Wisconsin Union Law Upheld

stokes234 said:
Except for the taxpaying union workers (ie. all of the union workers), who have just seen their overall wealth reduced. I wonder if the richest 10% are worrying about their benefits and pensions right now.
Click to expand...

Their "overall wealth" is still greater than the "overall wealth" of their counterparts working for private employers, union and non-union.

And exactly which of the benefits and pensions already earned does this legislation impact?

I am probably in the richest 10% of Americans, and I worry about my pension and my benefits - not in small part because the union that represents most federal goverment workers has managed to make goverment workers expensive beyond their actual worth.
 
bikerdruid said:
bureaucrats and lawyers are the bane of human existence.
any ten of them could be replaced by one good worker.
Click to expand...

Unionized workers are the bane of human existence.

Any ten of them could be replaced by one good worker.
 
sarge said:
Hard to tell sometimes. Was this tongue in cheek?


There are actually proponents of allowing servicemembers to unionize!
Click to expand...

I was serious. Enlisted guys work in horrible environments and conditions, even in peace time.
 
I know that this is an anecdote, but for me, the worst working conditions I ever had was one where I had to join a union to get the job.

I was in High School and worked as an usher at a movie theater for minimum wage and had to join the projectionists union. The worker-management relations were the worst of any job I had. The manager would routinely verbally abuse the staff. Once when I was cleaning a theater between showings by meself (a job usually done by 3 people) the manager came in, upset about the pace and yelled at me saying that "retarded people work faster".

The one and only time I got to speak with my union rep, I brought these issues up and specifically asked what value I was getting from my unions dues, since I only earned minimum wage. I got no response on the management issues, and was told that the dues helped lobby to get the minimum wage where it was. Needless to say, this experience seriously affected my views of unions and still does to this day.

Although I am still hesitant to restrict the rights of workers to unionize. It seems to me that the ability to unionize is a much stronger force for good working conditions than actual unions.
 
cwalner said:
I know that this is an anecdote, but for me, the worst working conditions I ever had was one where I had to join a union to get the job.

I was in High School and worked as an usher at a movie theater for minimum wage and had to join the projectionists union. The worker-management relations were the worst of any job I had. The manager would routinely verbally abuse the staff. Once when I was cleaning a theater between showings by meself (a job usually done by 3 people) the manager came in, upset about the pace and yelled at me saying that "retarded people work faster".

The one and only time I got to speak with my union rep, I brought these issues up and specifically asked what value I was getting from my unions dues, since I only earned minimum wage. I got no response on the management issues, and was told that the dues helped lobby to get the minimum wage where it was. Needless to say, this experience seriously affected my views of unions and still does to this day.

Although I am still hesitant to restrict the rights of workers to unionize. It seems to me that the ability to unionize is a much stronger force for good working conditions than actual unions.
Click to expand...

Well, at least they were honest about giving your money to Democrats...
 
stokes234 said:
If you're feeling insecure about your financial position on 100k a year, you need to learn to budget.
Click to expand...

You really know not of what you speak ... (you might also want to do some research first):

James Randi himself used to live in central New Jersey back in 1980. He admitted then to an income of around $40K and claimed that this in no way made him rich. Back then, I felt that it was a healthy income ... now, I know better, much better.

In the 1990's, then Governor Florio, ran on a platform of increasing taxes only on the "rich" ... which was in his view those making $35K and up. That's right, 10+ years after Randi himself admitted that $40K in 1980 was not a rich person's income.

Now it's over 20 years later. NJ is the most expensive state in which to live. The amount my family pays in overall taxes (for a very modest 3 bedroom ranch) in a single year can refinish my kitchen with Viking appliances. A teacher's starting salary in this state begins at around $50K ... many make close to the $100K mark. Toll booth collectors are close as well. So the thought that grouping all of the top 10% of income earners nationwide is somehow anywhere near some ridiculous equivalency is absurd at best. And the thought that mere budgeting will cure the ability to continue to afford the cost of living here on just a pension is ... well, there are rules of conduct on this forum that I will abide to.

Notice that Randi no longer resides in New Jersey. (As is true for a good many businesses over the years.)
 
Last edited:
stokes234 said:
I don't know about "close to becoming greece". Americans don't know how to have a good riot, and there's too many guns lying around anyway. But if you're struggling to pay the pensions that workers have been promised, maybe you should repeal the tax cuts you gave to the rich?
Click to expand...
Illinois gave no tax cuts to the rich. In fact we just had a 66% income tax increase, which as it turns out isn't putting a dent in our revenue shortfall in part because they keep spending more. And none of the state employee pensions come from federal tax revenue.

Politicians promised better pensions than they could deliver to avoid labor strife and continued support of the unions in elections. Besides, those problems won't manifest themselves for 20-30 years when said politicians will be long gone. Let the future people deal with the mess. Now it's the future.
 
Last edited:
BenBurch said:
Which is why we need to fund them.
Click to expand...
Or maybe get out of the business of pretending to be able to predict the future (which is what pensions do) and instead of defined benefit programs switch over to defined contribution programs, like the private sector has largely done. Pensions have failed wherever they were tried.

BenBurch said:
OR, we can cancel all pensions and benefits for current and former elected officials because it is unseemly to be keeping what you say you cannot afford for anybody else.
Click to expand...
Which wouldn't even make a dent in the problem. But they could show some actual leadership for a change and end the double-dipping and pension sweeteners they enrich themselves with.
 
WildCat said:
...
Which wouldn't even make a dent in the problem. But they could show some actual leadership for a change and end the double-dipping and pension sweeteners they enrich themselves with.
Click to expand...

Neither party is willing to do anything that will come out of their personal pockets. Some might claim they are going to in order to win votes from the gullible, but it never happens in Springfield.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Yes, it was the procedure. I think the content was never in question, at least from a legal perspective.
Click to expand...

This ^

While I'm personally bummed about the decision, and I do think there were procedural issues with how this law was passed, I respect the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision. I also think the issue should stop there, as I see no way this is a viable federal issue (any legal experts feel free to jump in and correct me).

I think the best option for those of us on the Democratic/union side of this issue is to hunker down, roll up our sleeves, and get ready for 2012 and those WI recall elections. Making our voices heard at the voting booth is the best way to go now - that's what allowed these Tea Party goofs to get into power in the first place, and it's what will get them out and more sane heads in.

So let's get moving.
 
Ziggurat said:
Don't be silly. Union workers don't picket. They outsource that stuff to non-union workers who work under terrible conditions for little pay.
Click to expand...

Interesting, seeing as how I've picketed multiple times. And I expect to again sometime in the future.

(Note for those unfamiliar with the language: "picket" doesn't mean the same thing as "strike". A "picket" is simply an exercise of free speech on public property outside of work hours, at least it has been in every case where I have picketed. A "strike" is much more serious, usually following unsuccessful picketing, and leads to basically shutting down the institution in question because the unionized employees walk out.)

ETA: For fuller context, the picketing in which I've taken part in the past has taken place on the public road in front of the school where I teach. Everything's on the up and up - we stay on the public sidewalk and street, we only picket before and after work hours, and we stay orderly and respectful. The police who show up to keep tabs on things are always thankful that we're so well organized, peaceful, and respectful about how we conduct ourselves.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom