Wisconsin labor protests it's like Cairo has moved to Madison these days

[Al68]

I may be being sloppy with words here. If a union uses it muscle for its own ends, not its members, that is wrong. Likewise, if a government employer does the same, for its own ends, not for the electorate that is wrong. My take on this thread is that in the main one or the other of these two extreme views is being justified. I may be wrong.

You are. Neither of those views has been justified or advocated in this thread.

I would suggest that there are very good reasons, good democratic reasons, why they cannot fire and replace, and that that siuation reinforces democratic government.

So, then, what "good democratic reasons" are there for employees of the state to be immune from being fired by democratically elected representatives of the people?

They are accountable while they are in office as well as when they are being elected.

Accountable to the people, not state employees. How many times have I repeated the same thing in this thread? The same exact thing that FDR, hero of the American left, said decades ago: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=15445

 

[cobalt124]

You are. Neither of those views has been justified or advocated in this thread.

My bad.

So, then, what "good democratic reasons" are there for employees of the state to be immune from being fired by democratically elected representatives of the people?

Nothing to add to this. I've already stated reasons why.

Accountable to the people, not state employees. How many times have I repeated the same thing in this thread? The same exact thing that FDR, hero of the American left, said decades ago: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=15445

Yes accountable to the electorate. I'll read the link when I get chance.

 

[nismaratwork]

I don't think so. You have a source?I was using the word "democratic" to refer to democratic republicanism, not a pure democracy. So was FDR, obviously. It's common practice to use the term in its broad sense that way.

It's a common practice to imbue "magical words" with ideals and ideas that having nothing to do with them. I can see why you hate semantics... you're often on the wrong side of them.

As for FDR, you want me to cite SCOTUS, when the reality of unions all around us is evidence enough? That's just odd, altough I assume that you're using his letter becaause you see this in purely ideological and partisan terms.

FDR was a politician like any other, and his letter expressed his concerns; unions persist and rightly fought with militant tactics against militant tactics... remember the Pinkertons? I feel as though your view of the world is somehow through a very odd lens of pure ideology. I'm getting a little tired of pure rigidity; conversation is not meant to constantly devolve into *-Wing talk radio.

 

[KeenanSteel]

unions persist and rightly fought with militant tactics against militant tactics

Unless we're talking about slavery - either of the employer or the employee - militant tactics seems to be an odd term to use. Working for money is a trade, and thus both parties must feel that something is to be gained from the trade. I agree that unions CAN make this possible, but cooperation is still required.

 

[nismaratwork]

Unless we're talking about slavery - either of the employer or the employee - militant tactics seems to be an odd term to use. Working for money is a trade, and thus both parties must feel that something is to be gained from the trade. I agree that unions CAN make this possible, but cooperation is still required.

Again... you may want to read about: [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_National_Detective_Agency.[/URL]

I'd add, how about the civil rights movement...?

 

[Al68]

It's a common practice to imbue "magical words" with ideals and ideas that having nothing to do with them. I can see why you hate semantics... you're often on the wrong side of them.

Using a word by its most commonly used definition is "on the wrong side" of semantics?

As for FDR, you want me to cite SCOTUS, when the reality of unions all around us is evidence enough? That's just odd, altough I assume that you're using his letter becaause you see this in purely ideological and partisan terms.

You claimed the judiciary disagreed with FDR. I asked for your source. Especially since the judiciary doesn't even make that type of judgments.

FDR was a politician like any other, and his letter expressed his concerns; unions persist and rightly fought with militant tactics against militant tactics... remember the Pinkertons? I feel as though your view of the world is somehow through a very odd lens of pure ideology. I'm getting a little tired of pure rigidity; conversation is not meant to constantly devolve into *-Wing talk radio.

That reminds me of a very funny commercial, one in which Rush Limbaugh says he finds the WSJ "a bit...opinionated".

 

[nismaratwork]

Using a word by its most commonly used definition is "on the wrong side" of semantics?You claimed the judiciary disagreed with FDR. I asked for your source. Especially since the judiciary doesn't even make that type of judgments.That reminds me of a very funny commercial, one in which Rush Limbaugh says he finds the WSJ "a bit...opinionated".

You know... I consider it a sign of growing maturity that: I give up.

[URL]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/rolleye/rolleye0005.gif[/URL]

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Palm Trees in Madison?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RClJ6vK9x_4

 

[Norman]

Palm Trees in Madison?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RClJ6vK9x_4

Fair and balanced...

 

[nismaratwork]

Oh... priceless.

 

[Gokul43201]

Palm Trees in Madison?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RClJ6vK9x_4

Bogus protest footage! Where have I seen that before?

 

[nismaratwork]

I'm so amused at this point... the polls indicate that the governor has essentially burned his political capital, and he just arrived.

 

[WhoWee]

I'm so amused at this point... the polls indicate that the governor has essentially burned his political capital, and he just arrived.

What polls?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Palm Trees in Madison?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RClJ6vK9x_4

I LOVE it! Fox News is the funniest news channel in the WORLD!

 

[Norman]

What polls?

I assume nismaratwork is talking about some polls showing up comparing whether people would still have voted Walker into office - basically asking if the same election was held last week, would the public still vote for Walker.

There have also been some polls concerning who is winning the public relations battles - the unions or Walker.

Some links:
Public Policy Polling blog (talking about re-voting for Walker or not): http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/02/do-over.html
Pew Poll (unions vs Walker): http://people-press.org/report/709/
CBS/NYT poll results: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/03/01/us/01poll_graphic.html
Article about CBS/NYT poll: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/us/01poll.html?_r=2

 

[nismaratwork]

What polls?

A Pew Research Foundation poll, seen on CNN yesterday... I can look it up if you like, I made the claim, I'll back it. If you already know of it however, my left arm is killing me, and I'm in a lot of threads.

@Norman: Thanks!

edit: Ah, Norman posted it too! MANY thanks Norman.

 

[nismaratwork]

I LOVE it! Fox News is the funniest news channel in the WORLD!

Oh man... priceless.

edit: "Stars, etc." Oh bleeping bleepity bleep... my ribs... [URL]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/happy/happy0032.gif[/URL]
Could there be a LESS elegant way of putting it?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

edit: "Stars, etc." Oh bleeping bleepity bleep... my ribs... [PLAIN]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/happy/happy0032.gif[/QUOTE]

[PLAIN]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/happy/happy0032.gif[ATTACH=full]197054[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]197055[/ATTACH]

 

[WhoWee]

A Pew Research Foundation poll, seen on CNN yesterday... I can look it up if you like, I made the claim, I'll back it. If you already know of it however, my left arm is killing me, and I'm in a lot of threads.

@Norman: Thanks!

edit: Ah, Norman posted it too! MANY thanks Norman.

This?

"By a modest margin, more say they back Wisconsin’s public employee unions rather than the state’s governor in their continuing dispute over collective bargaining rights. Roughly four-in-ten (42%) say they side more with the public employee unions, while 31% say they side more with the governor, Scott Walker, according to the latest Pew Research Center survey, conducted Feb. 24-27 among 1,009 adults.

In Washington, meanwhile, prospects for an imminent government shutdown decreased as Republicans and Democrats neared a short-term budget deal. However, the public is divided over who would be more to blame if the federal government were to shut down as a result of a budget impasse: 36% say Republicans would be more to blame, 35% say the Obama administration and 17% volunteer that both would be to blame. This question was asked jointly by the Pew Research and The Washington Post.

Opinions are notably different today than they were the last time a budget battle threatened a government shutdown. In November 1995, a Washington Post/ABC News survey asked a similar question and found that 46% said a possible government shutdown would be mainly the Republicans’ fault; just 27% said the bulk of the blame would fall on the Clinton administration. "

 

[nismaratwork]

This?

"By a modest margin, more say they back Wisconsin’s public employee unions rather than the state’s governor in their continuing dispute over collective bargaining rights. Roughly four-in-ten (42%) say they side more with the public employee unions, while 31% say they side more with the governor, Scott Walker, according to the latest Pew Research Center survey, conducted Feb. 24-27 among 1,009 adults.

In Washington, meanwhile, prospects for an imminent government shutdown decreased as Republicans and Democrats neared a short-term budget deal. However, the public is divided over who would be more to blame if the federal government were to shut down as a result of a budget impasse: 36% say Republicans would be more to blame, 35% say the Obama administration and 17% volunteer that both would be to blame. This question was asked jointly by the Pew Research and The Washington Post.

Opinions are notably different today than they were the last time a budget battle threatened a government shutdown. In November 1995, a Washington Post/ABC News survey asked a similar question and found that 46% said a possible government shutdown would be mainly the Republicans’ fault; just 27% said the bulk of the blame would fall on the Clinton administration. "

Yes, that... it's quite the rapid shift, and I suspect it has a lot to do with the unions having made all financial concessions. It would seem that the Democrats leaving is achieving precisely what they want.

 

[WhoWee]

Yes, that... it's quite the rapid shift, and I suspect it has a lot to do with the unions having made all financial concessions. It would seem that the Democrats leaving is achieving precisely what they want.

I'm not sure he's "essentially burned his political capital"? I would like to see a statewide poll of what people think about the 14 Democrats that are hiding out in another state to avoid a vote.

What kind of a system do we have when voters send a clear message during an election - cut spending - and the legislators who don't like the voter mandate hide out until the people who will be on the receiving end of the cuts storm the Statehouse and disrupt the legislative process until the leader of the state agree to do what they (a minority of voters as per the last election) want?

 

[Char. Limit]

I don't know if anyone has said this already, but I didn't want to read all 19 pages just to check.

No, Cairo did not move to Madison. What you are facing is NOTHING compared to what the Egyptians faced. What you are doing when you say that is CHEAPENING their revolt for no other purpose than your own selfish gain. They had to deal with tear gas and molotovs being thrown at them. I doubt you can say anything CLOSE to the same thing. Everyone in the United States needs to stop comparing their protests to Cairo, or to Tripoli, or to Tunis. They are only alike in the sense that a mountain is like a clod of dirt.

Sorry, but that sentence just annoyed the hell out of me.

 

[turbo]

What kind of a system do we have when voters send a clear message during an election - cut spending - and the legislators who don't like the voter mandate hide out until the people who will be on the receiving end of the cuts storm the Statehouse and disrupt the legislative process until the leader of the state agree to do what they (a minority of voters as per the last election) want?

As usual, the right has framed the conflict as "greedy unions" against cost-cutting governor. That is not the case. The unions have made the financial concessions that the governor wanted, but that's not enough for him - he wants to eliminate their right to bargain collectively. A very different kettle of fish.

BTW, did you miss this?

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3154056&postcount=174

Wisconsin's non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau was projecting surpluses until the GOP majority rammed through $117 million in tax breaks for businesses. Then suddenly it was the "greedy unions" who were responsible for the looming deficit, and it was the "greedy unions" that had to pay for those tax breaks to balance revenues. Well, the "greedy unions" have done just that, making the concessions that the GOP wanted, but that's not enough - the GOP wants to remove their right to collective bargaining, as well.

 

[WhoWee]

As usual, the right has framed the conflict as "greedy unions" against cost-cutting governor. That is not the case. The unions have made the financial concessions that the governor wanted, but that's not enough for him - he wants to eliminate their right to bargain collectively. A very different kettle of fish.

BTW, did you miss this?

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3154056&postcount=174

Wisconsin's non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau was projecting surpluses until the GOP majority rammed through $117 million in tax breaks for businesses. Then suddenly it was the "greedy unions" who were responsible for the looming deficit, and it was the "greedy unions" that had to pay for those tax breaks to balance revenues. Well, the "greedy unions" have done just that, making the concessions that the GOP wanted, but that's not enough - the GOP wants to remove their right to collective bargaining, as well.

In an effort not to backtrack the entire thread - the negotiations at the local level typically take 12 to 18 months. The prior administration apparently kicked the can down the road and now they are out of time - the problems need to be fixed long term (this time). There is also a matter of about $200 million the last administration tapped that must be repaid - a reversal of $400 million that isn't on the table yet - I posted a few pages back. We've also noted the state workers have civil service protection in addition to union.

If you want to debate the "greed" of unions - please start a thread - I'll participate. I'd also like to see a poll of PF to see who is willing to pay more in federal and state taxes to offset Government union benefits and pay increases.

 

[nismaratwork]

I'm not sure he's "essentially burned his political capital"? I would like to see a statewide poll of what people think about the 14 Democrats that are hiding out in another state to avoid a vote.

What kind of a system do we have when voters send a clear message during an election - cut spending - and the legislators who don't like the voter mandate hide out until the people who will be on the receiving end of the cuts storm the Statehouse and disrupt the legislative process until the leader of the state agree to do what they (a minority of voters as per the last election) want?

14 nearly faceless state senators are nothing compared to a new Republican governer making this Custarian stand. I'm happy to come back to this after it becomes clear that he's doomed himself; if you want more polls beyond what's been offered... get polling.

@Char Limit: Very true, and it's an absurd comparison.

 

[nismaratwork]

In an effort not to backtrack the entire thread - the negotiations at the local level typically take 12 to 18 months. The prior administration apparently kicked the can down the road and now they are out of time - the problems need to be fixed long term (this time). There is also a matter of about $200 million the last administration tapped that must be repaid - a reversal of $400 million that isn't on the table yet - I posted a few pages back. We've also noted the state workers have civil service protection in addition to union.

If you want to debate the "greed" of unions - please start a thread - I'll participate. I'd also like to see a poll of PF to see who is willing to pay more in federal and state taxes to offset Government union benefits and pay increases.

I would be happy to pay, but its not an issue because the unions already agreed. STRAW MAN.

 

[Char. Limit]

14 nearly faceless state senators are nothing compared to a new Republican governer making this Custarian stand. I'm happy to come back to this after it becomes clear that he's doomed himself; if you want more polls beyond what's been offered... get polling.

@Char Limit: Very true, and it's an absurd comparison.

Indeed it is. I can tell so, because it's gotten me more angry than I've been in months.

 

[nismaratwork]

Indeed it is. I can tell so, because it's gotten me more angry than I've been in months.

Yeah... it's the kind of thing that just makes you question the validity of the perspectives of any politician. The rhetoric is so poisonous, and so divorced from reality.

 

[WhoWee]

I would be happy to pay, but its not an issue because the unions already agreed. STRAW MAN.

It's not a straw man. The 2010 elections were very clear - cut spending at all levels of Government. Now the task is at hand and the only alternative is to raise taxes. The argument of choosing to raise taxes on rich people only aside - who wants to pay more in taxes and who wants to see cuts? The only way to allow states to make (and keep) cuts in place is to untie their hands.

 

[nismaratwork]

It's not a straw man. The 2010 elections were very clear - cut spending at all levels of Government. Now the task is at hand and the only alternative is to raise taxes. The argument of choosing to raise taxes on rich people only aside - who wants to pay more in taxes and who wants to see cuts? The only way to allow states to make (and keep) cuts in place is to untie their hands.

I do. And again, all financial concessions were made already; this is still a straw man. I'd add, the same electorate is now turning against their governer, and neither party is touching Defense or Entitlements as needed.

Sorry, still a straw man. We don't need to TOUCH this stuff, it's just chaff to distract from massive inaction, and in this case, from the point of this debate.

 

[WhoWee]

I do. And again, all financial concessions were made already; this is still a straw man. I'd add, the same electorate is now turning against their governer, and neither party is touching Defense or Entitlements as needed.

Sorry, still a straw man. We don't need to TOUCH this stuff, it's just chaff to distract from massive inaction, and in this case, from the point of this debate.

Oh no...this is the core of the debate. The Fall 2010 elections were very clear - cut spending - and it's happening all over the country - hence the comparison to the ME.

 

[Char. Limit]

Oh no...this is the core of the debate. The Fall 2010 elections were very clear - cut spending - and it's happening all over the country - hence the comparison to the ME.

No, no, no. The comparison to the ME is completely unwarranted political blather. It has no importance.

 

[turbo]

In an effort not to backtrack the entire thread - the negotiations at the local level typically take 12 to 18 months.

And every party to the union contracts (unions, administrations, etc) know exactly when the contracts will expire, and how they would like to negotiate the next iteration of each contract. Claiming that it takes 12-18 months to negotiate a new contract is pretty ridiculous. I have been on a union contract negotiating committee representing my paper machine crews. Negotiating a comprehensive 5-year contract at a very large pulp and paper mill took about 2 weeks, primarily because of the company's refusal to grant us a change from Southern Swing shifts to 3-on, 3-off shifts of 12 hours each. We had already established substantial agreement on wages, benefits, etc, but the company dug their heels in on the shift-structure issue. They used arguments like "No person should be expected to work 12-hour shifts on a paper machine." despite the fact that during the start-up-phase of the new machine (several months) we were forced to work 12 hour shifts every single day for months without a single day off.

I'd like you to explain how negotiating contracts for teachers, garbage collectors, and other public servants takes a year+ to negotiate. My experience suggests otherwise (to say the least).

 

[nismaratwork]

Oh no...this is the core of the debate. The Fall 2010 elections were very clear - cut spending - and it's happening all over the country - hence the comparison to the ME.

The comparison is beneath you, and we both know it.

 

[WhoWee]

And every party to the union contracts (unions, administrations, etc) know exactly when the contracts will expire, and how they would like to negotiate the next iteration of each contract. Claiming that it takes 12-18 months to negotiate a new contract is pretty ridiculous. I have been on a union contract negotiating committee representing my paper machine crews. Negotiating a comprehensive 5-year contract at a very large pulp and paper mill took about 2 weeks, primarily because of the company's refusal to grant us a change from Southern Swing shifts to 3-on, 3-off shifts of 12 hours each. We had already established substantial agreement on wages, benefits, etc, but the company dug their heels in on the shift-structure issue. They used arguments like "No person should be expected to work 12-hour shifts on a paper machine." despite the fact that during the start-up-phase of the new machine (several months) we were forced to work 12 hour shifts every single day for months without a single day off.

I'd like you to explain how negotiating contracts for teachers, garbage collectors, and other public servants takes a year+ to negotiate. My experience suggests otherwise (to say the least).

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_c814c77a-3600-11e0-b9e0-001cc4c03286.html

my bold
"Sen. Fred Risser, D-Madison, was shocked by the proposal. He said the governor seems to be "union-busting."

"State employees have the right to negotiate in good faith with the state. Without a willingness to even discuss what concessions need to be made with state employees, the governor comes across more like a dictator and less like a leader," Risser said.

Risser said he hopes Walker will meet with union leaders, instead of unilaterally imposing these measures. But the governor said Friday that he did not have 15 months to negotiate these issues with the union, the amount of time it typically takes for the state and its unions to agree on contracts.

Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers said Friday they expected Walker's bill will move quickly through the Legislature, perhaps being passed as early as next week. Republicans control the Assembly 60-38-1 and the Senate 19-14. "