So Ohio gets union rights back; What next? Layoffs or tax hikes?

[Article 15]

Hyperbole much?

Not hyperbole.

Those people were Union members.

Unions tend to protect the lazy worker.....and sadly, at the expense of the hard worker.

Use ALL of your personal and sick days and you get the same exact raise as the guy that used none of them.

An inch of snow prevents you from coming in and you strill get the same raise as the guy that found a way to get in when there were 2 feet of snow.

Do you see that as fair to the guy with the better work ethic?

Taking all of your contractually allowed sick and personal days = lazy worker?

What a load of pure garbage.

How do you know that person wasn't legit sick? Or their kids weren't legit sick? Maybe school was canceled because of snow and that person couldn't come into work but the other person could because they don't have that kind of responsibility. And how do you know that when they are at work they don't work circles around the person with no kids, never gets sick, and is there every day?

You don't know because you are talking completely out of your ass.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Not hyperbole.

Those people were Union members.

Unions tend to protect the lazy worker.....and sadly, at the expense of the hard worker.

Use ALL of your personal and sick days and you get the same exact raise as the guy that used none of them.

An inch of snow prevents you from coming in and you strill get the same raise as the guy that found a way to get in when there were 2 feet of snow.

Do you see that as fair to the guy with the better work ethic?

Taking all of your contractually allowed sick and personal days = lazy worker?

What a load of pure garbage.

How do you know that person wasn't legit sick? Or their kids weren't legit sick? Maybe school was canceled because of snow and that person couldn't come into work but the other person could because they don't have that kind of responsibility. And how do you know that when they are at work they don't work circles around the person with no kids, never gets sick, and is there every day?

You don't know because you are talking completely out of your ass.

Calling in sick just because you have sick days is being greedy and dishonest. They aren't there to be abused and used just because you can, they are there in case you get sick. This is of corse for people who just use up their sick days to use them when they aren't really sick and not directed at people who actually are sick when they use them.

Personal days on the other hand are there to be used up for any personal reason.

 

[Amelia]

Dumbass left wingers just dont get the math do they. Ohio voters voted to bring back collective bargaining rights for public sector unions.

Its known that Ohio governments simply cant afford the status quo. But, the law is now the law, and unions are gonna always demand more, and refuse to sacrifice for the greater good. So........which is first:

1- Layoffs for firemen, cops, teachers. Gotta make payroll and budget. Time to trim some fat.

and/or

2- Raise taxes on companies and individuals. Which will cause business to leave Ohio for non-union states like South Carolina, which is rapidly attracting business like Google, Boeing, BMW, etc, due to non-union labor, low taxes.

So either way, Ohio loses jobs.

Good job libtards.

Hey its their state if they want to vote for something that guarantees tax hikes or layoffs so be it.

Yup.

 

[Article 15]

Unions tend to protect the lazy worker.....and sadly, at the expense of the hard worker.

Use ALL of your personal and sick days and you get the same exact raise as the guy that used none of them.

An inch of snow prevents you from coming in and you strill get the same raise as the guy that found a way to get in when there were 2 feet of snow.

Do you see that as fair to the guy with the better work ethic?

Taking all of your contractually allowed sick and personal days = lazy worker?

What a load of pure garbage.

How do you know that person wasn't legit sick? Or their kids weren't legit sick? Maybe school was canceled because of snow and that person couldn't come into work but the other person could because they don't have that kind of responsibility. And how do you know that when they are at work they don't work circles around the person with no kids, never gets sick, and is there every day?

You don't know because you are talking completely out of your ass.

Calling in sick just because you have sick days is being greedy and dishonest. They aren't there to be abused and used just because you can, they are there in case you get sick. This is of corse for people who just use up their sick days to use them when they aren't really sick and not directed at people who actually are sick when they use them.

Personal days on the other hand are there to be used up for any personal reason.

And you can determine who is using their days just to use them and who isn't how, exactly?

You know what I use my sick days for mostly? Mental health days. Or to sleep.

You know who is prolly the most productive person in my office during my hours? Me.

You know what pisses me off? People who come to work no matter what because they think they have something to prove. People who come in on their death bed, do nothing all day, and risk getting everyone around them sick so they can thump their chests and sound off about how awesome they are because they never miss a day of work.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Taking all of your contractually allowed sick and personal days = lazy worker?

What a load of pure garbage.

How do you know that person wasn't legit sick? Or their kids weren't legit sick? Maybe school was canceled because of snow and that person couldn't come into work but the other person could because they don't have that kind of responsibility. And how do you know that when they are at work they don't work circles around the person with no kids, never gets sick, and is there every day?

You don't know because you are talking completely out of your ass.

Calling in sick just because you have sick days is being greedy and dishonest. They aren't there to be abused and used just because you can, they are there in case you get sick. This is of coarse for people who just use up their sick days to use them when they aren't really sick and not directed at people who actually are sick when they use them.

Personal days on the other hand are there to be used up for any personal reason.

And you can determine who is using their days just to use them and who isn't how, exactly?

You know what I use my sick days for mostly? Mental health days. Or to sleep.

You know who is prolly the most productive person in my office during my hours? Me.

You know what pisses me off? People who come to work no matter what because they think they have something to prove. People who come in on their death bed, do nothing all day, and risk getting everyone around them sick so they can thump their chests and sound off about how awesome they are because they never miss a day of work.

The only one who knows if they are being dishonest or not is the person calling in sick just to use the sick days when they aren't really sick.

Like I said in my post I have nothing against sick people calling in sick to work which was the entire premise of your last paragraph.

Was I not clear in the distinction between the two?

 

[EriktheRed]

If they had, thier company would either eventually leave or go out of business.

Nonsense. Their company was run by smart people, I'm sure. They would have made it work out. Maybe have to settle for a $5 million bonus instead of $10 million. But if there's money to be made, I'm sure their company would rather be the ones to make it than someone else who steps up and fills the void.

^^^^^

This is why I'm not worried about "Atlas shrugging". "Atlas" wouldn't dare because he knows there are others who are willing to jump in and make some $$$ under new rules if they aren't.

 

[Rozman]

Why should they care...
When the State gets into real trouble the people
will be pissed,they will blame the Gov.
Then they will expect to get bailed out by big Daddy Obama.

 

[Rozman]

I think Ohio should get the double dip...
Layoffs and tax hikes...

 

[eflatminor]

I think Ohio should get the double dip...
Layoffs and tax hikes...

That's exactly what will happen...then watch them blame successful Americans.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I think Ohio should get the double dip...
Layoffs and tax hikes...

That's exactly what will happen...then watch them blame successful Americans.

You get this as wrongly as you did the election results, the causes, and your misreading of FDR and public unions. You argue from ideology not facts, thus your comments can be dismissed.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Dumbass left wingers just dont get the math do they. Ohio voters voted to bring back collective bargaining rights for public sector unions.

Its known that Ohio governments simply cant afford the status quo. But, the law is now the law, and unions are gonna always demand more, and refuse to sacrifice for the greater good. So........which is first:

1- Layoffs for firemen, cops, teachers. Gotta make payroll and budget. Time to trim some fat.

and/or

2- Raise taxes on companies and individuals. Which will cause business to leave Ohio for non-union states like South Carolina, which is rapidly attracting business like Google, Boeing, BMW, etc, due to non-union labor, low taxes.

So either way, Ohio loses jobs.

Good job libtards.

Hey its their state if they want to vote for something that guarantees tax hikes or layoffs so be it.

Yup.

Some of us keep up our states rights values even when a state makes a decision we think is bad

 

[Jarhead]

I think Ohio should get the double dip...
Layoffs and tax hikes...

Are there any stats from exit polls showing how many people that voted were union members or spouses/children of union members compared to how many voters were no union members?

I'd like to know if the people of Ohio are victims of their laziness and not willing to go out and vote....and the union members voted strictly for their own personal selfish gain.

 

[bodecea]

Ever been to Cleveland? That's what democrats will do to the entire state of Ohio and then they will blame banks and Wall Street and everything but socialism.

THe Republicans just make it so the lake can burn.

 

[eflatminor]

I think Ohio should get the double dip...
Layoffs and tax hikes...

That's exactly what will happen...then watch them blame successful Americans.

You get this as wrongly as you did the election results, the causes, and your misreading of FDR and public unions. You argue from ideology not facts, thus your comments can be dismissed.

Let's get this straight for the record: You're predicting Ohio will NOT have to layoff any public sector workers nor raise taxes to pay for their current level of services. Got it.

Lastly, please provide a link or other proof to suggest that FDR was for public union collective bargaining. Waiting...

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Ever been to Cleveland? That's what democrats will do to the entire state of Ohio and then they will blame banks and Wall Street and everything but socialism.

THe Republicans just make it so the lake can burn.

that was a funny joke

 

[JakeStarkey]

That's exactly what will happen...then watch them blame successful Americans.

You get this as wrongly as you did the election results, the causes, and your misreading of FDR and public unions. You argue from ideology not facts, thus your comments can be dismissed.

Let's get this straight for the record: You're predicting Ohio will NOT have to layoff any public sector workers nor raise taxes to pay for their current level of services. Got it.
Lastly, please provide a link or other proof to suggest that FDR was for public union collective bargaining. Waiting...

You made the assertion without solid attribute. So give it again since it is your claim, and we will go there.

And don't even think of misattributing what I said about public unions. That is a form of deceit.

 

[eflatminor]

You get this as wrongly as you did the election results, the causes, and your misreading of FDR and public unions. You argue from ideology not facts, thus your comments can be dismissed.

Let's get this straight for the record: You're predicting Ohio will NOT have to layoff any public sector workers nor raise taxes to pay for their current level of services. Got it.
Lastly, please provide a link or other proof to suggest that FDR was for public union collective bargaining. Waiting...

You made the assertion without solid attribute. So give it again since it is your claim, and we will go there.

And don't even think of misattributing what I said about public unions. That is a form of deceit.

Nice dodge coward. Either FDR was for public sector collective bargaining or he wasn't. You can play all the bullshit games you want, but it is clear he did NOT support them. From a letter written by FDR on the Resolution of Federation of Federal Employees Against Strikes in Federal Service, August 16, 1937:

"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."

Regarding what Ohioans face, I stand behind my assertion that lay offs, service reductions and/or tax increases are inevitable for citizens of that state following the vote restoring public sector collective bargaining. Either you stand behind your statement I got this wrong or you don't.

Strap on a pair and make your case or step out of the way.

 

[Dragon]

Pretty funny to see a right-winger presenting FDR as some kind of authority.

One thing I've noticed is that liberals are not as inclined to authoritarian thinking as conservatives, on the average (exceptions exist, of course). Thus, there's perhaps a natural tendency to think that if some liberal icon such as Franklin Roosevelt said something that liberals today disagree with, that will put us in a bind.

It doesn't. There are no intellectual authorities. When Roosevelt said that about public-sector unions, he was -- GASP! -- WRONG! (OMG the sky is falling!) (Not.)

The reason he was wrong is that public-sector employees have a middle-man between themselves and their ultimate employer, the public, and that is the higher-up government official who is their boss. And just because a boss works for the government doesn't mean that workers don't have a need for bargaining power to represent their own interests.

It should be noted here as well, that FDR didn't believe in collective bargaining for anyone, really. He got on board with the labor movement and the Wagner Act late in the game, and because he saw it was going to pass without his support and he preferred to get the political benefit from supporting it rather than the political fallout from opposing it. Left to his own druthers without politics entering the picture, he would probably have vetoed it.

 

[eflatminor]

The reason he was wrong is that public-sector employees have a middle-man between themselves and their ultimate employer, the public, and that is the higher-up government official who is their boss. And just because a boss works for the government doesn't mean that workers don't have a need for bargaining power to represent their own interests.

Your logic is flawed here. The problem with your logic is that the higher-up official is not the union's boss, he's their crony partner. When a private union bargains with a real boss, the union has no ability to keep or remove that boss from his position. When a public union bargains with a politician, the union either put in in that position or has the power to remove him from that position. A dramatically different dynamic.

In addition, the real boss is negotiating with his own money, the politician with other people's money. Now if you don't think that makes a huge difference, well, I'm afraid there's no hope for logic and reason to prevail in this discussion.

That said, I respect that you called out FDR as wrong. I disagree, it was one of few areas in which he was right, but most of your Statist buddies can't come to grips with the idea that one of their heroes being out of lockstep with their socialistic ideals. At least you have the courage to differ.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your logic is flawed here. The problem with your logic is that the higher-up official is not the union's boss, he's their crony partner. When a private union bargains with a real boss, the union has no ability to keep or remove that boss from his position. When a public union bargains with a politician, the union either put in in that position or has the power to remove him from that position. A dramatically different dynamic.

One way to eliminate this is to forbid public employee unions from engaging in any sort of political campaign activity.
I'm -sure- they will agree to that.