Should State Unions Be Stronger Than a State government?

[Avatar4321]

No. There shouldnt be state unions. It's just a way to funnel money into elections.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

There shouldn't be Unions in Government period. They just have way too much power now. This needs to change.

 

[washamericom]

i was glad to see "who cares"
when unions started they were the opposite of the state, now they are in bed.

 

[WillowTree]

And the state government's aren't? The government is the biggest culprit for states going bankrupt-not unions.

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.[/QUOTE]

You are mistating the facts and you know it. The collective bargaining is not being eliminated. It is being limited to salary only and not benefit. You have to tell the truth if you want to be credible.


Let me guess. you want to Tax The evil Rich and TAx Corporations.

 

[drsmith1072]

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

You are mistating the facts and you know it. The collective bargaining is not being eliminated. It is being limited to salary only and not benefit. You have to tell the truth if you want to be credible.


Let me guess. you want to Tax The evil Rich and TAx Corporations.

Can you actually prove that is the case? I haven't seen or heard anything about that so can you please substantiate your claim?? How about a link to support what you say is true?

 

[Meister]

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

I'm assuming that they are trimming the budget.....but there is some serious unfunded benefits that has been laid on the backs of taxpayers. The state is broke, what part of that isn't sinking in?

The unions solution is a one time renegociated contract, this is going to be a long term problem....not a 2 or 3 year contract issue.

So what is your idea of a compromise?? The whole reason this is an issue is because the governor's, such as in wisconsin, are claiming there is CURRENTLY, short term problem, a crisis and yet according to http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb/Misc/2011_01_31Vos&Darling.pdf Wisconsin has a projected surplus. There are a couple of items that will need to be paid off or down but to claim it's a crisis is overstating it.

Report on Wisconsin’s budget deficit contains hidden costs
$2.2 billion deficit balloons to $3.3 billion without assumed spending cuts
By Jason Stein of the Journal Sentinel

Nov. 19, 2010

Madison — Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle's administration on Friday told Republican Governor-elect Scott Walker that he would have to cope with a $2.2 billion deficit in the state's upcoming two-year budget, but this brighter-than-expected forecast contained more than $1 billion in hidden pain.To arrive at the favorable estimate, the Doyle administration's estimate assumed that Walker and lawmakers would make spending cuts that have yet to actually happen - two more years of state employee furloughs, no pay raises, a virtual hiring freeze and belt tightening in state health programs. Without that $1.1 billion in savings, the state's projected shortfall rises to $3.3 billion - a significant increase over previous estimates that put the gap at between $2.7 billion and $3.1 billion.
Report on Wisconsin

Seems like a lot to me

 

[Oddball]

No.

I'll go one better and state categorically that gubmint employees should have no right to unionize....None.

 

[Oddball]

And the state government's aren't? The government is the biggest culprit for states going bankrupt-not unions.

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

Fuck it...Fire 'em all, decertify the unions and let those who want their jobs back re-apply.

Fucking ingrates.

 

[Intense]

We need to stop Retirement benefits being linked to paid Over-Time, the last 3 years, before retirement, for Government workers. The practice is a scam, meant to rip off the Public Tax Payer. Why aren't these people Salaried, like most in the real world??? God know's they are getting enough benefits to compensate. We are being robbed daily by these retirement schemes, which are unethical and should be illegal.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

A state government can kill someone (see death row). A union cannot legally kill anyone.

A state government has an obligation to its employees to provide decent, safe working conditions and a competative wage for labor. Should a state government be so strong that this simple obligation can be breached?

Has it ever? Ever go to a state office? It takes two to do the job of one in the private sector.

 

[drsmith1072]

I'm assuming that they are trimming the budget.....but there is some serious unfunded benefits that has been laid on the backs of taxpayers. The state is broke, what part of that isn't sinking in?

The unions solution is a one time renegociated contract, this is going to be a long term problem....not a 2 or 3 year contract issue.

So what is your idea of a compromise?? The whole reason this is an issue is because the governor's, such as in wisconsin, are claiming there is CURRENTLY, short term problem, a crisis and yet according to http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb/Misc/2011_01_31Vos&Darling.pdf Wisconsin has a projected surplus. There are a couple of items that will need to be paid off or down but to claim it's a crisis is overstating it.

Report on Wisconsin’s budget deficit contains hidden costs
$2.2 billion deficit balloons to $3.3 billion without assumed spending cuts
By Jason Stein of the Journal Sentinel

Nov. 19, 2010

Madison — Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle's administration on Friday told Republican Governor-elect Scott Walker that he would have to cope with a $2.2 billion deficit in the state's upcoming two-year budget, but this brighter-than-expected forecast contained more than $1 billion in hidden pain.To arrive at the favorable estimate, the Doyle administration's estimate assumed that Walker and lawmakers would make spending cuts that have yet to actually happen - two more years of state employee furloughs, no pay raises, a virtual hiring freeze and belt tightening in state health programs. Without that $1.1 billion in savings, the state's projected shortfall rises to $3.3 billion - a significant increase over previous estimates that put the gap at between $2.7 billion and $3.1 billion.
Report on Wisconsin

Seems like a lot to me

Funny how the report I site is more recent and the one you cite comes from a newspaper that backs walker.

ICYMI: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Endorses Scott Walker | Scott Walker for Wisconsin Governor

Another item of interest is that the other source sited by jsonline is an article from, jsonline. They site themselves as a source.

Funny how that works out. A newspaper endorses a candidate and then presents a story that supports the position taken by that very candidate.

The other thing that is funny is that your source sites a previous report from The Legislative Fiscal Bureau which is the very source that I site and the report I linked to shows a modest surplus.
Furthermore, did you happen to notice the section from your own source that is titled, "Numerous assumptions" and did you even bother to read your own source?

Oh well that's what you get when you rely on old info.

BTW care to answer my question of what you would call a compromise? Since the unions are willing to give and the governor is not, who is actually not willing to compromise??

 

[drsmith1072]

We need to stop Retirement benefits being linked to paid Over-Time, the last 3 years, before retirement, for Government workers. The practice is a scam, meant to rip off the Public Tax Payer. Why aren't these people Salaried, like most in the real world??? God know's they are getting enough benefits to compensate. We are being robbed daily by these retirement schemes, which are unethical and should be illegal.

Do you have an specifics? What scams/schemes are you talking about??

 

[drsmith1072]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

A state government can kill someone (see death row). A union cannot legally kill anyone.

A state government has an obligation to its employees to provide decent, safe working conditions and a competative wage for labor. Should a state government be so strong that this simple obligation can be breached?

Has it ever? Ever go to a state office? It takes two to do the job of one in the private sector.

Do you have anything real to back up this claim of 2 to 1 or are we just supposed to take your word for it?

 

[konradv]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

Simple-minded question in that it's a False Choice. What about approaching the bargaining table as equals?

 

[Oddball]

When does the taxpayer get a seat at the bargaining table with those hoodlums?

 

[AmericanFirst]

A simple question:
Should state unions be stronger than a state government?
Why?

A state government can kill someone (see death row). A union cannot legally kill anyone.

A state government has an obligation to its employees to provide decent, safe working conditions and a competative wage for labor. Should a state government be so strong that this simple obligation can be breached?

State Gov't. puts to death those that are convicted for murder, justified. The unions should look out for the workers rights but not be as powerful as the states.

 

[konradv]

When does the taxpayer get a seat at the bargaining table with those hoodlums?

Didn't the taxpayers vote in those hoodlums?

 

[AmericanFirst]

Union Bob says: "Of course the union should be more powerful than the government. As should a private union be more powerful than the company it works for. Thats common sense. What kind of society do we live in if workers unions can't force their employer to meet all their demands? Forcing your boss to meet all your demands is what a civil society is all about. Now............it's time for my lunch break, be back in a few hours."

If you want to keep your job you do not dictate to the employer what you will and will not do. Unions are too powerful. They need to stay out of politics and politicians need to stay out of the unions.

 

[Oddball]

When does the taxpayer get a seat at the bargaining table with those hoodlums?

Didn't the taxpayers vote in those hoodlums?

No, they don't have any say in voting the unions in or out....But the bureaucrats have a huge say in who their alleged "negotiators" will be.

Out in the real world, we call this collusion.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Then, who's taxes are paying for the unfunded benefit and pension contracts? Not the unions. I never said that it was the unions alone that are doing it, but "helping" to do it. There are cuts going on throughout state budgets, but it seems the unions are "untouchable"?

Why not just renegociate the contracts? Why eliminate ther right to collective bargaining?

I'll bet there are some ways to trim the budget without eliminating workers rights.

They've already tried. The unions said NO!!!

Unions have negotiated wages to the point where companies would rather go out of country. Look at the steel industry and the auto industry. UNIONS are the problem with the loss of business stateside.