Phoney Sick Notes From WI MDs

What they needed to do was accept the consequences of thier actions. Tell their supervisors they were out protesting, and then basically dare them to fire them. That would be a hell of a more effective protest measure then trying to weasel out some pay using sick time.

Modern protestors seem to lose sight of the fact that the core of non violent resistance is accepting the mandated consequences of your actions, be it imprisonment or unemployment. Your goal is to shame those in power into accepting your position, and to rally popular support to your side.

Todays protestors are more likely to scream for a lawyer to get them out of jail then to sit in the jail, accept the percived injustice of being jailed for an action, and then using that to force acceptance of your position.

Basically I'm calling modern american protestors a bunch of wimps compared to those who came before them.

collective bargaining was SUPPOSED to reduce liability for um, collective bargaining, meat-head(s). Stipulations as to unpaid leave (you can get FIRED for unpaid time, as has been pointed out) were designed to fuck strikers.
It isn't rocket science, but is astounds me the number of people who just don't get it. ANY of it.

Then the place to resolve this is on the state house floor, or the contract negotiation room, Barb. You dun accept a job and agree to the conditions, then find a MD to help you defraud your employer out of the benefit of the bargain. That is wrong.

part of the "bargain" is that they have collective bargaining. when the employer violates that part of the contract, you take advantage of the means legally available to you.
 
collective bargaining was SUPPOSED to reduce liability for um, collective bargaining, meat-head(s). Stipulations as to unpaid leave (you can get FIRED for unpaid time, as has been pointed out) were designed to fuck strikers.
It isn't rocket science, but is astounds me the number of people who just don't get it. ANY of it.

Then the place to resolve this is on the state house floor, or the contract negotiation room, Barb. You dun accept a job and agree to the conditions, then find a MD to help you defraud your employer out of the benefit of the bargain. That is wrong.

part of the "bargain" is that they have collective bargaining. when the employer violates that part of the contract, you take advantage of the means legally available to you.

I get that, Jillian...but fraud is not "legally available" to the teachers and their MDs.
 
I think fewer people than you believe are willing to commit perjury for a buck, mani.
:confused: Who committed perjury?

Ravi, every government time sheet I ever signed said right over the sig line "signed under penalties of perjury". Mebbe theirs does, mebbe not -- in which case, claiming a week of sick leave when they were not sick would just be fraud, embezzlement, falsifying an official record, etc.
When I worked for the man I never once had to sign a timesheet.
 
:confused: Who committed perjury?

Ravi, every government time sheet I ever signed said right over the sig line "signed under penalties of perjury". Mebbe theirs does, mebbe not -- in which case, claiming a week of sick leave when they were not sick would just be fraud, embezzlement, falsifying an official record, etc.
When I worked for the man I never once had to sign a timesheet.

well that settles it, i might as well close the thread now.

:lol:
 
Ravi, every government time sheet I ever signed said right over the sig line "signed under penalties of perjury". Mebbe theirs does, mebbe not -- in which case, claiming a week of sick leave when they were not sick would just be fraud, embezzlement, falsifying an official record, etc.
When I worked for the man I never once had to sign a timesheet.

well that settles it, i might as well close the thread now.

:lol:
You should!

And somehow I doubt seriously that teachers sign time sheets...not that that has anything to do with the topic. :lol:
 
When I worked for the man I never once had to sign a timesheet.

well that settles it, i might as well close the thread now.

:lol:
You should!

And somehow I doubt seriously that teachers sign time sheets...not that that has anything to do with the topic. :lol:

i have no idea whether or not they sign timesheets, but i'm sure that using a phony note to get paid for days you didn't work and weren't sick is wrong.
 
It may be wrong, but if it is fraud I couldn't tell you. And again, I don't think the point was to get paid, rather it was to not get fired for attending a protest.
 
When I worked for the man I never once had to sign a timesheet.

well that settles it, i might as well close the thread now.

:lol:
You should!

And somehow I doubt seriously that teachers sign time sheets...not that that has anything to do with the topic. :lol:

If they dun sign timesheets, Ravi, how do they claim sick leave? Does every teacher phone in their hours to the admin building?

Even if this were true, it would still be fraud -- and it would also be wire fraud, BTW. You cannot deliberately lie in a statement intended to result in payment to you in a manner that enlarges that payment and it NOT be fraud.
 
oh, well, that's completely different.

:rofl:
It is to me.

i know, that's why i'm laughing.

Ravi, why not face the facts: the public employees engaging in this conduct are wrong. Let's discuss what they SHOULD be doing to advance their interests, instead, shall we?

BTW, I have a daughter with a shiney new teaching certificate/Masters in Ed. who will not work for a school district in a state that repeals collective bargaining rights. Kids like my daughter are the labor pool these schools will need to tap if they fire the teachers.

Mayhaps the unions should be focusing on them a tad more?
 
It may be wrong, but if it is fraud I couldn't tell you. And again, I don't think the point was to get paid, rather it was to not get fired for attending a protest.

:lol::lol: H'OKAY


Linkiepoodle

Walker on Fake Sick Leave: State Employees Will be Terminated, Doctors Will Be Investigated
 
Last edited:
I also love the irony of striking to preserve a collective bargaining right to strike, which does not now exist.
That isn't what they are striking for...jebus, don't make me think you are as stupid as other posters portray you.

Never fear, Ravi, you are a long way from losing your tiara...at least to Madeline.

Though I'm thinking perhaps we should grant it to Bod...
 
They are protesting their right to EXIST. Without collective bargaining, there will be no more unions. Maddie's daughter should explain that to mom.



That's actually not true. Unions may most certainly exist without collective bargaining rights; federal employees had such a union for years. There are other reasons for unions to exist besides such rights.
 

Forum List

Back
Top