Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

Extreme Veteran

499

Racine WI

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

Here is the wording straight from the bill - no political spin attached (last sentence is most disturbing to me because it includes all aspects of the previously approved contract including employment work rules that the employer is required to adhere to) :

S

ECTION 5. 111.84 (2) (c) of the statutes is amended to read:
111.84 (2) (c) To refuse to bargain collectively on matters set forth in s. 111.91 (1) with the duly authorized officer or agent of the employer which is the recognizedor certified exclusive collective bargaining representative of employees specified in s. 111.81 (7) (a) (am) 1. in an appropriate collective bargaining unit or with the certified exclusive collective bargaining representative of employees specified in s.111.81 (7) (b) to (g) (am) 2. to 7. in an appropriate collective bargaining unit. Such refusal to bargain shall include, but not be limited to, the refusal to execute a collective bargaining agreement previously orally agreed upon.

So yes, unions will still be allowed to exist, and employees will still have the right to join unions, but the unions will have very limited, if any ability at all to speak on employee behalfs regarding all aspects of work conditions.

Edited by MarkK 2011-02-19 8:11 AM

My Race Log

Pro

4675

Wisconsin near the Twin Cities metro

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

UWMadTri - 2011-02-18 8:55 PM I got back from the Capitol about 2 hours ago. This has become a national movement.

a national UNION movement maybe???

My Race Log

Extreme Veteran

340

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

MarkK...

Excellent post back on page 15. You have managed to show a very valid side of this debate that reaches beyond political bickering and ideology.

It's not so cut and dry as all the outsiders (conservatives AND liberals) are saying. It's a complex issue, and I'd be willing to bet that there is a compromise reached to address the rational concerns you raise along with the very real budgetary concerns that WI is facing. I hope both sides can approach a resolution with your pragmatism.

Edited by WaitingGuilty 2011-02-19 8:57 AM

Master

1529

Living in the past

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

MarkK - 2011-02-18 11:36 PM

As a WI state employee, here is my concern. I have no problem with the financial aspects of Walkers plan (more contribution to health care and retirement) but his statement about state employees not giving their "fair share" is not fair or completely accurate without considering that:

1) WI state employees average 4% less take home pay than state employees in similar jobs in other states. Part of the union acceptance of this was historically the strong benefit package offered to offset the lower pay scale.
2) WI state employees have had their yearly wages reduced by 3% over the last two years due to the furlough days imposed.
3) WI state employees (at least in my union) have not had a pay raise in at the last two years.

Even with that said, I am still willing to accept the financial reality of the state of the WI budget and the need to continue to address this issue and that consessions will need to be made (and I think if you asked, most state employees would be willing to make some concessions in these areas).

My main concern is not with the budget aspects, it is with the dissolving of the union which supports state workers and ensures that certain workplace guidelines are adhered to by the employer (the state) in the workplace. They arent just talking about the unions ability to negotiate financial contracts for represented employees, they are talking about terminating all aspects of the union agreements with the state. As an example, I am a probation and parole agent. I supervise a caseload of registered sex offenders who have been either placed on community probation or have been released from prison. Part of the union contract dictates a limit to the number of offenders that I have on my caseload at any one time. This is in part, so that as an agent, I have the time to dedicate to actively and appropriately supervise these individuals in the community. Without an agreement and enforcement of the guidelines by the union, management (the state) would not have any limits as to the number of cases that an agent could be assigned. Basic math here folks, more cases, less time to spend on each case making sure they are doing what they are suppose to do. And heaven forbid, one of these guys re-offends and commits a new sexual assault, who's getting the finger pointed at them, I tell you, it wont be management (the state).

Understand, not all state employees are just money hungry and unwilling to compromise. Some of us are actually concerned about our ability to continue to do our jobs in our communities without the framework, guidelines and rules that the contract between the unions and the state have set inplace. I think that dissolving the unions is a bad idea. I also think that uncomprimising positions on both ends of the spectrum is equally bad.

?

?

Mark, you lost me at the hyperbole of registered sex offenders running around unsupervised and re-offending and why, because of the lack of a union contract? I think you give far too much credit (I'll even say 'misplaced' credit) to the role the union contract plays to the public's safety. Further I just don't buy that the union contract terms have much to do with your job effectiveness.

IMO, ending collective bargaining for state/municipal workers as part of this budget repair process is essential. Not only about wages, but benefits and work rules. The state is broke. It cannot continue to operate as it has. Pay and benefits must be cut. Work rules that limit efficiency and guarantee a level of employment must be scrapped. The work rule you cite has the effect of forcing new hiring for even a minute change in caseload - unworkable in today's reality. As a state/municipal worker your work conditions will adjust to match the tax payer's performance expectations and will be done at a pay level the tax payer can afford.

Gone I hope are the days where the tax payer is told by a third part (the 'union') how much work they should expect from their employees, the wages and benefits the tax payer must pay its employees in order to obtain their services, and all the while having that same third party in a cozy relationship with the elected state officials who have the power to accept these 'terms' on behalf of the tax payer.

My Race Log

49

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

Mark: I understand and can appreciate what you are saying. But I would like to know if you have any real world examples to support your concerns.

I have pointed out earlier in this thread that only 6.9% of workers in the private sector are unionized and that number continues to decline. That number is 36.2% in the public sector. Why is it that private sector employees are able to function without unions, but, you feel you need one?

There are federal laws that protect nearly every aspect of working conditions for employees. WI has "mirror laws" that actually expand those rights and afford WI workers -- all WI workers -- greater rights.

The federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) grants employees 12 weeks of unpaid leave for medical conditions and childbirth. The WI version of FMLA grants an additional 6 weeks of unapid leave and, unlike the federal law, allows substitution of any paid leave.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (federal) protects against discrimination on the basis for protected class. The Wisconsin Fair Employment Act (WFEA) expands those protections to include the following classes, which are not in the federal act -- sexual orientation, marital status, military status, arrest and conviction history, and lawful use of a lawful product.

The Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) provides for minimum wage, maximum hours of work, and overtime pay (among others). It requires that employees be paid at least once every month. The WI law provides greater protections, including the requirement that workers be paid at least twice per month and a more liberal granting of overtime. It also requires that the final paycheck be given within two weeks of departure.

The WI Civil Service Act affords protections to WI public employees and guarantee procedural due process to terminated public employees. There is no mirror federal act.

The Budget Repair Bill allows employers to establish a grievance arbitration procedure for employees. Every one of my clients is planning on adopting such a procedure even after the cba expires.

So, what are your fears and what evidence do you have to support that they will come true? I must be missing something here.

There is no provisions to reduce wages and unions are still permitted to collectively bargain on the topic of wages, so, that protection still applies.

Help us out here. Upon what are your fears based?

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

What would a self employed person need to earn to have the same level of compensation as the average teacher in WI?

ie with all the benefits and compensaton included for the teacher what is their annual compensation package.

Do teacher in WI work 12 months a year?

My Race Log

49

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

crusevegas - 2011-02-19 9:54 AM

What would a self employed person need to earn to have the same level of compensation as the average teacher in WI?

ie with all the benefits and compensaton included for the teacher what is their annual compensation package.

Do teacher in WI work 12 months a year?

No. WI teachers work 9 month per year. Most are paid over 12 months, but, that is only because they elect to spread their paychecks over that period (i.e., they are not actually paid for 12 months, they just receive paychecks twice a month during the 12 months).

Regarding how much they get paid, including benefits, below is a great source. You can search any district in WI and get a listing of the employees, the years of service, the pay, and the cost of benefits.

Now, understand that this is not "official." These are the numbers as reported to WI DPI - Department of Public Instruction. So, some numbers may be off or outdated. However, I have spot checked enough, based on the actual information I have, to say that they are, for the most part, accurate.

http://www.postcrescent.com/article/99999999/APC0110/80221166/DataMine-Search-Wisconsin-teacher-salaries

Extreme Veteran

499

Racine WI

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

Force and JSA,

As I previously stated, I understand and appreciate the financial crisis that the state currently finds itself in, and I honestly, don't mind the financial concessions that will need to be made by everyone in order to attempt to get the state budget back on track. The old "short term pain, long term gain" anology is where we need to go as a state. I also understand the governer's percieved need to do away with the local unions to attempt to give local governments the chance to also balance their budgets, but yet he has excluded fire and police unions (who were supporters of his during the previous election - that's unfortunately a pretty transparent exclusion).

I will conceed that I do not have any specific examples of unfair or illegal employer actions but that is because in my years as a state employee, workplace rules regarding my job requirements and performance has been governed by the contract between the union and the state employer.
Once the contract has been "voided", the state will have sole discretion to the implementation of the workplace rules. That is what concerns me the most, no oversight. To me, the potential for abuse of power where there are no longer guidelines governing the workplace rules or oversight, is most concerning. Like it or not, admit it or not, that potential for abuse of power is there. It comes down to an issue of safety, for the community, and yes, for me as an individual. On a daily basis, I work with offenders who have been convicted of sexual assaults, attempted murders, batteries, weapon charges etc. I would like to know that my safety and the safety of the community has not been comprimised by the state in effort to save a dime. Thats what the union provides, thats why I am objecting to the attempt to remove oversight power from the unions.

My Race Log

Champion

18680

Lost in the Luminiferous Aether

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

MarkK - 2011-02-19 12:56 PM Force and JSA,

As I previously stated, I understand and appreciate the financial crisis that the state currently finds itself in, and I honestly, don't mind the financial concessions that will need to be made by everyone in order to attempt to get the state budget back on track. The old "short term pain, long term gain" anology is where we need to go as a state. I also understand the governer's percieved need to do away with the local unions to attempt to give local governments the chance to also balance their budgets, but yet he has excluded fire and police unions (who were supporters of his during the previous election - that's unfortunately a pretty transparent exclusion).

I will conceed that I do not have any specific examples of unfair or illegal employer actions but that is because in my years as a state employee, workplace rules regarding my job requirements and performance has been governed by the contract between the union and the state employer.
Once the contract has been "voided", the state will have sole discretion to the implementation of the workplace rules. That is what concerns me the most, no oversight. To me, the potential for abuse of power where there are no longer guidelines governing the workplace rules or oversight, is most concerning. Like it or not, admit it or not, that potential for abuse of power is there. It comes down to an issue of safety, for the community, and yes, for me as an individual. On a daily basis, I work with offenders who have been convicted of sexual assaults, attempted murders, batteries, weapon charges etc. I would like to know that my safety and the safety of the community has not been comprimised by the state in effort to save a dime. Thats what the union provides, thats why I am objecting to the attempt to remove oversight power from the unions.

So would you then be OK with a removal of the union "oversight" if it was replaced by an impartial oversight commission?
This would be much less of a conflict of interest than collective bargaining by the unions.

49

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

MarkK - 2011-02-19 11:56 AM Force and JSA,

As I previously stated, I understand and appreciate the financial crisis that the state currently finds itself in, and I honestly, don't mind the financial concessions that will need to be made by everyone in order to attempt to get the state budget back on track. The old "short term pain, long term gain" anology is where we need to go as a state. I also understand the governer's percieved need to do away with the local unions to attempt to give local governments the chance to also balance their budgets, but yet he has excluded fire and police unions (who were supporters of his during the previous election - that's unfortunately a pretty transparent exclusion).

I will conceed that I do not have any specific examples of unfair or illegal employer actions but that is because in my years as a state employee, workplace rules regarding my job requirements and performance has been governed by the contract between the union and the state employer.
Once the contract has been "voided", the state will have sole discretion to the implementation of the workplace rules. That is what concerns me the most, no oversight. To me, the potential for abuse of power where there are no longer guidelines governing the workplace rules or oversight, is most concerning. Like it or not, admit it or not, that potential for abuse of power is there. It comes down to an issue of safety, for the community, and yes, for me as an individual. On a daily basis, I work with offenders who have been convicted of sexual assaults, attempted murders, batteries, weapon charges etc. I would like to know that my safety and the safety of the community has not been comprimised by the state in effort to save a dime. Thats what the union provides, thats why I am objecting to the attempt to remove oversight power from the unions.

If Walker struck a "sweetheart deal" with the police and fire unions, why are so many of them joining the protestors in Madison? If a purely political agreement with said unions had been reached, don't you think it would include a provision banning said unions from joining the festivities?

I believe I explained earlier in this thread how protective services are going to be impacted by this legislation. The other thing you have to keep in mind is that police and fire are governed by Wis. Stats. Section 62.13. "Rights" of police and fire are set forth in the statute and not in a collective bargaining agreement. So, police and fire cannot be lumped into the same category as other public employees.

What makes you think there will be no oversight after the passage of this bill? What makes you think there will be an abuse of power? Again, only 6.9% of the private workforce is unionized that they do not seem to have these same concerns. Why do you think it will be different in the public sector?

Master

1529

Living in the past

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

MarkK - 2011-02-19 11:56 AM Force and JSA,

As I previously stated, I understand and appreciate the financial crisis that the state currently finds itself in, and I honestly, don't mind the financial concessions that will need to be made by everyone in order to attempt to get the state budget back on track. The old "short term pain, long term gain" anology is where we need to go as a state. I also understand the governer's percieved need to do away with the local unions to attempt to give local governments the chance to also balance their budgets, but yet he has excluded fire and police unions (who were supporters of his during the previous election - that's unfortunately a pretty transparent exclusion).

I will conceed that I do not have any specific examples of unfair or illegal employer actions but that is because in my years as a state employee, workplace rules regarding my job requirements and performance has been governed by the contract between the union and the state employer.
Once the contract has been "voided", the state will have sole discretion to the implementation of the workplace rules. That is what concerns me the most, no oversight. To me, the potential for abuse of power where there are no longer guidelines governing the workplace rules or oversight, is most concerning. Like it or not, admit it or not, that potential for abuse of power is there. It comes down to an issue of safety, for the community, and yes, for me as an individual. On a daily basis, I work with offenders who have been convicted of sexual assaults, attempted murders, batteries, weapon charges etc. I would like to know that my safety and the safety of the community has not been comprimised by the state in effort to save a dime. Thats what the union provides, thats why I am objecting to the attempt to remove oversight power from the unions.

Mark: I'm still not convinced and the hyperbole remains. The "sky might fall" defense doesn't hold water for me. Your argument against the proposed changes is built on a bunch of 'might happens', 'could occurs', and an assumption of abuse of power. I have to twist, contort and squint a whole bunch to see your scenario play out and therefore I have to move forward knowing what is likely to happen with this legislation, not what might happen - state budget will move toward balance and the perversion of the proper relationship between tax payer (employer/customer) and employee will be corrected.

My Race Log

Elite

4564

Boise

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

crusevegas - 2011-02-19 8:54 AM

What would a self employed person need to earn to have the same level of compensation as the average teacher in WI?

ie with all the benefits and compensaton included for the teacher what is their annual compensation package.

Do teacher in WI work 12 months a year?

Even though I support the removal of the CBA I disagree with the teacher's only work 9 months issue. My wife is a teacher and typically she puts in 12 hour days M-F, along with another probably 8 hours per weekend. That's 68 hrs/week. If she works as a teacher for 9 months a year that's about an average of a 51 hour work week over a full year (for the record I did .75x365 days and rounded to 273 days in a school year including weekends, etc). Even when she has a holiday, she still goes into school to prepare lessons. So even though she only works from end of august until early june, she still works more than me who works full time year round.

Edited by JoshR 2011-02-19 2:00 PM

My Race Log

Extreme Veteran

499

Racine WI

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this subject. Your asking questions that I don't have the answers to. My only union experience has been in my current job, prior to this, I was a 22 year Navy vet so I cant speak to how other organizations have made the change from union to non-union and what issues they have faced. I am actually a registered Republican and voted for Walker knowing his intention of taking extreme measures in order to balance the state budget. That's one reason I voted for him. We need to take care of our fiscal house now in order to avoid larger problems in the coming years. As I said, I don't mind giving my "fair share" now in the hope that we will all be in a better place financially later. I see a lot of wasteful use of state funds in my job and hope that Gov Walker will address these wasteful practices also as he attempts to balance the budget and not place an unproportinate burden on state employees.

My "sky is falling" scenario is not an attempt to stop the financial crisis from being resolved in a reasonable manner by all parties. It is only an expression of a concern and belief of mine that once a "power vacum" is established, the potential for abuse and short-sighted management drastically increases.

I will be more than happy to re-adress this issue one year from now, and if I have been wrong, I will happily admit that. Unfortunately, if I am right, you won't need to look much further than the front page of your local newspaper to read about it.

My Race Log

Iron Donkey

38643

, Wisconsin

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

crusevegas - 2011-02-19 8:02 AM

1stTimeTri - 2011-02-19 5:28 AM

JSA - 2011-02-18 10:33 PM

Are you going back to the Capital tomorrow? I hope so. The Tea Party/Walker Rally starts at Noon. It will be a completely different show. Should be fun.

I know you truly believe "the people" support you and that you have substantial support nation wide. That simply is not true.

Walker has turned into the national symbol for gaining control over excessive expenditures. He is inspiring states all over the country to engage in the same cost cutting measures.

Think about this -- in less than 6 months, Scott Walker went from a little known County Executive to a National symbol of how to get fiscal control back in government. It is a true example of the American Dream.

An American Dream is made through compromise.

Cause hard work, risk and suffering is so yesterday.

I never said that it wasn't.
And if you were trying to be a bit smarmy, you should have at least used a few more o's in so.

My Race Log

Payson, AZ

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

JoshR - 2011-02-19 12:59 PM

crusevegas - 2011-02-19 8:54 AM

What would a self employed person need to earn to have the same level of compensation as the average teacher in WI?

ie with all the benefits and compensaton included for the teacher what is their annual compensation package.

Do teacher in WI work 12 months a year?

Even though I support the removal of the CBA I disagree with the teacher's only work 9 months issue. My wife is a teacher and typically she puts in 12 hour days M-F, along with another probably 8 hours per weekend. That's 68 hrs/week. If she works as a teacher for 9 months a year that's about an average of a 51 hour work week over a full year (for the record I did .75x365 days and rounded to 273 days in a school year including weekends, etc). Even when she has a holiday, she still goes into school to prepare lessons. So even though she only works from end of august until early june, she still works more than me who works full time year round.

I know teachers work hard, and all in all are underpayed and under appreciated. So, it'll be hard to not take this statement wrong, but it is not meant to belittle what effort a teacher puts in. But quite frankly I have to do that every week I work for all 12 months of the year and don't get payed extra for all my overtime. Corporations cut employees and make the remaining employees do more work with even shorter deadlines. I don't even know what my point is. Other then I quess I resent my job. Hum... I guess I would rather do that level of work for part of the year and have the full summer off is what I am thinking

My Race Log

Iron Donkey

38643

, Wisconsin

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

Once again, I thank those that are contributing, and keeping it civil.
As always, I keep learning.

I don't wish bad things to happen to private sector folks. It's bad enough out there with this economy.
I don't wish for anything bad or stupid to happen to a politician - the threats that were made against the Republicans were out of line.
I don't wish to see anyone lose a drastic pay cut.
I just want a compromise - it'll make everyone happy. That's all I ask.

My Race Log

Elite

4564

Boise

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

bzgl40 - 2011-02-19 6:09 PM

JoshR - 2011-02-19 12:59 PM

crusevegas - 2011-02-19 8:54 AM

What would a self employed person need to earn to have the same level of compensation as the average teacher in WI?

ie with all the benefits and compensaton included for the teacher what is their annual compensation package.

Do teacher in WI work 12 months a year?

Even though I support the removal of the CBA I disagree with the teacher's only work 9 months issue. My wife is a teacher and typically she puts in 12 hour days M-F, along with another probably 8 hours per weekend. That's 68 hrs/week. If she works as a teacher for 9 months a year that's about an average of a 51 hour work week over a full year (for the record I did .75x365 days and rounded to 273 days in a school year including weekends, etc). Even when she has a holiday, she still goes into school to prepare lessons. So even though she only works from end of august until early june, she still works more than me who works full time year round.

I know teachers work hard, and all in all are underpayed and under appreciated. So, it'll be hard to not take this statement wrong, but it is not meant to belittle what effort a teacher puts in. But quite frankly I have to do that every week I work for all 12 months of the year and don't get payed extra for all my overtime. Corporations cut employees and make the remaining employees do more work with even shorter deadlines. I don't even know what my point is. Other then I quess I resent my job. Hum... I guess I would rather do that level of work for part of the year and have the full summer off is what I am thinking

I'm not saying teachers need overtime, I'm just saying I think it is silly to say that just because Teachers only work during the school year they are actually getting paid well. Basically the argument that well 30,000 for 9 month is really like 40,000 a year for anyone else. Hell, my mom is a nurse and she gets a week off every 3rd week, but no one says she really is getting paid far more than her actual pay.

My Race Log

49

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

MarkK - 2011-02-19 2:25 PM I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this subject. Your asking questions that I don't have the answers to. My only union experience has been in my current job, prior to this, I was a 22 year Navy vet so I cant speak to how other organizations have made the change from union to non-union and what issues they have faced. I am actually a registered Republican and voted for Walker knowing his intention of taking extreme measures in order to balance the state budget. That's one reason I voted for him. We need to take care of our fiscal house now in order to avoid larger problems in the coming years. As I said, I don't mind giving my "fair share" now in the hope that we will all be in a better place financially later. I see a lot of wasteful use of state funds in my job and hope that Gov Walker will address these wasteful practices also as he attempts to balance the budget and not place an unproportinate burden on state employees.

My "sky is falling" scenario is not an attempt to stop the financial crisis from being resolved in a reasonable manner by all parties. It is only an expression of a concern and belief of mine that once a "power vacum" is established, the potential for abuse and short-sighted management drastically increases.

I will be more than happy to re-adress this issue one year from now, and if I have been wrong, I will happily admit that. Unfortunately, if I am right, you won't need to look much further than the front page of your local newspaper to read about it.

First of all, and most importantly, thank you for your service.

Knowing that you served for 22 years makes me even more confused as to why you feel such concern over the loss of some bargaining rights. Talk about a situation where you have no voice and your "boss" has absolute control!

I spent my first Army tour as a 12B - Combat Engineer during the Desert Storm era. My second tour was as a JAG Corps Officer where I served as Command Judge Advocate in the Gulf for round two the military's little jaunt in the region. Talk about a situation that had the potential for wide-spread abuse of the "little guy," jeesh.

But, did it? Are soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen abused, neglected, and in need of a union to ensure their safety and their rights? I sure don't think so.

You spent 22 years (in dedicated service to your country) in that environment. I am struggling to understand why you are worried about your current position.

49

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

JoshR - 2011-02-19 7:20 PM

bzgl40 - 2011-02-19 6:09 PM

JoshR - 2011-02-19 12:59 PM

crusevegas - 2011-02-19 8:54 AM

What would a self employed person need to earn to have the same level of compensation as the average teacher in WI?

ie with all the benefits and compensaton included for the teacher what is their annual compensation package.

Do teacher in WI work 12 months a year?

Even though I support the removal of the CBA I disagree with the teacher's only work 9 months issue. My wife is a teacher and typically she puts in 12 hour days M-F, along with another probably 8 hours per weekend. That's 68 hrs/week. If she works as a teacher for 9 months a year that's about an average of a 51 hour work week over a full year (for the record I did .75x365 days and rounded to 273 days in a school year including weekends, etc). Even when she has a holiday, she still goes into school to prepare lessons. So even though she only works from end of august until early june, she still works more than me who works full time year round.

I know teachers work hard, and all in all are underpayed and under appreciated. So, it'll be hard to not take this statement wrong, but it is not meant to belittle what effort a teacher puts in. But quite frankly I have to do that every week I work for all 12 months of the year and don't get payed extra for all my overtime. Corporations cut employees and make the remaining employees do more work with even shorter deadlines. I don't even know what my point is. Other then I quess I resent my job. Hum... I guess I would rather do that level of work for part of the year and have the full summer off is what I am thinking

I'm not saying teachers need overtime, I'm just saying I think it is silly to say that just because Teachers only work during the school year they are actually getting paid well. Basically the argument that well 30,000 for 9 month is really like 40,000 a year for anyone else. Hell, my mom is a nurse and she gets a week off every 3rd week, but no one says she really is getting paid far more than her actual pay.

Josh: I have no doubt, absolutely none, that your wife is a highly dedicated teachers who puts those hours in every day. My mom was a teacher for over 30 years and did the same. Used to kill me to see her put in those hours b/c she certainly was working well above her salary.

But, let's be honest - your wife, my mom - they are the exception and not the rule. For years I heard my mom being criticized by her colleages for "making them look bad." I heard her comment on the teachers who arrived minutes before the first bell and left seconds after the last. Tell me you have not heard your wife express the same.

NO profession -- none -- will be filled with over-achievers. Teacher are no different. They are no better and they certainly are no worse, than any other profession. I guarantee that everyone on this board can identify a number of people in their workplace who are just coasting.

You will never hear me say teachers are overpaid. That is an obsurd overstatement. But, when you factor in their benefits, they certainly are not underpaid.

And, what about those salary schedules? Step increments based on years of service? Lane increments for taking classes that are reimbursed by the district? Not a bad gig.

Extreme Veteran

499

Racine WI

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

JSA -
And to you, thank you for your service to our county. As you and I have both experienced the enlisted and officer side of our military careers, I think that you can appreciate and remember that the military (I dont think it matter which service you refer to) developes its leadership in a style and manner that is solely unique to the military. That is not something that is shared in other areas of employment, including some government management positions. What the union has provided in my limited experience has been a set of guidelines that management and employees are required to adhere to in the execution of our respective jobs no matter who the employee is, or who the "employer" is. I like knowing the rules, and I like knowing that there is a set of rules that management is required to also follow which will ensure that I am allowed to effectively and safely do my job.

Edited by MarkK 2011-02-19 9:24 PM

My Race Log

Master

5557

, California

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

What makes you think there will be no oversight after the passage of this bill? What makes you think there will be an abuse of power? Again, only 6.9% of the private workforce is unionized that they do not seem to have these same concerns. Why do you think it will be different in the public sector?

I've worked mostly in the private sector - tech - for the past 20 years and the difference between CEO & officer pay and pay of the average worker has skyrocketed. Jobs have been outsourced and/or H1B visa workers brought in. In fact I even remember workers at Amazon.com not long ago discussing the possibility of unionizing. Disclaimer: I never worked there but have friends who do.

The complaints you hear over and over again are "rising costs" and "healthcare". But that's happening in the private sector too. The difference in my line of work: we're salaried, so-called white collar employees. I'd say more weeks than not, I put in far and above 40 hours of work - just to keep my job. Oh they won't come out and say it but that's what the poor economy has provided: an employer's market, ripe for pressuring people.

If public sector jobs need to cut back expenses, then they should start from the top. If they did that, the unions would be much more receptive to bargaining.

My Race Log

49

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

spudone - 2011-02-19 9:30 PM

What makes you think there will be no oversight after the passage of this bill? What makes you think there will be an abuse of power? Again, only 6.9% of the private workforce is unionized that they do not seem to have these same concerns. Why do you think it will be different in the public sector?

I've worked mostly in the private sector - tech - for the past 20 years and the difference between CEO & officer pay and pay of the average worker has skyrocketed. Jobs have been outsourced and/or H1B visa workers brought in. In fact I even remember workers at Amazon.com not long ago discussing the possibility of unionizing. Disclaimer: I never worked there but have friends who do.

The complaints you hear over and over again are "rising costs" and "healthcare". But that's happening in the private sector too. The difference in my line of work: we're salaried, so-called white collar employees. I'd say more weeks than not, I put in far and above 40 hours of work - just to keep my job. Oh they won't come out and say it but that's what the poor economy has provided: an employer's market, ripe for pressuring people.

If public sector jobs need to cut back expenses, then they should start from the top. If they did that, the unions would be much more receptive to bargaining.

Have you read Gov Walker's bill? Tell me how his is not doing exactly what you suggest:

Pension changes for elected officials and appointees: The bill modifies the pension calculation for elected officials and appointees to be the same as general occupation employees and teachers. Current law requires these positions to pay more and receive a different multiplier for pension calculation than general classification employees. Under the state constitution, this change will be effective for elected officials at the beginning of their next term of office.

In addition, the 12% health insurance contribution and 5% pension contribution apply to state employee of all levels.

49

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

MarkK - 2011-02-19 9:23 PM JSA -
And to you, thank you for your service to our county. As you and I have both experienced the enlisted and officer side of our military careers, I think that you can appreciate and remember that the military (I dont think it matter which service you refer to) developes its leadership in a style and manner that is solely unique to the military. That is not something that is shared in other areas of employment, including some government management positions. What the union has provided in my limited experience has been a set of guidelines that management and employees are required to adhere to in the execution of our respective jobs no matter who the employee is, or who the "employer" is. I like knowing the rules, and I like knowing that there is a set of rules that management is required to also follow which will ensure that I am allowed to effectively and safely do my job.

Give me some examples. I would be willing to be the management rights clause in your collective bargaining agreement gives management to sole and exclusive right to created and implement work rules. I am also willing to bet management reserves the sole and exclusive right to determine the number of employees and the manner in which the operation is run. So, give me some examples.

Do you have a copy of your cba? What does the management rights section towards the front say?

I have been through this a few times in the private sector. This is the first time it has ever happened in the public sector, so, no one has experience in that. However, I think you will find it to be the same as I have experienced in the private sector. A lot fear, but no major problems.

Extreme Veteran

340

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

JSA...

Are you affiliated w/ Walker?

I ask in the spirit of 'Full Disclosure"

I've reviewed your posts and they seem one sided....

Thanks for any clarification.....

-John

Elite

2733

Venture Industries,

Subject: RE: Dear Gov. D-bag of WI:

crusevegas - 2011-02-18 4:37 PM

Brock Samson - 2011-02-18 1:20 PM

TriRSquared - 2011-02-18 4:12 PM

Brock Samson - 2011-02-18 4:09 PM

TriRSquared - 2011-02-18 1:36 PM

Brock Samson - 2011-02-18 1:31 PM

TriRSquared - 2011-02-18 1:09 PM Persoanlly I do not see a prpoblem with an "assult" on unions. Unions are an obstruction to the turnaround of the US economy.

I am neither pro-union or anti-union, neither am I pro-managment or anti-management. I believe that both parties have their short comings and both parties have there merits.

However, I find the idea that the elimination of unions will then somehow result in a more fair and equitable working structure almost laughable. To believe this you must believe that managment and owners, out of the shear goodness of thier hearts and their own personal desire to ensure fair wages, will give to their employees. History, and recent history, has demonstrated the contrary.

Good and successful companies do understand that they must treat their employees well if they want to maintain a happy and productive workforce.

How do you explain the vast majority of employees in the US who are NOT part of a union making a good and sometimes GREAT living?

Almost every single modern employee benefit, that we take for granted now, unions forced from the hands of ownership and management. Safe working conditions, child labor laws, minimum wages, health care, retirement. These were not freely given to workers/employees, they were forced concessions due to union pressure, and then became standardized through subsequent regulations.

I conceded they *had* their place. However these things are now laws.

I see you're from Fla., the reason I also have a problem with the "union" issue as it relates to public employees is that less than 5% of all public employees are in a union. (The Wisc. thing is apparently different, although I would be interested to see the actual percentage of public employees in Wisc. that are members of unions)

In Fla., which is a right to work state, this "union" issue is also being bandied about talking about reducing salaries/retirement benefits/health benefits. And it's a red herring because the vast majority, over 95% of all Fla. public employees are NOT in a union.

But, the anti-union sentiment is being used as a public argument to sway popular opinion against public employees. From the reports and arguments you would think that every public employee is a union member and all of our salaries and benefits are the result of collective bargaining. It simply isn't true.

Very true. Which is why the FL situation is different from the WI situation. While there are some similar points you cannot compare them apples to apples.

True, but they are trying to do the exact same thing to public employees in Fla. Reduction in benefits, reduction in retirement, reduction in health insurance. (for instance, the Governor has proposed changing the Florida Retirement service basis for calculating retirment income fomr the current calculation of the average of your last five years of pay to a new calculation of the average of all of your years of service. This will cost me about $40,000 a year!)

When an entitiy be it private or public runs out of money, someone is going to get stiffed, whoever is going to get a reduction isn't going to like it.

Every decision in life has some gamble to it, you don't like the results of your choice as it goes right now, that's life.

We're not talking about being stiffed. We're talking about fundemental changes to a negotiated employment contract. I can only talk about what's happening in Fla.

Again, this wasn't a gamble, this was a negotiated terms of employment. The State and the public employees engaged in a quid pro quo. The State wanted to save money up front. And durring the "good" economic times, the State chose to pay it's employees a lower salary compared to private sector workers. (No one in the public complained about this when this was happening) and in exchange for the concession of lower pay they offered certain benefits, including retirment and health care.

This wasn't a gamble. This was a term of my employment contract. I detrimentally relied upon this specific and articulated term of my employment contract in that I did not seek higher paying private sector work based upon this specific term of employment.

Now, the State want's to say: We paid you less for years ( in my case 16 years) and the portion of your contract that was agreed to to compensate for that lower pay we now aren't going to pay you.

Here pay more taxes...how's that. Problem solved.... Everyone is talking that the only solution is changing the pension payouts....Not true, another solution is to increase taxes. Why isn't that being discussed on this board?

My Race Log

Dear Gov. D-bag of WI: (Page 13)

REGISTER TODAY