Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Wisconsin state politics LOL!

Wisconsin state politics LOL! (Page 3)
Thread Tools
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 05:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
What you say doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
The salaries posted are AVERAGER, not the "upper echelon".

-t
What you don't seem to be considering is that the "average" is skewed toward teachers with a lot more years of experience and education level. It's not as if throngs of young people are falling all over themselves to enter the teaching profession given the high educational requirements and relatively low starting salary.

See here for raw data from the Wisconsin Dept. of Public Instruction ....

Statistical Information Center - School Staff and Salary Data.

If you go here you can get 2010 Teacher Compensation info.

Some key stats:

Average Salary: $49,093
Average Fringe Benefits: $25,750
Average Total Experience: 15.59 years

Now bear in mind you have to have a Bachelor's Degree to even walk in the door. As olePigeon has indicated many have a Master's Degree or more. How many you ask?

In order to be a teacher in Wisconsin, you've got to have a 4-year college degree. And 52 percent of Wisconsin teachers also have a master's degree. That's much, much higher than the average education level for workers in the private sector. People with higher degrees in education typically get paid more.

We found two studies that factored in such things as education level, years of experience, race, gender, etc. and found that public employees tend to make a little less than people with similar backgrounds in the private sector.

A report titled "Out of Balance" by two University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee professors for the National Institute of Retirement Security, whose board is largely composed of representatives of public employee pensions, found that when "comparable earning determinants," such as education, are considered, state employees typically earn salaries 11 percent lower than their private sector counterparts. When you consider total compensation -- salary plus benefits -- the deficit dropped to 6.8 percent (because public employees generally get better benefits packages than those in the private sector).

One of the study authors, Keith A. Bender, an associate professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, said that message has largely been lost in the Wisconsin debate.

As for Bollings' comparison, Bender said, "I guess you can do that if you don't want to compare like with like. But you are comparing less educated people with more educated people."

Another report, by the liberal Economic Policy Institute, found that Wisconsin public employees earn 4.8 percent less in total compensation than comparable private-sector workers.

The study's author, Jeff Keefe, issued a policy memo on Feb. 15, 2011, titled "Wisconsin public versus private employee costs: Why compare apples to oranges?"

"Inaccurate comparisons of national and Wisconsin public employee compensation with private sector compensation are circulating in Wisconsin," Keefe wrote. "These faulty comparisons, showing that public employees in Wisconsin are dramatically overpaid, seem to support legislative efforts to increase benefit contributions by public employees."

"But when we compare apples to apples, we find that Wisconsin public employees earn 4.8% less in total compensation than comparable private sector workers," Keefe wrote. "The comparisons—controlling for education, experience, hours of work, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship, and disability—demonstrate that full-time state and local public employees earn lower wages and receive less in total compensation (including all benefits) than comparable private sector employees.

"Why does it appear otherwise? Both nationally and within Wisconsin, public sector workers are significantly more educated than their private sector counterparts."
Fox Business News' Eric Bolling says Wisconsin teachers get compensated nearly double those in private sector - Politifact.com Truth-o-meter

So people really need to stop cherry picking the data as was stated earlier. Just state the facts and if they support your position then it will be readily apparent. So now that this is on the table ...

Is anyone in here willing to say that someone with a Master's Degree and 15 years of experience is "overpaid" with a $49K/year salary?

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Feb 23, 2011 at 06:00 PM. )
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 06:16 PM
 
And for those who still are trying to front like this is about the public sector workers in Wisconsin paying more out-of-pocket for their healthcare and pension benefits ....

On a prank call that quickly spread across the Internet, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker was duped into discussing his strategy to cripple public employee unions, promising never to give in and joking that he would use a baseball bat in his office to go after political opponents.

Walker believed the caller was a conservative billionaire named David Koch, but it was actually a liberal blogger.

The two talked for at least 20 minutes a conversation in which the governor described several potential ways to pressure Democrats to return to the Statehouse and revealed that his supporters had considered secretly planting people in pro-union protest crowds to stir up trouble.

The call also revealed Walker's cozy relationship with two billionaire brothers who have poured millions of dollars into conservative political causes, including Walker's campaign last year.
The governor said he was ratcheting up the pressure on Senate Democrats to return to the Capitol a week after they fled to block the legislation. He said he supported a move to require them to come to the Capitol to pick up their paychecks rather than have them deposited directly.

He also floated an idea to lure Democratic senators back to the Capitol for negotiations and then have the Senate quickly pass the bill while they are in talks.

Walker said aides were reviewing whether the GOP could hold a vote if Democrats were not physically in the Senate chamber but elsewhere in the building.

Democrats seized on Walker's recorded comments as evidence that the governor plans to go beyond budget cuts to crushing unions.

"This isn't about balancing the budget. This is about a political war,"
Rep. Jon Richards of Milwaukee yelled Wednesday on the floor of the state Assembly.
At the end of the call, the prankster says: "I'll tell you what Scott, once you crush these bastards, I'll fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time."

"All right, that would be outstanding," Walker replies, adding that the standoff is "all about getting our freedoms back"

The caller: "Absolutely. And you know, we have a little bit of vested interest as well" and laughs.
In prank call, Wis. gov discussed tricking Dems - chicagotribune.com

This is about union busting. Plain and simple ... straight from the horse's mouth.

OAW
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 06:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
What you don't seem to be considering is that the "average" is skewed toward teachers with a lot more years of experience and education level. It's not as if throngs of young people are falling all over themselves to enter the teaching profession given the high educational requirements and relatively low starting salary.
Is anyone in here willing to say that someone with a Master's Degree and 15 years of experience is "overpaid" with a $49K/year salary?
Interesting, let's take a quick look at what those in private industry earn with their bachelor's degree:
  • BS in Business Management
    In July 2009, people who hold a bachelor's of science (BS) in business management averaged $39,551 during their first year of employment and $43,022 for the first one to four years.
  • BS in Business Administration
    In July 2009, the average entry-level salary for a worker with a BS in business administration was $39,350 and was $43,800 through the first four years of employment.
  • BBA
    A bachelor's of business administration (BBA) earned professionals an average of $38,949 during their first year of employment and $41,922 through year four.
  • BA in Business
    In July 2009, workers who earned a bachelor's of arts (BA) degree in business received an average salary of $39,595 for their first year of employment, then earned an average of $43,513 through the fourth year.
  • BA in International Business
    Employees who earned a BA in international business enjoyed the highest average salaries of all baccalaureate business majors in July 2009 with $40,348 for their first year of employment, $41,450 for years one through four.
Of course, we're not considering over 2 months a year off on break, numerous days throughout the school calendar year, and almost $26k in bennies. Also, you're making the same mistake you claim others are making. Your copy-paste clearly states; People with higher degrees in education typically get paid more. Why would you close by asking who would be up for $49k per year with Masters degree and 15 years experience when teachers with Masters degrees and 15 years of experience clearly get paid more than the average?
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 06:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
And for those who still are trying to front like this is about the public sector workers in Wisconsin paying more out-of-pocket for their healthcare and pension benefits ....







In prank call, Wis. gov discussed tricking Dems - chicagotribune.com

This is about union busting. Plain and simple ... straight from the horse's mouth.

OAW


There is absolutely NOTHING to this. Seriously. What nefarious thing was said by anyone other than the prankster? You're lapping up... nothing?
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 06:56 PM
 
Oh and... per the NEA, the Wisconsin teacher salary average for 2009-10 was $52,644.
www.teacherworld.com

People often believe that teachers don't make a lot of money. Those in the know, though, are aware that compensation in the education industry can be quite generous, especially when you factor in the great vacation schedule and the comprehensive benefits packages that usually go along with teaching. In Wisconsin, teaching salaries averaged $52,644 in 2009-10, according to the National Education Association, with most school districts offering benefits that range from health insurance to retirement plans.

How exactly is Walker "busting" the teacher's union again? By making them actually pay a portion of their retirement and healthcare like the rest of the friggin' sane world? I don't buy the victimization angle. Not one bit.
ebuddy
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 07:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
How exactly is Walker "busting" the teacher's union again? By making them actually pay a portion of their retirement and healthcare like the rest of the friggin' sane world? I don't buy the victimization angle. Not one bit.
The big thing that is interpreted as "union-busting" is taking away the rights of public employee unions (who don't support Republicans) to collectively bargain anything except their wage scale. And even that would be subject to a local referendum if it calls for increases above a certain amount. How useful is the union when they can't negotiate benefits?

Note that Walker is specifically exempting police and firefighters' unions that generally support Republicans. That's an important point, and I think it puts the lie to the notion that he only proposed this for budgetary reasons, not political reasons.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 08:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Is anyone in here willing to say that someone with a Master's Degree and 15 years of experience is "overpaid" with a $49K/year salary?

OAW
My brother would. He has been employed by the St Paul School District for 12 years and makes $69K BEFORE FULL benefits. He has a Masters in Mathematics, works 6 hours a day, for 187 days and is required by law to join not one, but TWO unions in the state.

I have never heard him complain once about what is coming or about WI. It's almost like he doesn't care. You know, some teachers really do care about the kids and not about their elitist lifestyle.

cause we're not quite "the fuzz"
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 08:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
The big thing that is interpreted as "union-busting" is taking away the rights of public employee unions (who don't support Republicans) to collectively bargain anything except their wage scale. And even that would be subject to a local referendum if it calls for increases above a certain amount. How useful is the union when they can't negotiate benefits?

Note that Walker is specifically exempting police and firefighters' unions that generally support Republicans. That's an important point, and I think it puts the lie to the notion that he only proposed this for budgetary reasons, not political reasons.
A. Most states regard police, fire, and teachers unions differently. There is nothing bizarre about this.
B. The WPPA (Wisconsin Professional Police Association) endorses Barrett for Governor
C. I'd ask how useful the union is when Wisconsin already has a wealth of laws protecting workers' rights. There is no sacred "union" or "collective bargaining" right. Why should membership in a union give one any more bargaining power at the table of government legislation and expenditure than you and I?
D. What's at the foundation of this and why unions are bussing people into Wisconsin to protest is the practice of automatic payroll deductions to fund the union. If the concern is one of workers' rights (which are already protected by Wisconsin law), why is the right to decline automatic payroll deductions not also sacred?
ebuddy
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 08:55 PM
 
I'll admit that I hadn't given much thought to public employee unions before this all started, so I don't know much about point A, and your Point B is well taken.

But, to me, points C and D merely reinforce that the unions may have gotten too big, and need to be busted. Which is a perfectly reasonable opinion to have, why not just say it that plainly? I think it's unreasonable to say that Walker does not want to bust the union, given his statements and public actions. However, it is reasonable to say "He wants to bust the union -- so what?", if you are so inclined.

(That's basically turtle's position, as far as I can tell, and in case you haven't noticed I don't have a counterargument for it....)
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 10:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
I'll admit that I hadn't given much thought to public employee unions before this all started, so I don't know much about point A, and your Point B is well taken.

But, to me, points C and D merely reinforce that the unions may have gotten too big, and need to be busted. Which is a perfectly reasonable opinion to have, why not just say it that plainly? I think it's unreasonable to say that Walker does not want to bust the union, given his statements and public actions. However, it is reasonable to say "He wants to bust the union -- so what?", if you are so inclined.

(That's basically turtle's position, as far as I can tell, and in case you haven't noticed I don't have a counterargument for it....)
By your logic, the unions have negotiated unsustainable wages, pensions, and benefits to "bust" Wisconsin. There must be no other explanation for it.

Do you really think it'd be politically shrewd to say you're hell-bent on "busting unions"? Even if he truly felt that way and a prankster calling him saying mean things about unions proves it, why should he admit it? Are you this demanding of union representatives to express all of their interests? I mean, I'm not really sure what you're askin' for here.
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 10:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
If the concern is one of workers' rights (which are already protected by Wisconsin law), why is the right to decline automatic payroll deductions not also sacred?
This one is huge for me. I used to work in a government union for about 6 years. Had no choice about paying the dues and never really saw any benefit during my time in the job. That said, I did get paid quite nicely for a job that allowed me to sit around for half the day chatting and surfing the net.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 11:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post

Is anyone in here willing to say that someone with a Master's Degree and 15 years of experience is "overpaid" with a $49K/year salary?

OAW
I am. If you look at the output of their system, it's obvious that their masters degrees are just about useless. Many of the college kids I see have no background in the things they should have gotten in public school. None. Furthermore, they've been conditioned to think that society is supposed to be their slave. You can imagine how disheartening when they realize otherwise. The world doesn't owe them a living, and life is full of hard work. They never learned that in school.

They've never learned how to think on their own, or research things to find out facts, or how to structure a logical argument. They learned that their self-esteem was important, and that adults were morons, and that the Earth was dying, and businesses were evil, and that government knows better. They learned that white people destroyed everything, but that Native Americans led a pure, communal existence and coexisted with nature. They learned that equality of opportunity isn't important, but that somehow we're supposed to mandate/legislate equality of outcomes (regardless of effort) and have it come true. They learned that math is just some abstract thing that professors do, and that creative writing consists of "OMG WTF?" They think that what they hear on pop stations or iTunes is actually music, and that art is some trash that is stacked correctly and put behind glass (and paid for by tax dollars). They've been taught that all moral systems have equal validity (including, I guess, national socialism and sharia law) and that judging people or others based on behavior is wrong. They've been told that there is no such thing as normal, and when they show up at a job interview with sleeve tats and multiple facial piercings they can't understand why The Man is trying to keep them down (or however they'd say it these days).

So looking at the OUTPUT of the system, I'll judge public school teachers, no problem. Many of them are just mailing it in. There is no other way to explain the LACK OF results they get year in and year out. Our country is just about as f*cked as it can get right now, and the failure of basic education is a big part of the root cause.

Strictly, it's not THE TEACHERS' fault - the public schools have become a meat grinder for propaganda and socialization that the politicians can use. Political correctness is just one symptom. The inflated sense of self-importance is another. The fact that such a large portion of education budgets around the country is spent on things that do not impact the classroom indicates how much fluff there really is.

What we're seeing now, nationally, is the chickens coming home to roost. That's all.
( Last edited by finboy; Feb 23, 2011 at 11:10 PM. )
He can be fixed -- you can't.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 11:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
I am. If you look at the output of their system, it's obvious that their masters degrees are just about useless. Many of the college kids I see have no background in the things they should have gotten in public school. None. Furthermore, they've been conditioned to think that society is supposed to be their slave. You can imagine how disheartening when they realize otherwise. The world doesn't owe them a living, and life is full of hard work. They never learned that in school.

This is because unless you are dealing with a very specific sort of degree such as teaching, med, or law school, University was never designed to crank out worker drones - that is what vocational school is for.

Personally, I would probably hire somebody with critical thinking skills acquired in a traditional University setting over somebody with vocational training. This isn't to say that you cannot acquire critical thinking skills in a vocational school, but it is a *huge* misnomer that people have that all University degrees = certain kind of job. It just doesn't work that way.

If what you have written is specific to teaching degrees, I apologize, but it sounds like you are generalizing all University/Masters degrees.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 06:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW;4054413[i
Is anyone in here willing to say that someone with a Master's Degree and 15 years of experience is "overpaid" with a $49K/year salary?[/I]
A. I'm guessing since there are at least as many people who have a masters that don't, that the 49K is not what they are making. They are likely making over, and those without masters under. At least that's a possibility. 49K with over 20K in benefits and a very long vacation isn't really bad for a 4 year degree either.

B. I've got a masters degree in art. I could only find work at the local Pottery Barn. I make just a little over minimum wage. Would you say that my employers are taking advantage of me because I'm not getting paid reasonably based on my education? Do you think I should stop coming to work right now, in protest so I'll get master's degree wages?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 07:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I mean, I'm not really sure what you're askin' for here.
My point is only that anyone who is asking whether the Wisconsin governor is really out to bust the public employees unions is not paying attention -- that is exactly what he is doing. The debate is over whether or not that is a good thing.
     
BadKosh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 07:41 AM
 
Get rid of collective bargaining. Let each employee go through an actual review, beg for his own raise and see what its like to be an employee. The bad ones can be canned without causing a six week slow down, or other typical union thug tricks. Right now the unions are looking like spoiled whiny liberals after a bad loss in November.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 08:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Right now the unions are looking like spoiled whiny liberals after a bad loss in November.
hmmmm .... I was gonna say they look like bank executives expecting their bonuses right after being involved in a huge economic crash.
     
BadKosh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 10:51 AM
 
Where do the Wisconsin kids rate as far as national educational standards? Can they read on their level? Can they do math? Do they know there are 50 states?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 11:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
hmmmm .... I was gonna say they look like bank executives expecting their bonuses right after being involved in a huge economic crash.
Same difference. They need to be bitch-slapped out of it.

-t
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 11:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Interesting, let's take a quick look at what those in private industry earn with their bachelor's degree:
Putting aside the fact that you didn't source your figures .......

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Of course, we're not considering over 2 months a year off on break, numerous days throughout the school calendar year, and almost $26k in bennies. Also, you're making the same mistake you claim others are making. Your copy-paste clearly states; People with higher degrees in education typically get paid more. Why would you close by asking who would be up for $49k per year with Masters degree and 15 years experience when teachers with Masters degrees and 15 years of experience clearly get paid more than the average?
The point I was making was that people (i.e. Eric Bolling on Fox News, et al) try to push this notion that teachers are "overpaid" compared to private sector workers. The problem is that these cherry picked figures are comparing apples to oranges. And the figures you just cited do just that. You are trying to compare people with a Bachelor's degree with 1 - 4 years of experience to teachers with a Master's degree and 15 years of experience. The point here is when you control for comparable education level, work experience, field, etc. .... IOW, when you compare "apples to apples" ... the data shows that public sector workers make less money than their private sector counterparts. Even when you include their typically more generous healthcare and pension benefits.

So why all the vitriol towards public sector workers coming from the right? Why all the comments that try to insinuate that public sector workers are somehow "getting over". Sounds like hatin' to me.

OAW
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 12:32 PM
 
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 01:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Oh and... per the NEA, the Wisconsin teacher salary average for 2009-10 was $52,644.
www.teacherworld.com
Come now my friend. I posted a link to the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction website. I posted a second link that goes directly to a spreadsheet on that website detailing compensation figures across the state of Wisconsin. And you try to counter that with a link to teacher-world.com?

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
How exactly is Walker "busting" the teacher's union again? By making them actually pay a portion of their retirement and healthcare like the rest of the friggin' sane world? I don't buy the victimization angle. Not one bit.
I'll say this again. It's union busting because the public sector workers have already agreed to "actually pay a portion of their retirement and healthcare like the rest of the friggin' sane world." A long time ago. But that's not good enough for Gov. Scott "Koch Brothers Lackey" Walker. He is insisting on legislation that will essentially decimate the union. Let me break it down why this is the case:

Collective Bargaining: This is a core function of a union. The power dynamic between large employers (public or private) and individual workers is highly skewed in favor of the employer ... especially in a bad economy. One would have to be outright delusional to deny this. So a union is a pretty half-assed (not in terms of intent but rather effectiveness) way of balancing out that power dynamic by allowing workers to band together as a group to advance/protect their interests. Because let's face it ... large employers inherently have the power to advance/protect their interests at the expense of its employees. Collective bargaining typically covers 3 major areas: 1) Wages, 2) Benefits, and 3) Working Conditions. Gov. Walker's legislation will eliminate the unions ability to collectively bargain on #2 and #3. For good. IOW ... it will still be in effect long after this budget "crisis" (precipitated by Gov. Walker's $140 million dollar tax cut to corporations last January that created the "shortfall" that he's now trying to makeup for on the backs of the state employees) is over and done with. Oh and did I mention that this elimination of collective bargaining over benefits and working conditions covers all public workers except police, firefighters, and state troopers? Interestingly enough, those three unions all endorsed Gov. Walker in the last election ... whereas all other public sector unions endorsed his democratic opponent. As Arsenio Hall used to say .... that's a "thing that makes you go 'hmmmm'." Finally, even though the ability to collectively bargain over wages is being retained .... the maximum wage increase could only be whatever the rate of inflation happened to be in a given year. So the best deal the union could ever "collectively bargain" for would be a "cost of living adjustment" ... regardless of economic conditions .... regardless of productivity gains .... regardless of workforce reductions and decreased overall compensation expenses .... regardless of if the public workers had 10 straight years of pay freezes/cuts.

Contracts: all contracts that the union could make with the state would only last 1 year. But wait ... the union can't even negotiate for anything except a COLA.

Certification: all public employees would have to vote every year to re-certify the union as their bargaining agent.

Union Dues: public employees would not be allowed to pay their union dues out of their paychecks.

So is it any wonder why the public sector unions are up in arms over this? I can't stress this enough. These provisions go well above and beyond the public sector employees paying more out of pocket for healthcare and pension benefits. Concessions they've already agreed to. Gov. Walker is trying to neuter the public sector unions. It's as simple as that. But don't just take my word for it. Listen to the man's own words on the call he had with who he presumed was his billionaire political benefactor. Did he once mention anything about the "budget crisis"? No ... he talked about going after the unions and this being "our moment". But we can take it even further. What does a Fox News anchor have to say about it?

I think Shep Smith may have guaranteed himself a dose of hate mail with this one.

Here's how he explained to Juan Williams what's going on in Wisconsin on his Studio B show today.

Originally Posted by Shepard Smith
It's all political isn't it? Isn't it just 100% politics? ...Have you looked at the list of the top 10 donors to political campaigns? Seven of those 10 donate to Republicans. The other three that remain of those top 10, they all donate to Democrats and they are all unions. Bust the unions, it's over....And this started when? It started with the Koch brothers. The Koch brothers were organizing...
And then, perhaps sensing what some of his viewers were presumably thinking, Shep turned to the camera and said:

Originally Posted by Shepard Smith
I'm not taking a side on this, I'm telling you what's going on...The facts! But people don't want to hear the facts...let them get angry, facts are troublesome creatures from time to time. The Koch brothers, and others, were organized to bust labor, it's what big business wants to do...this isn't a new concept. So they gave a bunch of money to the governor's campaign. The governor's campaign is over. Now, away we go! We're going to try to bust this union up, and that's what they're doing....this is political and everyone in the middle is a pawn.
SHEP SMITH: The Koch Brothers Are Behind Gov. Attempt To Bust Unions

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Feb 24, 2011 at 01:07 PM. )
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 01:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
This is because unless you are dealing with a very specific sort of degree such as teaching, med, or law school, University was never designed to crank out worker drones - that is what vocational school is for.

Personally, I would probably hire somebody with critical thinking skills acquired in a traditional University setting over somebody with vocational training. This isn't to say that you cannot acquire critical thinking skills in a vocational school, but it is a *huge* misnomer that people have that all University degrees = certain kind of job. It just doesn't work that way.

If what you have written is specific to teaching degrees, I apologize, but it sounds like you are generalizing all University/Masters degrees.
Nope, I'm talking about public school graduates. The product of public schools.

I COULD HAVE droned on about the inadequacy of college-level teacher education, including "masters" degrees, but I left that out. I am intimately aware of the deficiencies there, and I have actually been involved in curriculum development decisions plenty of times. The system is plainly broken.

However, the teachers out there who really WANT to do well, and who aren't shirking their duties, and there's plenty of them, continue to be part of a flawed system. The unions (and administrative types) make it hard to make people accountable. Every higher-ed system designed for teacher education that I've seen, exists to diffuse accountability.

One other thing to consider: Unions exist to shield teachers from the wrath of administrators. You know, I can see some validity to that. I've argued that about tenure in general with (untenured) friends of mine. Without tenure (and unions in some cases) the administrators would probably succeed in completely co-opting those legitimate educators out there, those who still believe in the mission. I've seen it plenty in collegiate education, at least. For all of the deadwood, there are plenty other tenured types who use it to hold students and other teachers accountable. Maybe unions serve some of that role. Too bad their leadership is stuck on politics and dumbing things down all the time.

The original question was about who DARED to challenge these folks when they had "advanced" degrees and got paid so little. My point was that they did jack-all and ended up teaching nothing in high school or junior high. How do we know? Because our chirren learn nothing in high school and junior high.

And they learn nothing during most of the first two years of college as well, which is usually filled up with that "traditional" education that you're talking about. I wish we could say that they're learning to be good citizens, how to think critically and contribute to their communities, but that isn't true for a whole lot of them. There is no accountability at THAT level, for teachers or students, either. So the "vocational" training you're talking about (whatever that is -- an associates in HVAC or something?) doesn't work well either, because the students haven't learned how to think, haven't practiced how to think, and what's worse, THINK that they know how to think.

But... I digress.
( Last edited by finboy; Feb 24, 2011 at 01:24 PM. )
He can be fixed -- you can't.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 01:21 PM
 
Oh the noes. The Koch brothers. Run for the hills.

-t
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 01:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Same difference. They need to be bitch-slapped out of it.

-t
zactly!
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 02:10 PM
 
Who cares?

People who are employed with my tax money should have no right to strike against me and other taxpayers when we don't have the money to pay them what they think is competitive. If they want a better deal, then they can engage in the capitalistic system of shopping their services to higher bidders. No one is entitled to a job or a specific wage or benefit.

If those we vote for to represent us aren't acting in the interest of all taxpayers, then those employed by the government can work to have their "bosses" removed by vote. That's really not possible for privately held businesses.

Even FDR said this is craziness, and I agree. I don't care who is behind it.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 06:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Who cares?

People who are employed with my tax money should have no right to strike against me and other taxpayers when we don't have the money to pay them what they think is competitive. If they want a better deal, then they can engage in the capitalistic system of shopping their services to higher bidders. No one is entitled to a job or a specific wage or benefit.

To all of the private schools that are prepared to replace our public schools?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 06:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
To all of the private schools that are prepared to replace our public schools?
Sure, or home schooling. There are options.

-t
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 06:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
Nope, I'm talking about public school graduates. The product of public schools.

I COULD HAVE droned on about the inadequacy of college-level teacher education, including "masters" degrees, but I left that out. I am intimately aware of the deficiencies there, and I have actually been involved in curriculum development decisions plenty of times. The system is plainly broken.

However, the teachers out there who really WANT to do well, and who aren't shirking their duties, and there's plenty of them, continue to be part of a flawed system. The unions (and administrative types) make it hard to make people accountable. Every higher-ed system designed for teacher education that I've seen, exists to diffuse accountability.

One other thing to consider: Unions exist to shield teachers from the wrath of administrators. You know, I can see some validity to that. I've argued that about tenure in general with (untenured) friends of mine. Without tenure (and unions in some cases) the administrators would probably succeed in completely co-opting those legitimate educators out there, those who still believe in the mission. I've seen it plenty in collegiate education, at least. For all of the deadwood, there are plenty other tenured types who use it to hold students and other teachers accountable. Maybe unions serve some of that role. Too bad their leadership is stuck on politics and dumbing things down all the time.

The original question was about who DARED to challenge these folks when they had "advanced" degrees and got paid so little. My point was that they did jack-all and ended up teaching nothing in high school or junior high. How do we know? Because our chirren learn nothing in high school and junior high.

And they learn nothing during most of the first two years of college as well, which is usually filled up with that "traditional" education that you're talking about. I wish we could say that they're learning to be good citizens, how to think critically and contribute to their communities, but that isn't true for a whole lot of them. There is no accountability at THAT level, for teachers or students, either. So the "vocational" training you're talking about (whatever that is -- an associates in HVAC or something?) doesn't work well either, because the students haven't learned how to think, haven't practiced how to think, and what's worse, THINK that they know how to think.

But... I digress.


Where does accountability for parents and our culture play into this? This is a very large problem, much larger than the unions. The unions are not responsibility for apathy and a feeling of entitlement, and if I'm reading between the lines correctly, that seems to be what you are identifying here.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 07:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Sure, or home schooling. There are options.

-t

And again, we return to the same questions that I pose you frequently that you still haven't seemed to make a habit of tackling in advance, then what?

What do we do with the families that can't afford private school? What do we do with the parents who decide to home school and have absolutely no business doing so having no teaching qualifications? Being from a family of educators we've observed many home schooled kids over the years. Around here they either turn out to be marvelous students (particularly when the teacher parent has proper teaching qualifications), or they turn out to be massive train wrecks.

What do we do with the train wrecks, and the families that would otherwise not be putting their kids through school? You'd be the first to complain about these people leeching off the system and us spending money on them, yet doing nothing about these exceptions also costs money too.

The next time your mind goes to your usual "let's privatize that" mode, I challenge you to think about what the exact ramifications of that might be (the good and bad, but not just the good), and how we might deal with the bad.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 10:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post


There is absolutely NOTHING to this. Seriously. What nefarious thing was said by anyone other than the prankster? You're lapping up... nothing?
I know you'd like to think so, but Walker was agreeing that he'd like to take a trip, at Koch's expense, among other things, during the call. He didn't know that it wasn't one of the Koch brothers, yet he willingly put himself in a position to be accused of accepting illegal offers, among other things.

I'd bet that if that was Democrat being pranked like that, and said the things Walker did, you'd be one of the first to call for his hide.

Koch Brothers “Prank” No Laughing Matter | Common Dreams
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 12:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Where does accountability for parents and our culture play into this? This is a very large problem, much larger than the unions. The unions are not responsibility for apathy and a feeling of entitlement, and if I'm reading between the lines correctly, that seems to be what you are identifying here.
What planet do you live on?

cause we're not quite "the fuzz"
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 12:55 AM
 
Well lookie there. Who seems to be on top? Those evil, evil corporations and their lobbying....

http://gab.wi.gov/sites/default/file..._pdf_20078.pdf

http://elections.state.wi.us/docview.asp?docid=19064

cause we're not quite "the fuzz"
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 09:22 AM
 
^^ Looks like reliable info, from the state that's trying to bust the union.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 10:28 AM
 
^^why don't you call them up and accuse them to their face.

The Government Accountability Board is responsible for administration and enforcement of campaign finance, elections, ethics and lobbying laws in Wisconsin. The board is made up of six non-partisan, former judges and is supported by an agency of non-partisan staff members. Additional information about the mission of the Government Accountability Board is available by telephone at 608-266-8005, by electronic mail at gab@wi.gov, or through the Internet at Government Accountability Board | STATE OF WISCONSIN.

PS- one of them was written in August of 2010. you know, when dems were in office and could have passed budget items before the election.

cause we're not quite "the fuzz"
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 10:41 AM
 
P.P.S. There was no budget deficit until Walker gave tax breaks to a few big corporations, so he could create one, in order to bust the unions.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 10:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
To all of the private schools that are prepared to replace our public schools?
I don't believe that collective bargaining is required to be a teacher, or for a good teacher to get paid what they deserve. In fact, it's harder to pay the good ones more.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 11:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
P.P.S. There was no budget deficit until Walker gave tax breaks to a few big corporations, so he could create one, in order to bust the unions.
that is the best you can do? you can't respond to what i put, so you go to the talking points that have been proven wrong?

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ve-budget-sur/

But the remainder of the routine memo -- consider it the fine print -- outlines $258 million in unpaid bills or expected shortfalls in programs such as Medicaid services for the needy ($174 million alone), the public defender’s office and corrections. Additionally, the state owes Minnesota $58.7 million under a discontinued tax reciprocity deal.
I live in mn. we want our 60 million.

cause we're not quite "the fuzz"
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 12:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Where does accountability for parents and our culture play into this? This is a very large problem, much larger than the unions. The unions are not responsibility for apathy and a feeling of entitlement, and if I'm reading between the lines correctly, that seems to be what you are identifying here.
Sure it's a bigger problem, but I'd argue that the unions ARE responsible for a large part of the apathy and feeling of entitlement. That's the whole teachers' union profile these days. Rather than working to solve the problem they'd rather march and complain. The teachers who deserve our praise are probably too busy to go march.

Parents are ultimately responsible because they have to fix the problem, but for those parents who've given up because it's too much of a grind to push back against the entrenched, I can understand. And there are plenty of those, trapped b/c they can't both pay taxes to cover public schools AND afford a decent education for their kids in private schools.

I agree with your point about home schooling - either genii or train wrecks. The same can be said for public school, though, and I'd bet the train wrecks were the greater group. Or the plainly oblivious and irrelevant. The home schooling phenom, and its troubles, can be blamed squarely on teachers' unions and administrators who have politicized the school systems and created little robot factories. If the public schools worked, the private schools would go out of business. I saw that actually happen in the 70s, but it has been the opposite trend ever since.
He can be fixed -- you can't.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 12:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman
I don't believe that collective bargaining is required to be a teacher, or for a good teacher to get paid what they deserve. In fact, it's harder to pay the good ones more.
The point is that collective bargaining has been part of the fabric of American society for over 75 years. It is one of the fundamental, cornerstone reasons why the middle class even exists. Clearly the state of Wisconsin has been able to balance its budget plenty of times over this time frame despite the collective bargaining rights of its public employees. So there's simply no budgetary or financial reason to eliminate it. This attempt to destroy the public sector unions is purely political ... as evidenced by the fact that the public sector unions that tend to support the GOP (i.e. police, firefighters, state troopers) were exempted from this blatant power grab.

Support by Republicans for efforts to limit the power of public employee unions is lukewarm, according to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, as several Republican governors push such efforts in Wisconsin, Ohio, New Jersey, Iowa and other states.

About half of Republicans support reducing pay, benefits or collective-bargaining rights of government employees. By contrast, Democrats and independents strongly oppose such moves. The only income group supporting limits on union rights were those earning $90,000 or more a year, the poll found.
Poll shows mixed opinions about public worker unions - USATODAY.com

In any event, I find it amazing how some of our good friends on the right can see the value of checks and balances in government .... yet they are hostile to it in the private sector. I'm a capitalist for sure. Capitalism is one of the greatest systems for generating wealth the world has ever seen. However, its fundamental flaw is that left to its own devices, unbridled capitalism ... that is, capitalism without a mechanism for checks and balances .... will inevitably lead to the concentration of wealth in fewer and fewer hands. It's just the nature of the beast. The United States has always been an oligarchy to a certain extent. But it seems that some of you guys won't be satisfied until the middle class in America is completely destroyed and our nation becomes an oligarchy of the third-world variety .... where there is a wealthy elite of 5% ... and the other 95% is broker than the 10 Commandments.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Feb 25, 2011 at 12:58 PM. )
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 01:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
Sure it's a bigger problem, but I'd argue that the unions ARE responsible for a large part of the apathy and feeling of entitlement. That's the whole teachers' union profile these days. Rather than working to solve the problem they'd rather march and complain. The teachers who deserve our praise are probably too busy to go march.

Parents are ultimately responsible because they have to fix the problem, but for those parents who've given up because it's too much of a grind to push back against the entrenched, I can understand. And there are plenty of those, trapped b/c they can't both pay taxes to cover public schools AND afford a decent education for their kids in private schools.

I agree with your point about home schooling - either genii or train wrecks. The same can be said for public school, though, and I'd bet the train wrecks were the greater group. Or the plainly oblivious and irrelevant. The home schooling phenom, and its troubles, can be blamed squarely on teachers' unions and administrators who have politicized the school systems and created little robot factories. If the public schools worked, the private schools would go out of business. I saw that actually happen in the 70s, but it has been the opposite trend ever since.

We are going at this from different directions. I didn't mean apathy and entitlement in terms of salaries and benefits, I meant apathy and entitlement in the entire learning process, the educational system in general and commitment to high educational standards.

I do not take for granted that any of the average salary numbers here which are all over the map are accurate. However, I'd argue that if you were to go state by state looking for chronically overpaid teachers you'd probably find very little of this and much more of the opposite. I think in many instances where teachers are underpaid you could make the case that the state (i.e. the parents, since they are the ones who vote) as a whole don't value education as highly as many of us do.

Why this is I don't know. I'm willing to bet that one variable is our culture. It is much harder for a prize fighter to stay a prize fighter, and I think that westerners often take for granted that title and are losing their thirst to maintain it. It is just hard to see a lot of cultural interest in intelligence and learning and a lot easier to see mediocrity.

That, I feel, although I have no way of proving this, is what I feel is the biggest contributor to the apathy which I speak of.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 07:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
^^ Looks like reliable info, from the state that's trying to bust the union.
Stop trolling.

It's pretty clear ghat you would only accept data complied by the unions.

-t
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 07:31 PM
 
So what's wrong with union busting anyway?

The public employee unions seem to make no bones about the fact that they exist to 'state budget bust'.

The biggest problem I have with state employee unions is there's no balance. In the private sector, a union makes more sense because there are two sides. You have the company that has its agenda- get things done within a budget, make a profit, watch a bottom line that they actually ARE held accountable for, vs. a workforce that wants as much pay and bennies for their labor as possible. Looked at as a tug of war between the two interests, there should be balance to keep the business itself afloat, profitable, yet people paid what they negotiate for, and therefore serve both sides. (Of course, this sometimes doesn't happen even with private companies, and often when the union gets too much power, IE: the auto makers)

In the public sector, there's only one side- the government, and the government employees. Looked at as a 'tug of war' there's no opposing side. The government interest is to spend as much money, and who cares about any bottom line. In fact, what bottom line? You can always run defects, keep growing spending and borrowing, and NEVER have to worry about the whole system going belly up. You basically just operate in 'belly up' status for decades on end, and get asskissers to cover for you. The government employees have the SAME interests- so just pile on the bennies and salaries. Both 'sides' just say "yes" to everything, until the whole beast is so bloated you eventually have the government unable to stick it to the taxpayer YET AGAIN, so so they have to try and get some semblance of fiscal responsibility in place- even if just for show. And then look what happens.

Government employee unions are one big conflict of interest. The whole 'argument' is bullshit- notice how the tactic is always to mix the government unions with the private sector unions and pretend they are the same thing.

So you get these bullshit 'arguments' like "You must be against collective bargaining!"

The simple fact is, 'collective bargaining' in the private sector has TWO SIDES with opposing agendas achieving a balance via the bargaining process, and is a whole separate issue. 'Collective bargaining' in the public sector means: one 'side' saying: We like growing ourselves and doling out endless bennies, hang the expense, screw the taxpayer." and the other 'side' saying: "We like getting more bennies and stuff, so sure, let's have it!"

That's not 'bargaining' its just 'screw the taxpayer' no matter what.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 08:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Lint Police View Post
^^why don't you call them up and accuse them to their face.

The Government Accountability Board is responsible for administration and enforcement of campaign finance, elections, ethics and lobbying laws in Wisconsin. The board is made up of six non-partisan, former judges and is supported by an agency of non-partisan staff members. Additional information about the mission of the Government Accountability Board is available by telephone at 608-266-8005, by electronic mail at gab@wi.gov, or through the Internet at Government Accountability Board | STATE OF WISCONSIN.

PS- one of them was written in August of 2010. you know, when dems were in office and could have passed budget items before the election.
You keep your blasted facts out of this.
ebuddy
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Valley of the Sun
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 09:03 PM
 
Can some with a WSJ online subscription review this article?

Strassel: Union Power for Thee, But Not for Me - WSJ.com

Supposedly the 1978 Federal Labor Relations Act (signed by Pres. Carter(D) and passed by a (D )controlled house and senate)strips federal workers of the rights Walker wants to strip Wisconsin state workers of.
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 10:46 PM
 
Paste the article headline in Google and you'll find the full text article of the WSJ. Always works.

-t
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 10:50 PM
 
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 11:02 PM
 
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Valley of the Sun
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2011, 11:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Paste the article headline in Google and you'll find the full text article of the WSJ. Always works.

-t
Hmmm It did not work the first couple of times I tried that.

Here's the relevant portion a of the article.
Fact: President Obama is the boss of a civil work force that numbers up to two million (excluding postal workers and uniformed military). Fact: Those federal workers cannot bargain for wages or benefits. Fact: Washington, D.C. is, in the purest sense, a "right to work zone." Federal employees are not compelled to join a union, nor to pay union dues. Fact: Neither Mr. Obama, nor the prior Democratic majority, ever acted to give their union chums a better federal deal.

Scott Walker, eat your heart out.

For this enormous flexibility in managing his work force, Mr. Obama can thank his own party. In 1978, Democratic President Jimmy Carter, backed by a Democratic Congress, passed the Civil Service Reform Act. Washington had already established its General Schedule (GS) classification and pay system for workers. The 1978 bill went further, focused as it was on worker accountability and performance. It severely proscribed the issues over which employees could bargain, as well as prohibited compulsory union support.

Democrats weren't then (and aren't now) about to let their federal employees dictate pay. The GS system, as well as the president and Congress, sees to that. Nor were they about to let workers touch health-care or retirement plans. Unions are instead limited to bargaining over personnel employment practices such as whether employees are allowed to wear beards, or whether the government must pay to clean uniforms. These demands matter, though they are hardly the sort to break the federal bank.
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2011, 11:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Come now my friend. I posted a link to the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction website. I posted a second link that goes directly to a spreadsheet on that website detailing compensation figures across the state of Wisconsin. And you try to counter that with a link to teacher-world.com?
teacherworld.com is quoting figures from the NEA. How exactly are the good folks at teacherworld.com locked into the Walker Administration anyway and why should this teacher advocacy not be quoted when expressing how rewarding teaching can be? Of course, those differences between our figures pale in comparison to the arrangements of the rest of the working class in Wisconsin. What you have to omit in order to make the relationship appear "fair" is very telling. You wanted to compare apples to apples so when I broke out what a bachelor's degree pays in the private industry, you didn't like it. I can break out what a teacher gets paid say... to the average household income in Wisconsin, 42% of which are funded by two workers, but I'm sure you'd not like that either. Those with tenure get paid more than the mean, those who teach science for example get paid more than the mean, those with Master's degrees get paid more than the mean, and there are a wealth of differences contingent upon county or townships, and whether or not the teacher is involved outside the classroom and how many hours/# of days worked annually and what tax breaks are available exclusively to them as State employees etc... Apples to apples? Impossible. Not without first tacking on a few more $k my friend and that's before any talk of bennies.

I'll say this again. It's union busting because the public sector workers have already agreed to "actually pay a portion of their retirement and healthcare like the rest of the friggin' sane world." A long time ago. But that's not good enough for Gov. Scott "Koch Brothers Lackey" Walker. He is insisting on legislation that will essentially decimate the union. Let me break it down why this is the case:
Again, using this logic the unions have been busting Wisconsin. This is just rhetoric and political posturing. He's addressing a budget shortfall by eliminating a substantial expense off the books. An expense that is quickly becoming "too big to fail".

Collective Bargaining: This is a core function of a union. The power dynamic between large employers (public or private) and individual workers is highly skewed in favor of the employer ... especially in a bad economy. One would have to be outright delusional to deny this.
Only because the labor market is distorted by a wealth of bad government policies like granting "rights" no one else has including you, me, and Federal employees. There are already laws protecting civil and workers' rights in Wisconsin to ensure the dynamic is not skewed highly in favor of the employer. The Union is a labor cartel that keeps employment artificially low to increase wages and needs the automatic payroll deduction to sustain itself. Don't kid yourself into believing this is about protecting the "dynamic" of the have-nots. What would be delusional in this case is pretending this particular pool of employees do not already have more than most (using your own figures if it pleases) and no one else has a special little seat at the table of government legislation and expenditures or the right to appeal to the government for more.

So a union is a pretty half-assed (not in terms of intent but rather effectiveness) way of balancing out that power dynamic by allowing workers to band together as a group to advance/protect their interests.
What about skewing the balance of equal protections? Like I said, there's a very good reason Federal employees do not have this collective bargaining right in Washington OAW. It's clearly not a right, but a severe conflict of interest. Walker's proposal is a way of balancing out the expense incurred by this growing obligation by balancing the representation of his electorate; the collective tax payers of Wisconsin who do not have a special seat at the State House for negotiating their pay, benefits, and retirement plans. Like I told you before, have you met anyone, anyone at all who felt they were overpaid? After all, if this were truly about workers' rights, you'd be fighting for their right to reject an automatic payroll deduction to fund (let's make no mistake here) Labor Cartel Inc.

Because let's face it ... large employers inherently have the power to advance/protect their interests at the expense of its employees.
There are laws to protect workers against exploitation OAW and they always maintain the right to vote with their feet. Employers have learned that a bad reputation for abusive practices will eventually break them and starve them of a resource they need... employees. This may have been important in the days of Upton Sinclair where a book was necessary to expose horrific corporate practices, but our communications have come a long way from the glued binding of literature and people are more capable of collaborating and collective bargaining on their own than at any other time in our history. Let's face it, this has become an issue because the labor cartel has skewed the relationship too far in its own interest and exploits the fact that there isn't a person on the globe who feels they're paid too much.

Collective bargaining typically covers 3 major areas: 1) Wages, 2) Benefits, and 3) Working Conditions. Gov. Walker's legislation will eliminate the unions ability to collectively bargain on #2 and #3. For good. IOW ... it will still be in effect long after this budget "crisis" (precipitated by Gov. Walker's $140 million dollar tax cut to corporations last January that created the "shortfall" that he's now trying to makeup for on the backs of the state employees) is over and done with. Oh and did I mention that this elimination of collective bargaining over benefits and working conditions covers all public workers except police, firefighters, and state troopers? Interestingly enough, those three unions all endorsed Gov. Walker in the last election ... whereas all other public sector unions endorsed his democratic opponent. As Arsenio Hall used to say .... that's a "thing that makes you go 'hmmmm'." Finally, even though the ability to collectively bargain over wages is being retained .... the maximum wage increase could only be whatever the rate of inflation happened to be in a given year. So the best deal the union could ever "collectively bargain" for would be a "cost of living adjustment" ... regardless of economic conditions .... regardless of productivity gains .... regardless of workforce reductions and decreased overall compensation expenses .... regardless of if the public workers had 10 straight years of pay freezes/cuts.
A sound argument should not rely on dishonesty OAW, particularly when your points of contention above have been addressed with a wealth of facts.
  1. How many times does this have to be repeated for the talking point to go away? According to Robert Lang, the director of the Wisconsin bipartisan Fiscal Bureau; the tax cuts were not responsible for the shortfall. The WI budget identifies a pending payment under the Minnesota/Wisconsin Income Tax Reciprocity Program and related shortfalls for 2010-11. The Minnesota/Wisconsin payment and the identified shortfalls total $258.1 million. These amounts are not reflected in the January 31 condition statement because legislative and executive action would be required between February 1, 2011, and June 30, 2011, to address them. If the entire $258.1 million was to be addressed before June 30, 2011, the gross general fund balance would be -$136.7
  2. Most states regard police, fire, and teachers unions differently. There is nothing unique or nefarious about this.
  3. The WPPA (Wisconsin Professional Police Association) endorses Barrett for Governor
  4. Wisconsin already has a wealth of laws protecting workers' rights. There is no sacred "union" or "collective bargaining" right. Why should membership in a union give one any more bargaining power at the table of government legislation and expenditure than you and I?
  5. Collective Bargaining OAW. Teachers' pay in Wisconsin has always varied by tenure, by education level, by what they're teaching, and by their merit. There is no right to "collectively bargain" your pay and bennies and this doesn't "keep anyone down".
  6. BTW, since when can tax cuts and spending cuts not both be considered for stimulating an economy? You act as if you can only legislate one or the other, as if some moral law is being breeched here.
  7. What's at the foundation of this and why unions are busing people into Wisconsin to protest is the practice of automatic payroll deductions to fund the union. If the concern is one of workers' rights (which are already protected by Wisconsin law), why is the right to decline automatic payroll deductions not also sacred?

Contracts: all contracts that the union could make with the state would only last 1 year. But wait ... the union can't even negotiate for anything except a COLA.
Why is this a right? Federal employees don't have this right OAW, why should a Wisconsin teacher?

Certification: all public employees would have to vote every year to re-certify the union as their bargaining agent.
If the Union has been acting diligently in their interest OAW, why is this a problem? I'll tell ya why!

Union Dues: public employees would not be allowed to pay their union dues out of their paychecks.
... and here inlies the biggie and why the Unions are collating their anger among their sheeple. I remember all the complaints about Tea Party anger and shouting matches and the like, but what of the zealots at the State House. SHAME ON THEM!!!

So is it any wonder why the public sector unions are up in arms over this?
I've always known why. For the same reason an alcoholic would be up in arms over losing his bottle.

I can't stress this enough. These provisions go well above and beyond the public sector employees paying more out of pocket for healthcare and pension benefits. Concessions they've already agreed to. Gov. Walker is trying to neuter the public sector unions. It's as simple as that. But don't just take my word for it. Listen to the man's own words on the call he had with who he presumed was his billionaire political benefactor. Did he once mention anything about the "budget crisis"? No ... he talked about going after the unions and this being "our moment". But we can take it even further. What does a Fox News anchor have to say about it?
The most contentious moments of that call were uttered by the prankster, not by Walker. That "story" is a joke and proof that proponents of this bloated labor cartel don't have a plate at the table of ideals.

While I'm pleased as punch at the ideal that Fox News has now become an authoritative source of news, you and he can say whatever you wish. Walker is "collectively bargaining" for the tax payers of his state. You see, this is how the rest of the working class does it; they vote for someone to represent them. I'm sorry the two voting entities have come to a head, but this is the way of things. They've bargained themselves into the position of taking cuts or losing their jobs entirely. They should thank Walker for trying to save their jobs.

BTW, I wonder if this is the only matter on Wisconsin's docket that they can afford to go without the other party's representation as they hide out in the State Walker is trying to woo business from. The Democratic leadership in Wisconsin is obviously more interested in representing Big Labor than the collective people of Wisconsin and they should be ashamed.
ebuddy
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:34 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2014 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2