Comment

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on February 23, 2011 at 2:41pm

Morgan, you are ever so right, so many of the folks that sit down to negotiate with public unions are figuring they will only be there 8 years or whatever, and they kick the can down the street to the next guy at the expense of the taxpayers who have to foot the bill.  They are supposed to be OUR representatives, but they fail the people they work for when it comes to negotiating with the public sector unions, and they have failed big time cause now all the chickens have come home to roost and the set of legislators in office right now or shortly are the ones at the end of the long street they kicked the can down.  I know the unions think it can go on forever and they just plain don't care period.  They are also no longer the "working man" as they wish to call themselves.  Those who pick up almost all of their benefits and their pay, and earn less than them, are the real working man.  It is sad, and even sadder the democrats refuse to allow this to be decided by a democratic method but instead of decided if they can't get their way, then, they aren't going to play at all.  They would rather go into hiding to protect all those nice donations they get.

Comment by Rick on February 23, 2011 at 2:38pm

The problem with these public sector unions is two fold.

First, the original reason for giving such great benefits packages (that is, them not contributing to the pension) was that the public sector was paid much less than the private sector (since the pension is based on pay, the benefits were not outrageous large--though they did get to retire after 20 years with max benefits). This is no longer true. As the pay for these positions has risen to the level (or exceeded the level) of the private sector, there is no longer any justification for not having them contribute to their own retirement and healthcare--just like the rest of us do.

Second, the unions should not have collective bargaining because I do not have choice about paying them.  My taxes are collected at gun point, and so I have no choice whether or not I contribute to their pay.  With a private corporation, if they go union and drive the price of their product through the roof, I can decide not to buy their product--driving them out of business and correcting the problem of paying people much, much more than the market demands. With the public sector, I do not have this choice.  If I am stripped of my choice, they should be stripped of their power.

Fair, is fair.

Comment by Morgan Orlins on February 21, 2011 at 6:12am

As a matter of principle, I PROFOUNDLY dislike unions! I do understand the limited good they do for police and firefighters when it comes to legal representation. Everybody seems to want to sue these poor guys, we're a lawsuit happy society, unfortunately. Maybe there should be a mechanism for protecting these brave public servants without the damned unions?

 

There's a profound moral difference between private sector, and government employee unions. When a company sits down across the table from the union representives, they have a VESTED financial interest in holding down costs and limiting what they concede to the goonions. If they concede too much, they risk going under. Private sector unions are legitimate.

 

The same CANNOT be said of the taxpayers! They are NEVER properly represented at the negotiating table! Taxpayer dollars are ultimately collected at the point of a gun. Do you think I'm kidding? Try not paying your taxes for a few years, tell them why, and then watch what happens. Due to the coercive nature of tax dollar collection, government workers should NEVER BE ALLOWED TO UNIONIZE AGAINST THE TAXPAYER!! It's an abusive relationship to start with, and it's made even worse by the fact that government workers organize against the people who are paying them. This SUCKS! Government unions need to be disbanded, this crap is out of control!

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on February 20, 2011 at 1:48pm

Tamara,

What Armando is saying is what I had also heard.  These folks are not losing their collective bargaining rights for wages at all.  They are losing collective bargaining rights for benefits for everything else except the the exceptions Armando mentioned.  The small changes that are in the bill will not bring the public employees even close to what the private sector pays gladly towards their own retirement savings accounts and health care benefits.  The state should also not have to pay employees with taxpayer money to handle union dues nor should this be taken out of people's checks by the state; this should be handled by the union at the expense of the union.   Although I would agree, at one time, unions did a great deal to improve life for blue collar workers, the have morphed way beyond anything that is reasonable and now their demands are so outrageous and over the top, almost every state in the country is facing and short fall and many are faced with fixing the problems (the governors, mayors and other head officials) elected officials kicked down the court to the next person while promising wages and benefits to the union employees that they knew full well were not sustainable.  That time has now come.  This group of governors and new mayors MUST deal with the problem and the unions aren't going to be happy when they have to lose or downgrade on some very unrealistic demands they have made on the taxpayers over quite a number of years.  I do not feel one bit sorry for the teachers of Wisconsin (they pay in $1.00 for every $57.00 the state pays into their retirement accounts....we should all have such a deal).  I further think every single one of the group that called in and lied about being sick (so they could be paid) should be allowed to get their personal belonging out of the classrooms the were in (preferably when the rooms are devoid of children), and they should be terminated. 

 

Between lying about being sick and many of

Comment by Armando Delgado on February 20, 2011 at 1:30pm

The law in Wisconsin will eliminate collective bargaining for public employees other than firefighters, police, and troopers. The reason for this is to allow separate counties to bargain with other state employee groups individually. This gives counties more flexibility in setting benefits. Wages will still be bargained collectively by the state. It is complex, and painful for the unions, but necessary to save the economy of the state.

Comment by tamara stephenson on February 20, 2011 at 10:50am

I am not anti-union.  Over the years, they have done great things for the workers of this country.  The public sector workers have agreed to all cuts proposed by the state of Wisconsin (pay cut and pension contributions).  they want to keep collective bargaining rights.  the governor has said no.  that makes no sense to me.  Can someone explain?  if there is an agreement to the monetary aspect of the debate, what is the problem in keeping collective bargaining rights?

Comment by Armando Delgado on February 19, 2011 at 11:18am

During the 2010 election the AFSCME union alone spent $87.5 million on Democratic candidates (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20020498-503544.html). Now, they cry bloody murder because they are asked to make a little sacrifice. Is that greed, or what?

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on February 18, 2011 at 1:31pm

There are a number of things wrong with what is going on right now in relation to the union and Wisconsin and the first of them is that this is a state matter and nothing our federal government has a voice in.  Mr. Obama should have kept his large mouth shut and not tried to tip favor to the union protesters (I suspect this would all be over by now if he had the good sense to mind his own business).

The second thing is the senators from that state leaving the state and going to hide out in another state because our democratic system wasn't working in their favor on this issue.  These are the folks that reminded us time and time again "they won" in 2008 and every time they rammed something down our throats that we did not want.  Funny when they lose, they don't seem to think quite so highly of the democratic system or the outcome of the people's voice.

Although the governor is more than willing to put up with protesters protesting, those who have called in sick (lied), dragged the children from their classes into an unsafe situation and embroiled these children into their "situation" should be fired period.  Those who continued to work and didn't involve innocent people in their fight with the state should be allowed to keep the  job (and from what Governor Walker says that would include MOST of the 300,000 public workers in the state of Wisconsin).  So, most of the people protesting have no skin in the game except (hallelujah) to lose their union bargaining rights, have this spread like wild fire to other states, and perhaps have future bargaining actually be fair not only to them but to the people who have to pay their wages and benefits.  Wisconsin wishes to become a right to work state.........nothing wrong with that!

Hang in there Governor Walker..............we are all counting on you.

Comment by Geneo on February 18, 2011 at 11:52am

It comes down to one issue USA is broke Contacts made during Democrat Controlled State Governments the money is gone. We have been taxed to the limit. A cycle begins when costs exceed revenue and taxes are raised. This cycle cannot be maintained.