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

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the labor protests in Wisconsin, particularly focusing on the proposed elimination of collective bargaining rights for public workers by Governor Scott Walker. Participants express varying opinions on the implications of wage and benefit cuts, the role of unions, and the political actions taken by state lawmakers in response to the protests.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express that they do not oppose wage and benefit cuts but are concerned about the stripping of collective bargaining rights, questioning its protection under the Freedom of Association.
  • Others argue that collective bargaining is often misrepresented by union leaders, suggesting that it encompasses more than just wage negotiations, including restrictions on hiring replacements.
  • There are claims that the current protests may be influenced by a trend or fad, with some participants drawing parallels to historical protests from the 1970s.
  • Some participants express frustration with unions in general, suggesting that teachers should be held accountable for the decline in school performance and questioning the need for government workers to have protections from their employers.
  • Concerns are raised about the financial obligations of the state to unions, particularly regarding pensions and benefits for current employees versus new hires.
  • Participants share information about union membership statistics, highlighting differences between public and private sector unionization rates.
  • There are reports of state senators leaving Wisconsin to avoid voting on the proposed bill, which some view as a strategic move to delay the legislative process.
  • Questions arise about the financial implications for taxpayers regarding the costs associated with lawmakers' actions during the protests.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a range of competing views on the role and necessity of unions, the legitimacy of the protests, and the implications of the proposed legislation. There is no clear consensus on these issues.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various sources and statistics, but there are unresolved questions regarding the specifics of union contracts and the financial obligations of the state. The discussion reflects a complex interplay of political, social, and economic factors without definitive resolutions.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in labor relations, political activism, and the dynamics of union negotiations may find this discussion relevant.

Greg Bernhardt
Admin
Insights Author
Messages
19,907
Reaction score
10,915
wisconsin labor protests "it's like Cairo has moved to Madison these days"

Not sure if people have been aware of this situation, but it's getting a bit crazy here and I'd like outside opinions on it. All my friends/family are fiercely divided on this issue and things are heating up! We had 20k+ people at the capitol yesterday. Many schools closing today due to teachers leaving to protest.

Details of the matter are in this link
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/17/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T2
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/116381289.html


Personally I don't have a problem with the benefit/wage cuts, but Walker is moving to strip collective bargaining from the labor union. Isn't that protected under the Freedom of Association?

WI Rep says "...it's like Cairo has moved to Madison these days."
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


Greg Bernhardt said:
Personally I don't have a problem with the benefit/wage cuts, but Walker is moving to strip collective bargaining from the labor union. Isn't that protected under the Freedom of Association?
Yes, and every free citizen has the right to withhold his labor for any reason he sees fit, including as collective leverage to negotiate wages. That's true whether a member of a union or not.

But Freedom of Association works both ways: employees are free to associate with employers and each other or not as they see fit, and so are employers.

In this case, like many others, union leaders are using the phrase "collective bargaining" to refer to current union benefits above and beyond what the words "collective bargaining" actually mean, such as a restriction on the ability of the state to hire replacements, etc.
 


Al68 said:
In this case, like many others, union leaders are using the phrase "collective bargaining" to refer to current union benefits above and beyond what the words "collective bargaining" actually mean, such as a restriction on the ability of the state to hire replacements, etc.

Wiki says "Collective agreements usually set out wage scales, working hours, training, health and safety, overtime, grievance mechanisms and rights to participate in workplace or company affairs."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_bargaining

:confused:
 


Greg Bernhardt said:
Wiki says "Collective agreements usually set out wage scales, working hours, training, health and safety, overtime, grievance mechanisms and rights to participate in workplace or company affairs."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_bargaining

:confused:
Yes, exactly. Far more than the phrase "collective bargaining" generically means. And failure of an employer to agree to employee demands does not constitute violating their right to collectively negotiate for them. Neither would a refusal of an employer to negotiate at all.

I have the right to negotiate for a lower price at a car lot, and refuse to buy (as leverage), but that right imposes no obligation on the car lot whatsoever.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


I'm not totally sure if this is part of it but I think protesting has become trendy and it is in fact a fad now. If that can even happen?? Yes I think the 70s are back can't wait for woodstock 10 or what ever it's at now. The best part is soon we will all be in home made clothes that look amazing at the time but will result in many pictures burned 15 years later so that nobody can see us wearing them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Al68 said:
Yes, exactly. Far more than the phrase "collective bargaining" generically means. And failure of an employer to agree to employee demands does not constitute violating their right to collectively negotiate for them. Neither would a refusal of an employer to negotiate at all.

I have the right to negotiate for a lower price at a car lot, and refuse to buy (as leverage), but that right imposes no obligation on the car lot whatsoever.

Interesting! Thanks!

Got a photo of inside the capitol building below
 

Attachments

  • 183060_103110226436335_101919233222101_27060_1117792_n.jpg
    183060_103110226436335_101919233222101_27060_1117792_n.jpg
    63.5 KB · Views: 458


State Sens. Spencer Coggs (D-Milwaukee) Jon Erpenbach (D-Fitchburg) said Thursday all 14 Senate Democrats had left Wisconsin Thursday to avoid being forcibly returned to the Capitol to vote on Gov. Scott Walker's proposed elimination of public worker bargaining rights.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/116426009.html
 


What do the voters think about the Democrats avoiding the debate?:smile:

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/17/wisconsin-senate-vote-on-anti-union-bill/

"A group of Wisconsin lawmakers blocked passage of a sweeping anti-union bill Thursday by ignoring orders to attend a vote and instead left the state to force Republicans to negotiate over the proposal.

As ever-growing throngs of protesters filled the Capitol for a third day, the 14 Democrats disappeared from the Capitol. They were not in their offices, and aides said they did not know where any of them had gone.

Hours later, one of them told The Associated Press that the group had left Wisconsin.

Sen. Jon Erpenbach said Democrats fled to slow down consideration of the bill in the hopes that Republican Gov. Scott Walker and GOP lawmakers would discuss changes."

Personally, I think people in the Great Lakes/Rustbelt are fed up with Unions in general. IMO - teacher's should be subject to review and share responsibility in the decline of our schools. Additionally, I still can't understand why any Government workers need protection from their employer?

(we posted at the same time)
 


WhoWee said:
What do the voters think about the Democrats avoiding the debate?:smile:

Not surprising the union voters are calling them patriots. I hope the majority call them out.

WhoWee said:
Personally, I think people in the Great Lakes/Rustbelt are fed up with Unions in general. IMO - teacher's should be subject to review and share responsibility in the decline of our schools. Additionally, I still can't understand why any Government workers need protection from their employer?

(we posted at the same time)

A lot of it is feelings of entitlement and appeals to emotion. Many are seeing this as a forecast for other states that might start moving on similar measures. The bill will likely pass, but I wonder how long the protests will continue and what happens then.
 
  • #10


did the teachers' union have a contract that guaranteed the benefits?

i can see the state opting to not provide benefits going forward to new hires, but if they made a financial obligation to the union, then it seems like they should be willing to sell some assets to make up the difference.

scuttling of pensions has always seemed a scummy practice to me. if anything, the employees should at least be able to recover the equity in the enterprise when a business is involved.
 
  • #11


The Dept of Labor released their report on unions recently:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

"Highlights from the 2010 data:

--The union membership rate for public sector workers (36.2 percent) was
substantially higher than the rate for private sector workers (6.9 percent).
(See table 3.)

--Workers in education, training, and library occupations had the highest
unionization rate at 37.1 percent. (See table 3.)

--Black workers were more likely to be union members than were white, Asian,
or Hispanic workers. (See table 1.)

--Among states, New York had the highest union membership rate (24.2 percent)
and North Carolina had the lowest rate (3.2 percent). (See table 5.)"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12


WhoWee said:
As ever-growing throngs of protesters filled the Capitol for a third day, the 14 Democrats disappeared from the Capitol. They were not in their offices, and aides said they did not know where any of them had gone.

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/116390569.html

They were just found in a Best Western in Rockford IL. Unbelievable!
 
Last edited:
  • #13


Greg Bernhardt said:
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/116390569.html

They were just found in a Best Western in Rockford IL. Unbelievable!

I wonder if the taxpayers are responsible for the bill - wages, bus, hotel, food, entertainment(?) - what next?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14


WhoWee said:
I wonder if the taxpayers are responsible for the bill - wages, bus, hotel, food, entertainment(?) - what next?

oh I am willing to bet we are!
 
  • #15


WhoWee said:
Additionally, I still can't understand why any Government workers need protection from their employer?

One person I talked to said they need it for safety. They can make demands for changes or additions to make the workplace more safe. ie. social workers might need a cellphone or police escort.
 
  • #16


Greg Bernhardt said:
One person I talked to said they need it for safety. They can make demands for changes or additions to make the workplace more safe. ie. social workers might need a cellphone or police escort.

On the other hand - maybe they're thinking "Russelville Convention" Part II?:biggrin:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russellville_Convention
 
  • #17


Greg Bernhardt said:
Not sure if people have been aware of this situation, but it's getting a bit crazy here and I'd like outside opinions on it. All my friends/family are fiercely divided on this issue and things are heating up! We had 20k+ people at the capitol yesterday. Many schools closing today due to teachers leaving to protest.

Details of the matter are in this link
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/17/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T2
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/116381289.html


Personally I don't have a problem with the benefit/wage cuts, but Walker is moving to strip collective bargaining from the labor union. Isn't that protected under the Freedom of Association?

WI Rep says "...it's like Cairo has moved to Madison these days."
AFAIK, labor laws developed after the Constitution was put in place. Collective barganing would be covered by state laws. For instance, the are some states that are 'right to work' states, as opposed to those states that have laws favoring unions.

Collective bargaining may also cover pensions, which is major issue for some states.

In our state, some government officials, both R & D, have 'retired' then continue in office. That way, they can collect a pension as well as salary, well before they reach retirement age. We have double dippers, triple dippers, and more.

One our Congressman is a retired colonel from the military. He made a point to suspend his military retirement because he's drawing a salary from Congress. That is appropriate and commendable. Apparently he's an exception. Many others, state and federal, collect one or more pensions before retirement age, while drawing a salary from a different government job.
 
  • #18


Astronuc said:
In our state, some government officials, both R & D, have 'retired' then continue in office. That way, they can collect a pension as well as salary, well before they reach retirement age. We have double dippers, triple dippers, and more.

The double dipping is also a major problem in our area - with teachers. They retire and receive about 80% of their former wage - then are rehired at the starting wage (about $28,000).
 
  • #19


Astronuc said:
Collective bargaining may also cover pensions, which is major issue for some states.

Under the new bill pension contribution would increase from .2% to 5.8%. That is still a sweet deal!
 
  • #20


Greg Bernhardt said:
Under the new bill pension contribution would increase from .2% to 5.8%. That is still a sweet deal!

I pay 100% of mine. Perhaps, I should go on strike this weekend - see if anyone feels sorry for me.
 
  • #21


Even with the current benefit system, how many people here would work as k-12 school teachers? Admittedly, pensions that are set up so that it makes the most sense to retire and immediately got back to work should be reworked, but even with that odd perk, how many people here would work as a teacher?
 
  • #22


ParticleGrl said:
Even with the current benefit system, how many people here would work as k-12 school teachers? Admittedly, pensions that are set up so that it makes the most sense to retire and immediately got back to work should be reworked, but even with that odd perk, how many people here would work as a teacher?

Personally I can't stand other people's kids :D (I don't have any of my own, but I am sure i'd love them)
 
  • #23


Greg Bernhardt said:
Not sure if people have been aware of this situation, but it's getting a bit crazy here and I'd like outside opinions on it. All my friends/family are fiercely divided on this issue and things are heating up! We had 20k+ people at the capitol yesterday. Many schools closing today due to teachers leaving to protest.

Details of the matter are in this link
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/17/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T2
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/116381289.html


Personally I don't have a problem with the benefit/wage cuts, but Walker is moving to strip collective bargaining from the labor union. Isn't that protected under the Freedom of Association?

WI Rep says "...it's like Cairo has moved to Madison these days."

I got an email today from the AAUP (Ohio's new government is advocating for the same thing as Wisconsin) about this. I am in the union- I can opt out and save $10 (my annual membership fee), but I would still be bound by the annual collective bargaining agreement and cannot negotiate my own employment agreement independent of the union. The law school is not unionized.

I'm not sure how I feel about it- I don't really understand how I benefit from the AAUP (although there's a lot of scary rhetoric available detailing the horrors that will occur) and I have seen how employee unions can impede progress in the workplace (NASA civil servants) by creating a two-tiered citizenry.

According to Cary Nelson (AAUP president), "The issue is self-determination: whether faculty members and other public sector employees should have the democratic right to choose their own collective destiny."

I don't know what 'collective destiny' means in the current academic environment.

I suppose eliminating collective bargaining shifts power to the administration, and I don't have confidence that the administration can determine what is best for me- what research I should pursue "to align with the strategic goals of the institution", for example. On the other hand, the AAUP (and our local union reps) often takes a very adversarial posture when a more thoughtful discussion is needed.

To be sure, employee unions can be very important- the ongoing issue with Homeland Security Presidential Directive #12 and JPL employees is a great example. But I've worked years without union protection and would have a hard time claiming the working environment was substantively worse than now.
 
  • #24


The signs in the crowd make the Tea Party look pretty mild (IMO) - Mubarak, Mussolini, and Hitler - where is the outrage from the media over the lack of civility?
 
  • #26


Greg Bernhardt said:
A lot of it is feelings of entitlement and appeals to emotion.
I hear so much of that and other related things, it is hard for me to feel sympathy for teachers. I've heard them say they work long hours, yet few ever work more than 45 hours a week and have all summer off (most I know work summer jobs!). I've heard complaints about it taking a long time to get tenure (5 years!) mixed with complaints about the poor performance of older, burned-out teachers. Teaching really is a pretty sweet deal and in a poor economy, even sweet deals need to be on the cutting table.

I will say one legitimate complaint is the continuing education requirements. They're basically required to get phd's for the sake of getting phd's. They get paid extra for it, but it doesn't really add much value imo. So if they drop the continuing ed requirements, they could save money and save the headache for the teachers.
 
  • #27


Astronuc said:
In our state, some government officials, both R & D, have 'retired' then continue in office. That way, they can collect a pension as well as salary, well before they reach retirement age. We have double dippers, triple dippers, and more.
We have a big to-do going on in Philly about that right now. When ambitious and unscrupulous people can write laws that benefit them personally, it's not surprising...despicable, though.
 
  • #28


ParticleGrl said:
Even with the current benefit system, how many people here would work as k-12 school teachers? Admittedly, pensions that are set up so that it makes the most sense to retire and immediately got back to work should be reworked, but even with that odd perk, how many people here would work as a teacher?
I wouldn't either, but it is also more because I can't stand other people's kids and actually like engineering, not because of the salary and benefits...though my income potential is better as an engineer. My teacher-friends acknowledge that engineering is more difficult than teaching, though.

So maybe we shouldn't be comparing people on PF to teachers. How about a random office worker vs a teacher, both with a communications degree?
 
  • #29


ParticleGrl said:
Its worth noting that Wisconsin was not facing a budget shortfall, and is not in need of austerity measures:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...udget-shortfall-to-undercut-worker-rights.php
Ironic he's being lambasted (it's a pretty biased article) for supporting what nationally would be considered a liberal adjenda: two different job creation incentive and a health savings account tax break. Difference is, he's trying to cut in some places while spending in others whereas Obama is just trying to spend.

This is a harbinger of things to come. We've talked before about why the US hasn't seen riots like they have in the EU. And that's the answer: they are making real cuts, doing real austerity measures and we aren't. Here's an example of an American government trying to make significant cuts and getting slammed for it.

Caveat: I can't reconcile CNN saying there is a deficit vs that article (and the Wisconsin Fiscal Bureau) saying there actually isn't.
 
  • #30


Having someone here from there I would like to ask is there really as many people protesting as the news says? I find it hard to believe when I read it was like 10-20k people is it actually true?