End Public Sector Unions Period.

[shintao]

The taxpayer is well served by a public employee who has sufficient job security to do his assigned work well and fairly, without regard to the political ties of the member of the public he is dealing with

Their job security is guaranteed by two things no private sector employee has. Government guns shutting down their competition and the ability to confiscate money at the point of a gun rather then from customers with a choice. I own two businesses, one is a restaurant. The health department regularly inspects me, and sends me a bill for doing it. For both businesses, the fire marshall inspects and sends me a bill. The county sends me a bill to tax me on all my possessions. And that doesn't even count the Federal and State governments forcing me to pay taxes on my income. No private sector company can do that. As a taxpayer, I shouldn't be subject to getting reamed yet once again by bureaucrats giving more pay and benefits beyond what private employers get because they demand it. They should get jobs that contribute to the economy. They are the economic equivalent of welfare recipients, only they get to chose what they get and force us to pay it.

The IRS is a private Corporation from the private sector. How many more tax collectors are private firms working on contracts?

 

[boedicca]

Who is at the bargaining table?

Are you really this dense? Don't bother answering, it's a rhetorical question.

In a typical public employee union negotiation, the parties at the table are career politicians and the union reps - who are really on the same side. The former agree to excessive comp packages (to be paid for by future taxpayers who didn't elect them) in exchange for union support and donations.

Gov. Walker has said no to this con game. Good for him.

 

[B. Kidd]

Funny thing about civil service tests and lists; they still have to interview from them til they get to Larry's other brother Larry, who doesn't necessarily have to be in the top scoring group to get hired.

 

[boedicca]

The IRS is a private Corporation from the private sector. How many more tax collectors are private firms working on contracts?

B'loney. I call shenanigans.

LINK?

 

[kaz]

The taxpayer is well served by a public employee who has sufficient job security to do his assigned work well and fairly, without regard to the political ties of the member of the public he is dealing with

Their job security is guaranteed by two things no private sector employee has. Government guns shutting down their competition and the ability to confiscate money at the point of a gun rather then from customers with a choice. I own two businesses, one is a restaurant. The health department regularly inspects me, and sends me a bill for doing it. For both businesses, the fire marshall inspects and sends me a bill. The county sends me a bill to tax me on all my possessions. And that doesn't even count the Federal and State governments forcing me to pay taxes on my income. No private sector company can do that. As a taxpayer, I shouldn't be subject to getting reamed yet once again by bureaucrats giving more pay and benefits beyond what private employers get because they demand it. They should get jobs that contribute to the economy. They are the economic equivalent of welfare recipients, only they get to chose what they get and force us to pay it.

The IRS is a private Corporation from the private sector. How many more tax collectors are private firms working on contracts?

OMG. Every time I think the left can't get any more clueless...

 

[Samson]

Who is at the bargaining table?

Are you really this dense? Don't bother answering, it's a rhetorical question.

In a typical public employee union negotiation, the parties at the table are career politicians and the union reps - who are really on the same side. The former agree to excessive comp packages (to be paid for by future taxpayers who didn't elect them) in exchange for union support and donations.

Gov. Walker has said no to this con game. Good for him.

Yes, shintao really is that dense.

This is "Who is At the Bargaining Table."

 

[Wry Catcher]

Bull shit.

Even FDR realized that unions for public employees are a very bad construct.

I've never heard or read such a comment by FDR ('cept from you). Do you have a quote or link to such a comment?

 

[Wry Catcher]

I understand the anger at public employees. For many, such as Willow Tree, are too stupid to pass a civil service test and lacking any skills are green with envy.

Others have bought the propaganda, and joined the herd bleating the emotion stirred by the power elite. An elite motivated by avarice and aided in this coup by NewsCorp and the GOP, pitting working people against working people, in an effort to divide and conquer the hoi polloi - their enemy.

Thinking, rational and non-callous people understand our nation's, and the world's, economies are in trouble - only in the United States is the cause of this ecomomic malaise blamed on one group of people. It is easy to scapegoat, but the RW should be careful of the goat chosen and the consequences should they actually get what their emotions desire.

Public and private sector unions have been on the radar, a target of the 'conservative' movement since Reagan was elected and thus far been successful. The success has resulted in a shrinking middleclass, an increase in the numbers of Americans living below the poverty line and the creation of a class of billionaires insulated from 98% of the American People.

This is not sustainable. As Amercians we all need to pull together. Public unions have offered consessions, yet compromise is not in the lexicon of the New Right; divide and conquer in a zero sum game is the plan of elected Republicans and those who control them.

Every once in a while I read in hopes that they have grown-up, posts from those I have ignored for months .

Even by WC standards of continuously streaming platitude, his rambing babble is more vapid than usual.

Other than insulting Willow, and broadbrushing an imaginary right-wing, conservative, republican conspiracy, he has no comment.

Clearly your condition is deteriorating.

Very good sammie, you've progressed from one-line glibness to several ad hominems aided by your thesaurus. I'm so impressed. The fact that your post offers no counter-point, nothing of substance or any real thought is however a good example of your typical tripe.

 

[boedicca]

Here you go:

"The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service," Roosevelt wrote in 1937 to the National Federation of Federal Employees. Yes, public workers may demand fair treatment, wrote Roosevelt. But, he wrote, "I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place" in the public sector. "A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government."

RealClearPolitics - FDR's Ghost Is Smiling on Wisconsin's Governor

The full letter:

My dear Mr. Steward:

As I am unable to accept your kind invitation to be present on the occasion of the Twentieth Jubilee Convention of the National Federation of Federal Employees, I am taking this method of sending greetings and a message.

Reading your letter of July 14, 1937, I was especially interested in the timeliness of your remark that the manner in which the activities of your organization have been carried on during the past two decades "has been in complete consonance with the best traditions of public employee relationships." Organizations of Government employees have a logical place in Government affairs.

The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.

Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that "under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government."

I congratulate the National Federation of Federal Employees the twentieth anniversary of its founding and trust that the convention will, in every way, be successful.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=15445

 

[rightwinger]

So, essentially the Republicans want to set up a situation where they are guaranteed to always win

Government can bring in as many high powered representatives as they wish while labor must negotiate one on one

I'd like a fight too where the other side has both hands tied behind its back

 

[shintao]

American Thinker: End Public Sector Unions...Period



No one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated." Outstanding..

Who is at the bargaining table??

That's the point, Sherlock.

That's a confirmation, home boy.

WHO IS AT THE BARGAINING TABLE?

 

[WillowTree]

American Thinker: End Public Sector Unions...Period

It's about time. I've been waiting for this debate to mature for 15 years.


The battles in Wisconsin and New Jersey over public sector union benefits are merely financial precursors to a much bigger ideological war that has been on the horizon now for years, if not decades. When you acknowledge the coming battle, you realize that Governors Walker and Christie -- courageously as they are behaving -- are only nibbling at the edges of the real issue.


And the real issue is whether public sector unions should even be allowed to exist. Frankly, when even a modicum of common sense is infused into the equation, the answer is a resounding no. And the foundational reason is simple. There is no one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated.


Gee, what could possibly go wrong?

No one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated." Outstanding..

Who is at the bargaining table??

the private sector, the taxpayer.

 

[WillowTree]

I understand the anger at public employees. For many, such as Willow Tree, are too stupid to pass a civil service test and lacking any skills are green with envy.

Others have bought the propaganda, and joined the herd bleating the emotion stirred by the power elite. An elite motivated by avarice and aided in this coup by NewsCorp and the GOP, pitting working people against working people, in an effort to divide and conquer the hoi polloi - their enemy.

Thinking, rational and non-callous people understand our nation's, and the world's, economies are in trouble - only in the United States is the cause of this ecomomic malaise blamed on one group of people. It is easy to scapegoat, but the RW should be careful of the goat chosen and the consequences should they actually get what their emotions desire.

Public and private sector unions have been on the radar, a target of the 'conservative' movement since Reagan was elected and thus far been successful. The success has resulted in a shrinking middleclass, an increase in the numbers of Americans living below the poverty line and the creation of a class of billionaires insulated from 98% of the American People.

This is not sustainable. As Amercians we all need to pull together. Public unions have offered consessions, yet compromise is not in the lexicon of the New Right; divide and conquer in a zero sum game is the plan of elected Republicans and those who control them.

Keep all the private unions you can afford. but don't expect us to pay for you public sector unions and their benefits, pay your own damn benefits.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here you go:

"The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service," Roosevelt wrote in 1937 to the National Federation of Federal Employees. Yes, public workers may demand fair treatment, wrote Roosevelt. But, he wrote, "I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place" in the public sector. "A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government."

RealClearPolitics - FDR's Ghost Is Smiling on Wisconsin's Governor

The full letter:

My dear Mr. Steward:

As I am unable to accept your kind invitation to be present on the occasion of the Twentieth Jubilee Convention of the National Federation of Federal Employees, I am taking this method of sending greetings and a message.

Reading your letter of July 14, 1937, I was especially interested in the timeliness of your remark that the manner in which the activities of your organization have been carried on during the past two decades "has been in complete consonance with the best traditions of public employee relationships." Organizations of Government employees have a logical place in Government affairs.

The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.

Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that "under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government."

I congratulate the National Federation of Federal Employees the twentieth anniversary of its founding and trust that the convention will, in every way, be successful.

Franklin D. Roosevelt: Letter on the Resolution of Federation of Federal Employees Against Strikes in Federal Service

Great. Thank you. Expect a postive rep for this interesting and informative post.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

So, essentially the Republicans want to set up a situation where they are guaranteed to always win
What the hell do you think Democrats are trying to do with the unons...?

Government can bring in as many high powered representatives as they wish while labor must negotiate one on one

I'd like a fight too where the other side has both hands tied behind its back
a good reason for cutting the number of public employees...

.

 

[shintao]

"No one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated."

Who is at the bargaining table?

Are you really this dense? Don't bother answering, it's a rhetorical question.

In a typical public employee union negotiation, the parties at the table are career politicians and the union reps - who are really on the same side. The former agree to excessive comp packages (to be paid for by future taxpayers who didn't elect them) in exchange for union support and donations.

Gov. Walker has said no to this con game. Good for him.

Finally an answer that confirms what I already know. The article is a lie to suggest that the people are not represented. Politicians represent the people at the table, or is Willow too stupid to even acknowledge that?

 

[boedicca]

FDR wasn't a Republican, bub.

 

[kaz]

So, essentially the Republicans want to set up a situation where they are guaranteed to always win

Government can bring in as many high powered representatives as they wish while labor must negotiate one on one

I'd like a fight too where the other side has both hands tied behind its back

Thumbs up. I'd like them to leave and get jobs that produce economic value and grow the economy. Both sides in this, bureaucrats and lazy, greedy government workers, are leaches on our economy. I'd like both to lose, but I'd settle for either one. The winner in your scenario is the taxpayer. They are more important then either the unaccountable bureaucrats or the glorified welfare recipients.

 

[WillowTree]

"No one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated."

Who is at the bargaining table?

Are you really this dense? Don't bother answering, it's a rhetorical question.

In a typical public employee union negotiation, the parties at the table are career politicians and the union reps - who are really on the same side. The former agree to excessive comp packages (to be paid for by future taxpayers who didn't elect them) in exchange for union support and donations.

Gov. Walker has said no to this con game. Good for him.

Finally an answer that confirms what I already know. The article is a lie to suggest that the people are not represented. Politicians represent the people at the table, or is Willow too stupid to even acknowledge that?

which politicians fucktard? the ones who moved to Illinois..

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here's what I think and why.

I spent over thirty years in civil service, as a deputy, supervisor and manager. I see the issue from both sides of the equation - from management and from labor and the reasonable arguments on both sides of the issue.
As somewhat of an iconoclast I took on senior mangement on issues I felt were important, both personally and professionally, causing me years of being passed over for promotion. Top management can be as callus in government service as in the private sector, and use the power of their office to sustain the status quo. Both public service managers and private sector managers tend to resist change (if one watches, the manager challenged to change long term policy will pause, considers the most importatnt question, "how will this effect me?" and replies with something like, "but we've never done that before"). If one persists and asks, "Why not?" the insecure manager senses a 'troublemaker' and careers can and are stalled or damaged beyond repair. A union offers an opportunity for an outsider to defend an employee from vindictive actions such as involuntary transfers, changes in hours or working conditions or even false allegations of wrongdoing.

As a member of senior management I was also - for a time - charged with internal affairs, investigating employee wrongdoing and recommending employee discipline. The counter-point to union representation is that unions generally defend employees who have earned termination. The business agents I worked with complained 'off the table' that 5% of the employees took up 90% of their time, yet when at the table but defended their member, sometimes the same member several times.

As for unions negotiating salary, benefits and working conditions, every agreement must be certified by a vote of elected officials. And this brings the issue in Wisconsin full circle. The Governor chose to engage in brinkmanship, and now both sides of the political spectrum have dug in their heals. Everyone agrees the pension benefits for some public employees are excessive, as do I even though I benefit from some of the most liberal in the nation. Change must be a result of reasoned arguments and rational debate; something not apparent on the pages of this message board orin the halls of government in Wisconsin and The District.