Typically, the executive honors labor agreements that have been negotiated with unions.
But Walker is not a typical executive.
He’s not negotiating. Instead, Walker said if necessary he would literally call in the National Guard.
As Milwaukee County executive, Walker submitted two budgets that included tens of millions of wage and benefits concessions that had not been negotiated with the unions that represent county employees. Walker’s 2010 budget included $32 million of concessions that were not included in a tentative agreement his own labor negotiator had struck with unions at the time Walker had proposed his budget.
Walker’s 2010 budget was so unfair that an examiner for the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission declared that Walker had bargained in bad faith.
But that hasn’t deterred Walker from using the same tactic now as governor.
The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) concluded that the state would end the year with a surplus, so there is no need for a budget repair bill. Walker disputes those numbers, so he has submitted a budget repair bill that would strip collective bargaining rights from most state workers. Walker has excluded employees whose unions endorsed him in the 2010 election.
Typically, changes to bargaining rights would mean a change to state statutes.
Instead, Walker is using his unnecessary budget repair bill to drive a stake through the heart of Wisconsin’s social contract that has maintained stable labor relations with public employee unions for decades. Walker is trying to severely limit the rights of public employees in addition to requesting that they make wage and benefits concessions. But Walker’s demand for public employees to pick up more of their expenses would have a negative effect on the state’s economy by decreasing wages of middle-class workers; weakening their purchasing power at local businesses, putting more than 9,000 private sector jobs in jeopardy; and reducing property taxes statewide by an estimated $46 million, according to a recent study.
What’s
in the Works
Although
Walker and his fellow Republicans have blithely described the changes as simply
asking state workers to pay more for their health care and pensions, the
governor’s budget repair bill contains a slew of changes to public employee
union rights:
- Public employee unions would only be able to bargain for wage increases—and those increases could not exceed the consumer price index, unless it was approved by a referendum. Gone are negotiations about health care, seniority, job conditions or health and safety issues.
- Labor contracts would be limited to one year, which would result in nonstop negotiations between units of government and their unions.
- Unions would have to vote to be recertified annually.
- Exemptions are the
members of unions that supported Walker in 2010—law enforcement, firefighters
and state troopers and inspectors—because, Walker explained, they are critical
to public safety. Yet other public sector employees who are critical to public
safety—nurses, corrections officers, sewer and water workers, among many
others—would be subject to the new rules
Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett has taken issue with the exemption of fire and police employees, since they comprise 65% of the city’s operating budget salaries. Combined with Walker’s promise that his next budget will include large cuts to shared revenue sent to local governments, Barrett is concerned about the impact of Walker’s plans on the city’s budget.
“If we are going to ask our employees to shoulder the impact of the state’s budget deficit, it is only fair to apply it to all of them,” Barrett wrote in a letter to state legislators. “You should not give the Milwaukee police and fire unions a special exception to the changes in the bill, forcing all other employees to bear the burden of the cuts.”
- University of Wisconsin faculty and academic staff, University of Wisconsin hospitals and clinics employees, home health care workers in the Medicaid program and family child care workers would be stripped of their bargaining rights.
According to the state LFB, these proposals are non-fiscal policy items, which are typically not included in the state budget so that they can be fully debated by the state Legislature in separate legislation.
Are
Public Employees Overpaid?
Walker has
said that the labor changes are necessary because Wisconsin’s local and state
employees haven’t made the same sacrifices during the Great Recession as private
sector workers.
Walker
glossed over the fact that state employees had eight unpaid furlough days in
2009 and 2010, which saved the state $121 million, and their wages have been
flat for years.
He also
forgot to mention that when he was Milwaukee County executive, members of the
largest county employee union took 26 unpaid furlough days in 2010, or one
unpaid day off for every two-week pay period—a 10% pay cut. They’ll have 26
unpaid days off this year, too, as a result of Walker’s final county budget. (The
employees at the Shepherd Express, a
private sector company, did not have any wage decreases or forced furlough
days.)
So is Walker
correct when he says that public employees are making more than their
counterparts in the private sector?
The short
answer is no, according to a new study by the national nonpartisan Economic
Policy Institute (EPI), which found that Wisconsin’s state and local employees
earn 4.8% less per hour in total compensation than their peers in the private
sector. That number jumps to 25% for college-educated employees. EPI found
that, on average, Wisconsin’s public employees with a bachelor’s degree earn
$61,668 in total compensation; their peers working for private employers earn
$82,134 in wages and benefits.
And although
Gov. Scott Walker is earning $144,423 as a public sector employee with “some
college” education, his pay package is not typical. Public sector employees who
attended college but did not earn a diploma earn an average $46,707 in wages
and benefits, while those in the private sector earn 7% more, or $50,324, EPI
found.
Extra
Cost of Cutting Wages: Killing Jobs
Although
Walker took office promising to focus on job creation like a laser beam, he has
not explained how many jobs this budget bill would create.
In fact, a
new study by the Institute for Wisconsin’s Future (IWF) found that cutting
public sector employees’ pay to the degree demanded by Walker would be a
disaster for the state’s economy. In fact, about $1 billion of public employee
wages would be lost each year:
- State workers would lose $429 million of disposable income
- Local employees would lose $335 million of disposable income
- School district employees would lose $230 million of disposable income
“Public
sector workers are moderate-income people who spend the vast majority of their
income on consumer goods—unlike rich households who save the bulk of their
wealth,” wrote Jack Norman, the study’s author.
Since that
$1 billion would not be spent—and recirculated—in businesses throughout
Wisconsin, the study projected that 9,900 private sector jobs would be lost.
“State
leaders cannot make up for the loss in consumer purchasing power by an
equivalent amount of tax cuts,” Norman wrote. “That would worsen the deficit
and cancel out any savings created by cuts to public sector compensation.”
And what
about the ripple effect on local governments? IWF’s Norman calculated that $46
million of property tax revenue would be lost because of the wage cutbacks and
depressed economic activity. Dane County would be hit the hardest and lose $14
million in property taxes; Milwaukee County would lose $6 million in property
taxes.
*/?>
Walker is a complete idiot being pushed into this plan by the private sector out there wanting to steal from us tax payers. Scott is an equivalent to Al Capone and just as crooked!. Where are you hiding all the payola from these corporations Scott?.
Wow, 3 pages of comments! But, how many people check out pages 2 or later when they google the internet?... not many go past page 1... so I write in this spot.
Like others commented, one set of working or middle class against another set of working or middle class... because it's easier to go after the captive and relatively powerless than it is to go after the powerful who can afford to hire the big guns.
We all forget what really got us into this mess, and it is NOT Doyle, Thompson, Bush, Reagan, Clinton, Obama. It also isn't unions, illegal aliens or freed slaves. We've been in this mess since we started living off of credit, aka national (and consumer) debt. This cannot be solved at the state level, even if Walker is allowed to eliminate ALL state payroll. Only the input of lots of money from the outside will "solve" it.
All we can hope for as a state is to be considered a better place to go than some other states, but that still doesn't solve the problem. We need outsiders to bring their money to our state, we need to take from others (out-state) to make up for what we have already lost through taxes going out, purchase of out-sourced goods, etc.
Nationally, we cannot even tax the rich as a way out, US tax rates on the rich had to drop because the rich were going to countries where the taxes are lower. Look at all the multi-national businesses that re-incorporated in Bermuda, and now Ireland. Funny how they didn't move their HQ there, HQ is usually in Houston, TX, where the oil resources feed the state to where there is zero personal income tax. Good state to be in when you can pay yourself million-dollar CEO salaries and bonuses.
We got out of the Great Depression of the 30's by going into debt as a nation... taking on a "federal deficit". Easy to do when there is a World War going, and you can divert attention from the truth via calls of patriotism.
Later, we learned to switch much of that debt to personal credit. We did that as a nation through our federal guaranteed home loan programs like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Prior to that, you rarely got a loan unless you already had wealth, like farm land that you did not want to split up (called killing the goose that lays golden eggs). Selling off part of the land meant you could not make money on it any more.
It's a wonderful thing to make money, and ridiculously easy and accelerated when it is tapping into cash flow rooted in OTHER's debt, the more leverage you can get away with, the faster you can take money out for yourself. Did not matter if a private company or individual got rich off of government debt or off of consumer debt.
Why does debt matter, instead of fair trade or barter (or layaway?) It's all about dreams and the image you want to present to your peers. If you had to buy that item with cash, choosing to not spend that cash on another necessity, the price you are willing to pay will not be enough to allow the seller to make a profit. Credit allows the consumer to pay more than the item is really worth... that means profit for the seller... profit born out of your consumer debt. And don't think that tapping in to your home's equity was any better than a credit card, you still took on debt, and that is what crashed in 2008.
And that "credit" even counts when Uncle Sam buys that state-of-the-art military hardware!
Like a pyramid scheme, credit will collapse when there are no more suckers... I mean investors... to draw in. The only real growth is to grow something, (can be renewable, but limited by the slowness of nature), dig it out of the ground (non-renewable), or put labor into making a raw thing into a shiny useful thing.
You win when you have more stuff than your neighbor, "He who has the most toys wins." Hard part is taking care of all that stuff, keep others from stealing it, keep it from rusting and rotting. Now you hire others to assist you in taking care of YOUR stuff. Your firefighter's and cops, that's only there to protect your PROPERTY, not us worthless peasants. Why else do crimes of property get the most attention, but violence against takes a back seat?
The republican party hates unions, and has always wanted to get rid of them. They are using the bad economy as excuse to try to destroy unions.
Governor Walker’s proposals don’t end collective bargaining altogether, which is the charge being leveled by union members and media outlets throughout the country. This is just a smoke screen thrown up by union bosses and the people obligated to those bosses like Wisconsin Democrats and President Obama. But in truth, the governor’s actions are aimed at saving the state of Wisconsin from the bankruptcy it faces if someone doesn’t step up and pull these unionized masses off the taxpayer’s backs.
Whether intentional or not, along the way public employees grew more accustomed to having their pensions, healthcare, and unfunded liabilities paid by rank and file residents of Wisconsin. This must end and there’s finally someone willing to take a stand for those of us who can’t call in sick to protest our benefits packages.
The below comment was not posted by myself!
Governor Walker’s proposals don’t end collective bargaining altogether, which is the charge being leveled by union members and media outlets throughout the country. This is just a smoke screen thrown up by union bosses and the people obligated to those bosses like Wisconsin Democrats and President Obama. But in truth, the governor’s actions are aimed at saving the state of Wisconsin from the bankruptcy it faces if someone doesn’t step up and pull these unionized masses off the taxpayer’s backs.
Whether intentional or not, along the way public employees grew more accustomed to having their pensions, healthcare, and unfunded liabilities paid by rank and file residents of Wisconsin. This must end and there’s finally someone willing to take a stand for those of us who can’t call in sick to protest our benefits packages.
We have to keep in mind that all this disposable income being lost by state workers is money they are being overpaid for. Many state workers have "make work" jobs with no meaningful purpose other than a form of make-work do nothing jobs. We need to fire unproductive workers immediately. If they really do have a skill or purpose, private industry will suck them up quickly and put them to work. Public sector workers should make less than the private sector because for the most part, the jobs are just make-work jobs or welfare. Go to any state office building and what do you see? People just sitting around talking or staring at computer screens, waiting for 4pm to come. We need to privatize all many of these functions. Example - emissions stations. Everybody's car passes probably 99% of the time. If you have a 12 year old poluting clunker, you don't even need to go. Its a make work job.
Hi David;
What you say might be true but there are many hard working public employees out there. I take my job seriously and seldom take a lunch during my 8 hour day so I can keep up with the demands for what I do. Us civil servants of the city of Milwaukee have given up raises for the last 3 years and have saved the taxpayers almost one hundred ninety million dollars doing so, I also took the health plan that costs the taxpayers less and costs me more out of my pocket in an effort to save the tax payers dollars. What people don't realize and it's been tried in many other states is that privitization ends up costing more tax dollars due to kick backs corporations get for running the system, on top of the kick backs the employee's often steal quite a bit from us in the buildings us tax payers have paid for. I say don't put any trust in Scott Walker, because as I said he's no better then Al Capone, someday you will read about his corruption and scandles when the media finally exposes who's padding his pockets!
We do need fire and police. So there are many legitimate civil servent jobs. But something like Wisconsin Shares - where we pay people to babysit their relatives kids and then have a department to oversee it. Thats a waste. Unemployment after 26 weeks -- thats a waste. I really could care less about what kind of health plan someone gets, furlough days, pensions. Those have some value and are part of overall compensation. Being self employed I have no sympathy. I pays a ton of money into unemployment yet I'm not allow to lay myself off and collect. I get no sick days and must fund my retirement 100%. I must pay 100% of my health insurance and have a huge deductible. If more people were fired and rehired as 1099 workers with no labor contract, they would learn to appreciate their civil servent job. I'm having to spend at least 20 days a year attending workshops and conferences, just to keep up with how to avoid paying taxes, when I could be out producing more wealth. If more state workers were required to purchase their own individual health insurance and manage and fund their own retirement portfolio -- they would get a wake up call real fast on what its like in the real world.
Was just reading a liberal editorial entitled "Walker's Budget Strips State Worker's Right." Your damn right it does!!. One right they still have is they can opt into some other kind of employment someplace else. I was just thinking about how much money I donated to Scott Walker and how I expect a little payback on my investment. I wonder how much money state workers donated to Mr. Walker? I imagine they are getting a return on their investment as well. I know a lot of smart, intelligent, educated, wealthy, successful businesspeople and every one of them likes what Mr. Walker is doing. My accounant, attorney, financil advisor, pastor, doctors, bankers, and the many other hard working people in my support staff all feel the Walker way is the right way. Really, if I don't know anything, I think I have to trust their good judgment.
I just think we should all thank Mr. Walker for energizing our youth and getting them involved in democracy at an early age. Students that are supporting their teachers in mass will be voting soon. Scott Walker is doing a great job of laying the building blocks for sweeping changes that will soon sweep the old white males out of office and expose them for the whiners that they are.
How many of your friends, advisors and associates are middle aged white males? You all work soo hard I know, at whining about all the injustices.
Mr. Livingston,
How many of your public school teachers deserved to have their pay cut? Do you think about the education you received at taxpayer expense? Yes, you went to good public schools and now are turning your back on them. On second thought, maybe they should receive pay cuts for teaching the likes of you.
Why are the wealthy in America so unwilling to pay their fair share? Didn't this country allow you to make your fortune? Isn't contributing to the maintenance and future growth and development of this country in all of our best interest? Wouldn't the patriotic thing to do in an economic crisis, such as we've been experiencing, be to shoulder more of the burden until things turn around?
Rich people caused the financial calamity we're all being forced to endure, however, they have yet to feel any discomfort from the situation. Temporarily increasing the tax rates on the top earners would be more motivation to put AMERICANS (not Indians) back to work in order to ease the tax burden on themselves.
Skipping work to march on the state capitol is a sign of immaturity. I recall my very best and very favorite teachers. Growing up in a poor district I know they made very little. Yes they taught me the basic principles of captialism and wealth building. They were strong Nixon Republicans. Those teachers all retired wealthly not because of some public welfare pension but because they were wise investors and frugal with their money.
When I went to college I got a big lesson on teachers. Few people went to college to become teachers. They became teachers by default because they could not handle the rigors of business, health, engineering degrees etc. It was rumored to be the easiest major.
My first summer in college we had a diverse group in our dorms. We housed high school pom pom camps, cheerleader camps and also grad students. I recall the immaturity among a certain group of grad students. The men in particular, who would party every night and seduce the young high school girls. Who are these people I naively asked? I was told those are teachers getting their masters degree. After that I realized that while 25% of teachers are true professionals that deserve every penny they get and more, there is a large group of slackers and perverts, the kind that put their paycheck ahead of student. The kind that march on the Capitol.
"How many of your friends, advisors and associates are middle aged white males?" Thats a fair question. The answer is about 30%. About 50% are mostly white women with the remainder Asian/Indian or Arab.
The rich do pay their fair share, especially those with incomes. However a lot of wealthy people do not have taxible incomes. Many of my friends and neighbors own homes in Florida and claim residense there, where there is no state income tax. My friends in commercial real estate have positive cash flows but no taxible income. If you don't understand how that works, ask your accountant and they will explain. Many simply invest in double tax-free municipal bonds. I know wealtly people on Medicaid. On paper they have no assets and no income. It all is owned by a trust. The trust pays taxes. But in order to qualify for government assistance, their assets have to be out of their name and into a trust. I know former millionaires in nursing homes that with proper estate planning, transferred all their wealth to a trust in order to keep the nursing home from taking it. The taxpayer picks up the tab. Fair? Probably not, but those are the laws our elected officials have passed. Most of them Democrats.
david livingston,
I'm a public employee, last year I brought home $23,000. I have a bachelor's degree, haven't seen a raise in 4 years working for the state because of budget shortfalls, and, as an LTE, almost lost what little insurance and pension I have because of Walker's "budget repair" bill. Does it sound to you like I'm "overpaid" or have a lot of "disposable" income? I have a very specialized job, that there is no "private sector" equivalent of, and there are a lot of us that are in that boat. I have a very hard time believing that you would do what I do for the pay I get, and yet, what I do is for the people of our state, whether they appreciate it or not. You obviously have no clear idea of what goes on in state government. Do you really want to complain about the state employees that sit at their computers all day for half the money a private sector employee would do it for, answering emails and processing requests from the public, serving you even though you aren't even grateful for them doing it? You should spend a week in public sector and find out how much "disposable" income we all have. You'd never want to work a public job again and wouldn't have the integrity to do the things we do. And as far as the money that we'd be losing from our paychecks, that's not even the big issue. The point behind the outcry from public employees and from (most of) the public is the violation of employee rights and the inflammatory idea of calling out the national guard on state employees. You don't see any issues with this?
Joe Public Employee - You have made a deliberate choice to work for $23,000 year. But thats what you said you brought home. Perhaps you got another $60,000 in benefits such as healthcare, pension,social security match, and other perks. Maybe your pay is being garnished for bad debts and child support. I recall my last year working for "the man" I chose to have no take home pay - it all went to taxes, 401k, and alimony. Family court judge had no sympathy for me and my 77 cents per week take home pay when I tried to get alimony reduced. So don't give me any "take home" double talk. How can I conclude if you are overpaid? Still you chose to work for whatever salary you have. Why not choose to make more money doing something else? Of course I would not do what you do for the pay you get. And I'm sure you can figure out why.
@JoePublicEmployee: Grateful?? GRATEFUL?? How can you possibly be so arrogant? I have news for you, "Joe", unless you're a cop or firefighter, you're NOT a public servant- you're a GUY WITH A JOB, just like the rest of us. Your incredible arrogance is why you and the unions will ultimately lose this battle.
If you are actually "taking home" (a BS number right off the bat from a BS'er) only $23K, there are three possible reasons for that: (1) you are brand new to the workforce, (2) you love what you do and there is heavy competition for jobs in your discipline or (3) you are uneducated or a crappy worker. The fact that you are an LTE, and couldn't get hired "for real" points to the latter. As does your arrogant, crybaby attitude.
You're right- I'd never do your job for your pay. I'm valuable to my company. I've spent tens of thousands of dollars on education and thousands of hours making myself a better employee. I sit in front of a computer 60 hours every week, and yes- I process requests and answer questions from the public too. Apparently, I do it much better than you do.
As far as your last two claims go, Walker prepped the National Guard to step into jobs in the event you children walked out- like the teachers did. He never threatened to "call out the guard on public employees", you liar. Finally, you don't have a "right" to collectively bargain for work rules, pensions, sick days, vacation days, or health care benefits. This was a PRIVILEGE you were given by the people of Wisconsin. Now we're taking it back. Not because you're an arrogant horse's ass- only because we don't have the money to float your arrogant horse's ass anymore.
@PoliticalPygmalion
You are officially insane. Only cops and firefighters are public servants? What about nurses (at county run hospitals), corrections officers, DOT workers, garbage men, snowplow drivers, librarians, teachers, and social workers? I guess those people can go fuck themselves according to you.
@jacob clark- Nope. Don't put words in my mouth- that's not what I said at all. It's simple: if you put your life on the line as part of your job, you are a public servant. If your public sector job is replicated in the private sector, you just have a job.
There are a multitude of jobs out there- noble jobs, useless jobs, hard jobs, easy jobs, jobs that pay a high wage and jobs that pay low wages. A garbageman who works for a municipality is no more or less "worthy" than a garbageman who works for a private company that is contracted by a municipality, or by a private company.
JoPublicEmployee seems to think that because he is employed by the state, that he is somehow more "worthy" (whatever that means) than others who do the same job for private companies. He is wrong, arrogant, illogical, and generally unpleasant.
I don't think anyone should go f-themselves. You said that, not me.
So, does this really sound "insane" to you?
@PoliticalPygmalion
Why do people still believe that the private sector is more efficient than the gov't when just the opposite has been proven time and time again? Our soldiers used to drive trucks, wash their own clothes, and cook their own meals for $20,000 or so a year (yes that's really what they earn even in a time of war). Now we pay Haliburton employees upwards of $100,000 a year to do those very same jobs! How can that possibly be more efficient? How about the Wackenhut security guards who patrol MCTS? Those guys are essentially armed transit police who only earn $11 an hour. Not that you probably ride public transportation, but do you really think they're going to take a bullet for you when they only make $11 an hour? Just saying.
Do some of you people even read the article before you comment on it?? Non-partisan LFB says Wisconsin will end the year with a surplus! Public employees already have taken deep cuts... public employees on average don't make as much as the private sector...
When has a section of our society decided that if they aren't making as much as another worker, that worker should be brought down to their level? That that same section doesn't think the ultra wealthy should give their fair share and will vehemently fight for the wealthy to keep all their wealth.
And David, you should be ashamed of yourself, you'd rather spend 20 hours plus to try to find tax loopholes for yourself rather than paying your fair share and you are upset with public employees who just want to retain their rights to be treated fairly??!
@Erin- Did you bother to read the LFB report? I did. It shows a tiny surplus (54 million) in the GENERAL FUND. That leaves out a whole lot of state government, says nothing of municipalities, and does not take into account state aid to school districts. The Shepherd has never presented a report from a non-partisan group honestly. Give it a read- it'll be fun for you!
@jacob clark- Got to hand it to you. You somehow managed to bring Halliburton into the debate. Amazing. I would point out that it is the governmnet that is paying Halliburton. Just like the $500 toilet seats, the government almost gets it wrong, spends too much, and generally screws it up. As far as the Wackenhut MCTS guards go, you're so far afield it's barely worth responding. This debate, this bill is not about privatization. It is about bringing benefits for public employees into line with what the general public can get. @Erin- why is that important? Because the general public PAYS FOR THE BENEFITS! if you're earning more than me and being paid by a successful private company, I salute you. If I'm paying for it, and our largest school district has a 48% graduation rate, well, I want a better deal.
One more thing- the left is always whining about "what's fair". Is it fair to force me to pay, through public employee salaries, the union dues that are used to negotiate against me? I have a new idea for the Fairness Doctrine: for every dollar of union dues (collected by the government on the taxpayer's dime) used to campaign for Democratic politicians, public employees have to contribute one dollar to Republicans. Sounds fair, doesn't it?
@PoliticalPygmalion
WI was poised to have a surplus of $56 million thanks to Doyle raising taxes on those earning more than $300,000 per year as well as increasing the excise taxes on cigarettes and liquor. Too bad Walker already squandered this surplus in the form of tax cuts for the wealthy, adding $117 million to the state's deficit.
Walker squander everything that his predecessor built up for our economy, his wasteful spending will force many Wisconsin people to pack up and move from this tax burdened state. Why do we have to wait a year to get this loser and thieving governor out of office?.
Political Pygmalion; you are losing control of your senses. It appears to me you can’t see straight from all the bigotry and bitterness clouding your vision. Your reply to JoePublicEmployee’s credible post is way over the top--and you are now showing your true colors- so, as long as we are now name-calling; YOU sound like the most arrogant, ungrateful, selfrighteous, conceited, misinformed, bitter, condescending, crybaby, and sorehead horses-ass (I did see all your posts, man).
You complain, yet you choose to stay in the business that seems to give you grief. You complain about owning so much property you have to pay in 4 municipailities-how awful! You chose to own them-so SELL them! how lucky you are--a lot of people can’t even afford a roof over their heads with the low salaries and no benefits you stingy employers want to slather us with. I assume you live in the suburbs in a home most others could never afford. So don’t get all in a tizzy when the truth gets you between the eyes. JoePublicEmployee is right. And the next time you need some service done for you or your business from the state of Wisconsin, do us all a favor, do it yourself. What a creep.
Government workers that are appointed to "do nothing jobs" are usually appointed by top level officials. Top level officials like Scott Walker, when he was County Exec. or one of his department heads. It is likely that these would be non represented employees. Their job titles and job descriptions could be changed by the department head at will. This would have the benefit of having the job description reworded to give a raise in pay without any question. For union workers, there would have to be a contract for employees to receive a raise.
Who would give a no work job to a buddy only to have it subject to bargaining for wages and benefits? Not even Walker was that stupid!
It isn't just the unions of state employees that are being targeted here. I am an MCTS bus driver and I am sure I don't have to tell you how drastic the changes to our services have been. I don't mind paying more into my pension, or making other financial concessions. The real issue here is the potential loss of our bargaining rights. That is what union employees simply will not accept. Nor should we.
I agree 100%.
This is union busting on a state and national level. To claim it is budget repair is disingenuous. For Scott Walker and others at his educational level, disingenuous means: not straightforward or candid; giving a false appearance of frankness.
Collective bargaining is not a RIGHT. It is a PRIVILEGE. Last I read, about 18% of the American workforce is unionized. So why should less than 1 in 5 employees, public or private, be able to negotiate their healthcare, sick days, and work rules when the rest of us cannot? This is especially insulting when the union workers in question are paid by the rest of the taxpaying public- who by and large don't enjoy these privileges. If there were a surplus of dollars to work with, this would not be an issue. But there is no surplus, only deficits and debt that are becoming unmanageable.
Unions should only be able to negotiate salaries and paid vacation- just like the rest of us.
The public employee union model is fundamentally flawed. Under this system, the politicians who are willing to abandon fiscal responsibility benefit from campaign donations and advertising support paid out of union dues, collected by the entities that benefit from the fiscally irresponsible contracts these politicians agree to. This is a vicious cycle which started years ago. Republicans have been guilty too- but they haven't benefited from union support anywhere near as much as the Democrats.
I really don't understand this mentality at all. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps you should be paid more and you should have more bargaining rights in the workplace, rather than trying to strip those things away from public sector workers because you're jealous? Conservatives are trying to pit regular low-income people against public sector employees. Walker has actually characterized public sector workers as being "the haves" while everybody else are "the have-nots." At one point, back in the 40's and 50's, close to 40% of the country belonged to unions and the wealthiest 2% of earners paid a 90% marginal tax rate. It's no coincidence those times are often referred to as the "good ol' days.
As I've said before, a good chunk of the developing world is experiencing an industrial revolution. The Good Old Days are gone. We need to adapt, and part of the adaptation is not slathering our public employees with benefits that the private sector cannot offer and remain competetive in a global economy. Is it a coincidence that the worst performing companies in this country- the automobile manufacturers- are dominated by unions?
Do you have any comment on the inherent flaws in the public employee union model? Rewarding politicians for making fiscally irresponsible decisions?
I'm not jealous- I'd never be part of a union. My co-workers are not my brothers and sisters. I compete with them for limited payroll dollars, and I do so by working harder and doing a better job. I don't see that as unfair, I see it as rewarding and an important part of my personal development.
It occurs to me that I want to have a good job, and I want my company to thrive and grow. It occurs to me that YOU are the one pitting a tiny group of public-sector employees against the vast majority of the rest of us. It occurs to me that you are a student who probably has never even applied for a career position, paid significant amounts of taxes, or negotiated for a salary.
It occurs to me that I pay property taxes in 4 (count them- 4) municipalities. I'm doing my part- what are you doing? Why should the people my taxes pay be able to support politicians with my tax dollars when those politicians make decisions that hurt me and make my property taxes go up?
Any response to those questions? And please, no references to 60 years ago or the tired class warfare argument. Deal with this situation.
I am with Jacob on his response, let the rich who don't pay much taxes mend our debt!
Jacobs quote: I really don't understand this mentality at all. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps you should be paid more and you should have more bargaining rights in the workplace, rather than trying to strip those things away from public sector workers because you're jealous? Conservatives are trying to pit regular low-income people against public sector employees. Walker has actually characterized public sector workers as being "the haves" while everybody else are "the have-nots." At one point, back in the 40's and 50's, close to 40% of the country belonged to unions and the wealthiest 2% of earners paid a 90% marginal tax rate. It's no coincidence those times are often referred to as the "good ol' days.
scott walker is a wolf in sheeps clothing.my wife is a teacher and according to her many teachers in her district and other districts in the state,are willing to pay their fair share.remember this is about all state employees.but,to just step in and dictate these changes is ludicrous.thse steps are part of the master plan to make wisconsin a right to work state and nothing else.what does stripping all these people of their worker rights have to do with creating the jobs walker talked about previously??? not a damn thing.union busting is exactky is what this is.l
Tend to agree with Iron Worker, Walker is an idiot and doing this will not make new jobs. When you're getting paid what he is for being Governor and receiving that plus all the free benefits when he finishes his term you wouldn't give a hoot either. Hope the loser gets busted turning his term for graft and corruption!
Mb;
Political Pygmalion; you are losing control of your senses. It appears to me you can’t see straight from all the bigotry and bitterness clouding your vision. Your reply to JoePublicEmployee’s credible post is way over the top--and you are now showing your true colors- YOU sound arrogant, ungrateful, selfrighteous, bitter, condescending, and a "crybaby" sorehead (I did see all your posts, man).
You complain, yet you choose to stay in the business that seems to give you grief. You complain about owning so much property you have to pay in 4 municipailities!!-4!! how awful! You chose to own them-so SELL them!
how lucky you are--a lot of people can’t even afford a roof over their heads with the low salaries and no benefits you stingy employers want to slather us with. I assume you live in the suburbs in a home most others could never afford.
So don’t get all in a tizzy when the truth gets you between the eyes. JoePublicEmployee is right. And the next time you need some service done for you or your business from the state of Wisconsin, do us all a favor, do it yourself.