretty much from any source that "seems" credible. It's frustrating.

Kijip is absolutely right when she says that situations are going to get dire. People are going to suffer. People will die. People will revert to crime. And the political tides will change anew.

[wellyes]

"decent public education" seems to be quite an oxymoron - Just yesterday a story broke that said:

"The Obama administration estimates that 82% of the nation's public schools could fall short of federal standards this year, grades that are not only embarrassing but also mean government intervention for some of them."

I would not consider 8 out of every 10 schools failing to be a decent education system...it should be viewed as a national disgrace!

I respectfully submit that the No Child Left Behind federal standards are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[JBaxter]

I respectfully submit that the No Child Left Behind federal standards are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I whole heartily agree with you.

[icunurse]

I respectfully submit that the No Child Left Behind federal standards are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

That law is what is causing 82% of schools to be considered "failing". Not that they are doing poorly, just that the guidelines are so muddled and stringent, it makes it difficult for *any* school to do well.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-schools-20110310,0,769263.story

[jenfromnj]

Never mind. I'm not getting sucked into this one again.

I'll second (or third, now that I see larig's post) this--I keep wanting to post, then reconsidering, since I'm once again violating my "don't get ruffled by discussions on the internet" rule.

I do appreciate the civility of discussions on this board on potentially inflammatory topics, even though the content of some of the posts contained therein make me want to use caps lock excessively :).

[niccig]

I will admit I didn't understand the role of unions - I knew the history but never needed the union I was a part of when working.

Then DH's company got bought by a multinational and things were fine for a while, but then every couple of months they do something else to cut salary/benefits/extend what is the working week until overtime is paid, latest is to set the week in such a way that they could in theory work 7 days as long as 2 of them were not over a certain number of hours. Everything has been checked and it's legal but barely. In total we've had 20% in cuts. And if times were tough, we would understand. But they are not for his company. And it gets presented as a "accept it or go try to find work somewhere else. ".

A union would help with dealing with all of this. The companies that are union have not had any of this at all. A friends works at one and hasn't dealt with anything like DH has.

Well, the employees will get the last laugh. Other companies have started to hire again, and the people that actually do the work the company gets its profit from are starting to leave. Word gets around fast when your top employees that people come to you for, have left and the work goes with them. At least they can do that - little harder for teachers, they could look at nearby school district, but it's not the same as being able to go work for several private companies.