Wisconsin Union Bill

[Bob Maxey]

You must be in a union.

Union official are as corrupt as the corporate management counterpart.

The problem is nobody wants to give. The same people complaining about union wages will fight like hell if their company reduces their wages . We all need to give something up for peace and prosperity and security down the road. Not me, naturally, but you all should.

Union members will argue that their union is good for them and the company and as one forum member pointed out, a union can call a strike and end a company. Union officials will make the case that a parts washer in a manufacturing plant actually does need 60.00 per hour in wages and benefits; the minimum wage worker asks why.

A union member wont cross picket lines because I think they fear a horse head in their bed the next day.

My question is this: are all unions the same way or are a few bad examples of union behavior making it seem all unions are bad?

Bob Maxey

 

[Dark Jedi]

The problem is nobody wants to give. The same people complaining about union wages will fight like hell if their company reduces their wages . We all need to give something up for peace and prosperity and security down the road. Not me, naturally, but you all should.

Union members will argue that their union is good for them and the company and as one forum member pointed out, a union can call a strike and end a company. Union officials will make the case that a parts washer in a manufacturing plant actually does need 60.00 per hour in wages and benefits; the minimum wage worker asks why.

A union member wont cross picket lines because I think they fear a horse head in their bed the next day.

My question is this: are all unions the same way or are a few bad examples of union behavior making it seem all unions are bad?

Bob Maxey

I know where my wife works the union and management works hand and hand. If a union worker dont do their job. the union will back the firing of the worker. no saving of his and her job. Plus the management will give perks for sections to work when they not suppose to. So after seeing this at my wifes work I can say not all unions are the same cut throat milk a company for all their worth.

 

[Bob Maxey]

I know where my wife works the union and management works hand and hand. If a union worker dont do their job. the union will back the firing of the worker. no saving of his and her job. Plus the management will give perks for sections to work when they not suppose to. So after seeing this at my wifes work I can say not all unions are the same cut throat milk a company for all their worth.

That is how it should be. All too often, we hear the abuse stories and never learn of those situations like your wife's company.

Bob Maxey

 

[Hangdog42]

You must be in a union.

Union official are as corrupt as the corporate management counterpart.

For the record, no I'm not in a union. I'm just an average American who recognizes that before unions existed, companies abused workers without mercy. And yes, I do recognize that many unions have gotten just as fat, lazy and stupid as corporate management has. What you're missing is the point that unions don't bear the sole blame here. For every stupid decision, there was a manager or a politician agreeing to it. However, at this point all of the blame is being placed on the unions, and that isn't right. Read through this thread. Until I brought up management culpability, nobody was talking about. It was all the unions fault.

Why are you so hung up on fault? From what I read in Wisconsin the concessions to the public unions began in the 1950's. I suppose a Wisconsin Governer's body from the 1950's could be exhumed and flogged in a public square but where will that leave today's taxpayers?

I'm hung up on fault? Again, read through the thread, everybody is blaming the unions, and only the unions, for this mess. And as for today's taxpayers, how will removing the right to collective bargaining balance the budget? The money is a completely separate issue. If the budget has to be cut, then cut the budget. The Wisconsin Democrats have already said that they will vote for the budget cuts, just not budgets cuts and eliminating collective bargaining. So now who is the obstacle? Is the goal to get the budget under control or is the goal to remove the rights of working Americans?

I know where my wife works the union and management works hand and hand. If a union worker dont do their job. the union will back the firing of the worker. no saving of his and her job. Plus the management will give perks for sections to work when they not suppose to. So after seeing this at my wifes work I can say not all unions are the same cut throat milk a company for all their worth

This is exactly my point. If unions and management actually behave themselves, it is to everyone's benefit.

 

[Dark Jedi]

Um your second quote I didnt say.

(mod note - fixed that for you)

 

[Dark Jedi]

and no people are blaming the union for not wanting to help with the budget. Thats what people are blaming the union members for.

 

[fatfenders]

It would seem to me, that with all the focus on the union folks here, and the perceived notion that the terms 'corruption' and 'unions' are not unoften heard in the same sentence, they would avoid anything that suggested impropriety. Yet here we have this little bit of news...
"Doctors from numerous hospitals set up a station near the Capitol to provide notes to explain public employees' absences from work. Family physician Lou Sanner, 59, of Madison, said he had given out hundreds of notes. Many of the people he spoke with seemed to be suffering from stress, he said.
"What employers have a right to know is if the patient was assessed by a duly licensed physician about time off of work, " Sanner said. "Employers don't have a right to know the nature of that conversation or the nature of that illness. So it's
as valid as every other work note that I've written for the last 30 years."

For me, this little anecdote serves as a typical example of the union mentality arrogance and dishonesty.

"Stress". Yea, right. I would be stressed to if I had to give up their sweet deal and actually do such unreasonable things as pay a little more into my own retirement.

 

[Hangdog42]

and no people are blaming the union for not wanting to help with the budget. Thats what people are blaming the union members for.

You know, I would love to see a list of people volunteering to have their salary and benefits cut in order to balance the budget. Do you see farmers saying no to handouts? Do you see retirees marching to have Social Security cut? How about the police volunteering to have furloughs to balance the budget? And once again, how does removing the right to collective bargaining solve the budget problem? The fact is it doesn't, not a single dollar of spending will be affected by removing collective bargaining.

Are union members going to have to face up to the fact that they are going to have to pay more for their retirement and health insurance? Yeah, they are. But that all by itself isn't going to solve the budget problems in most states, or at the federal level. If the governor of Wisconsin were honest, he would be proposing an overall budget that hits pretty much everyone, not exempting some workers and programs and taxpayers. Shared pain is going to be the only way we get out of this.

 

[cjr72]

And once again, how does removing the right to collective bargaining solve the budget problem? The fact is it doesn't, not a single dollar of spending will be affected by removing collective bargaining.

So what does the unions lose if collective bargaining is removed?

 

[Hangdog42]

So what does the unions lose if collective bargaining is removed?

Uh, the ability to function as a union? Collective bargaining is the whole reason to have a union. Without collective bargaining, there is no union.

 

[Healz]

If you take away collective bargaining then under the Taylor law you give the union the right to strike. I do not want strikes or walkouts this could paralyze all of Government and most of the pirate sector also

 

[cjr72]

Uh, the ability to function as a union? Collective bargaining is the whole reason to have a union. Without collective bargaining, there is no union.

So what do the workers lose if they aren't in a union?

 

[cmkuhl]

If you take away collective bargaining then under the Taylor law you give the union the right to strike. I do not want strikes or walkouts this could paralyze all of Government and most of the pirate sector also

They are striking right now, so IMHO, they broke the deal and its null and void! Take collective bargaining and shove it.

 

[Hangdog42]

So what do the workers lose if they aren't in a union?

The right to collective bargaining isn't about whether or not a worker is in a union or not. Workers always have the right to work someplace that isn't part of a union. But if workers choose to unionize, who gives the government the right to prevent that?

They are striking right now, so IMHO, they broke the deal and its null and void! Take collective bargaining and shove it.

The Taylor law is a New York law and doesn't apply to Wisconsin. Might want to do your research before spouting off in ignorance.

 

[cjr72]

The right to collective bargaining isn't about whether or not a worker is in a union or not. Workers always have the right to work someplace that isn't part of a union. But if workers choose to unionize, who gives the government the right to prevent that?

Why would workers want to be in a union that collectively bargains? Is there something to be gained by it?

 

[Bob Maxey]

The right to collective bargaining isn't about whether or not a worker is in a union or not. Workers always have the right to work someplace that isn't part of a union. But if workers choose to unionize, who gives the government the right to prevent that?

I looked it up, Collective Bargaining defined:

Good-faith process between an organization's management and a trade union representing its employees, for negotiating wages, working hours, working conditions, and other matters of mutual interest. To the management, this process presents (usually) one set of people to negotiate with; to the employees, it gives greatly enhanced bargaining-power. Collective bargaining is the fundamental principle on which the trade union system is based.

Bob

 

[Bob Maxey]

Oh, and screw unions, I worked as a scab during the grocery store strikes. Now every time I go to albertson's and check myself out in the automated lanes, I make it a point to ask anyone with me, don't you think its weird that these people felt they had the right to strike when they can be replaced by machines so easily??

I am not an expert on the history of Unions in this country, but it seems to me I recall reading stories about replacing people with machines. The unions caused serious issues for manufacturers that adopted machines and let workers go.

By the way, I love those machines at checkout. Easy, fast, and the machine does not put the cans of clam chowder on top of the dinner rolls. I think they save us money, too.

Bob Maxey

 

[copestag]

you guys are gonna get earlymon all worked up and make him delete a bunch of posts and lock another thread........ cant you for once have a discussion on a topic in a civil manner? theres really no need for all the personal attacks..... each person is entitled to their opinion and it is simply that OPINION

also for those who are forming their opinions one way or the other based on a headline from their favorite biased (in either direction) news site...... here is a link to the actual bill if you would like to read for yourself and see what actually is in it in referrence to collective bargaining.....

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/data/SB-13.pdf

 

[Hangdog42]

also for those who are forming their opinions one way or the other based on a headline from their favorite biased (in either direction) news site...... here is a link to the actual bill if you would like to read for yourself and see what actually is in it in referrence to collective bargaining.....

Sorry, that isn't the right bill. The bill in question is Assembly Bill 11, not Senate Bill 13


http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2011/data/JR1AB-11.pdf

 

[EarlyMon]

you guys are gonna get earlymon all worked up and make him delete a bunch of posts and lock another thread........ cant you for once have a discussion on a topic in a civil manner? theres really no need for all the personal attacks..... each person is entitled to their opinion and it is simply that OPINION

I would like everyone here to note that copestag is staff and his views on this matter absolutely reflect policy set by AndroidForums.com management - in fact - they accurate paraphrase the site rules and guidelines that each of you were required to read when becoming a member of AF.

The site rules are linked in my sig. I would urge everyone with missing posts to read them.

In the meantime, I'll give you my two favorites, also paraphrased:

1. Attack issues and not each other
2. Stay on-topic - discuss the discussion and not each other

Admin sums in up in one simple rule and it's not negotiable:

• Please be polite

Minimum penalty for not paying attention to this warning shall be a 7-day ban from Android Forums.

 

[Dark Jedi]

You know, I would love to see a list of people volunteering to have their salary and benefits cut in order to balance the budget. Do you see farmers saying no to handouts? Do you see retirees marching to have Social Security cut? How about the police volunteering to have furloughs to balance the budget? And once again, how does removing the right to collective bargaining solve the budget problem? The fact is it doesn't, not a single dollar of spending will be affected by removing collective bargaining.

Are union members going to have to face up to the fact that they are going to have to pay more for their retirement and health insurance? Yeah, they are. But that all by itself isn't going to solve the budget problems in most states, or at the federal level. If the governor of Wisconsin were honest, he would be proposing an overall budget that hits pretty much everyone, not exempting some workers and programs and taxpayers. Shared pain is going to be the only way we get out of this.

I am not saying anyone likes it. There comes a time when everyone has to accept some kinda cut to help their company/gov. I know when I worked at mohawk I was a Fixer of weaving looms. Then we had layoffs and I had to go back to my old job of a Leader in fill yarn section. I was lucky I didnt have to take a paycut but 3 months later I had to take almost a $4 an hour paycut when they cut the leader from 2 per shift to 1 per shift. So I went to a fill yarn operator. Sure I hated it but its better to take a pay cut and have a job than to show my butt and not have a job.

Union reminds me of lil kids and I dont think its fair that if they dont agree they do that mass sick day. To me they dont care about their jobs. All they are worried about is how much money they can milk out of people. Case in point Those teachers that so many called in that schools all over had to shut down. I think when on video those teachers are id they should be fired on the spot. As it shows they are not sick. I know if I did this I would be fired on the spot from my job.

Basically they should be told either you take it or you dont work no more in that job. I agree the Governor and other officials should make a sacrifice also. As a sign of good faith.

I know the Governor in VA is getting rid of all Government worker cell phones provided by the State gov. He gave up his voluntarily and said everyone else will be losing theirs. Its nice to see the fat slowly trimmed. Its a start and hope more to come.

 

[ElasticNinja]

To me they dont care about their jobs. All they are worried about is how much money they can milk out of people

so true in many cases
Here the Unions when negotiating with the Government would've genuinely preferred to have 10% job cuts rather than a 10% pay cut

 

[Dark Jedi]

so true in many cases
Here the Unions when negotiating with the Government would've genuinely preferred to have 10% job cuts rather than a 10% pay cut

This is so true. When I worked at McQuay We had a layoff looming and they wouldnt have to layoff anyone if the union agreed to everyone work a 32 hour week. These was the union reps exact words. We aint giving up our pay. Lay them off. So yeah they only care about them selves as long as they are not the one affected. Sad thing was so many new guys just hired fell for the unions lies of hey you join the union and we will fight for your job. Well you saw just how hard they fought for them guys that paid them union dues for nothing. Why I never joined that union as I know my job wasnt secured as every fall they have a big layoff.

 

[Hangdog42]

[QUOTE=Dark Jedi]I am not saying anyone likes it. There comes a time when everyone has to accept some kinda cut to help their company/gov.[/QUOTE]

They already have accepted the cuts. The issue in Wisconsin isn't about the union accepting reduced pay and increased health and retirement payments. The senators that left the state have said that they will absolutely vote for the governors proposal on wages and benefits. What they are upset about is the governor removing the right to have a union.

Here the Unions when negotiating with the Government would've genuinely preferred to have 10% job cuts rather than a 10% pay cut

If people don't like the way the union represents them, they shouldn't join one. It really is pretty simple. And from the government's point of view, a 10% job cut is probably a better deal since both wages and benefits go away. Sure, it sucks big time if you're one of the people losing a job, but that is the way a free market works.

 

[mdram]

[QUOTE=Dark Jedi]
If people don't like the way the union represents them, they shouldn't join one. It really is pretty simple. And from the government's point of view, a 10% job cut is probably a better deal since both wages and benefits go away. Sure, it sucks big time if you're one of the people losing a job, but that is the way a free market works.

the problem with this is that if you take a certain job you have to join the union many places. or maybe your shop when union after you were hired, but you voted against it. yes you can leave, if you can find a new job.

union membership should not be mandatory