Unions trounced in California

[Quantum Windbag]

What do unions do when 70% of voters back pension reform?

File a lawsuit.

It seems that Wisconsin is not the only place where voters are not all that happy with public employee unions. This story is pretty big here in CA.

In San Jose, Measure B — a serious pension reform measure that reduces benefits for current workers – passed overwhelmingly, with little opposition from the unions, which are gearing up for a legal fight. They know they can’t win in the democratic arena. The measure was leading with 71 percent of the vote in that Democratic city, which along with Scott Walker’s victory suggests that unions are now going to be backpedaling fast. Councilwoman Rose Herrera, the swing vote on the council, is leading in her race to retain her seat, which is more good news for San Jose pension reformers.
In San Diego, pension-reform councilman Carl DeMaio was leading the race for mayor, followed by Democrat Bob Filner, which is the best-possible news. A DeMaio-Filner general-election race will be great for DeMaio.

Unions trounced in Wisconsin, California | CalWatchDog

 

[tjvh]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

 

[tererun]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

Yeah, we want all popular things like slavery, segregation, and sexism. those were all landslide victories in the past. The masses should always be able to vote your rights away, right? because the public never does anything stupid.

Maybe you should wake the fuck up and realize that popular doesn't mean right.

 

[Lumpy 1]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

Yeah, we want all popular things like slavery, segregation, and sexism. those were all landslide victories in the past. The masses should always be able to vote your rights away, right? because the public never does anything stupid.

Maybe you should wake the fuck up and realize that popular doesn't mean right.

A tad extreme on the comparisons there..don't Ya think?

The corruption and absolute greed of the unions in California have had the legislators and the private sector by the "boys" for all too long, let the private sector free in my opinion.

 

[tjvh]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

Yeah, we want all popular things like slavery, segregation, and sexism. those were all landslide victories in the past. The masses should always be able to vote your rights away, right? because the public never does anything stupid.

Maybe you should wake the fuck up and realize that popular doesn't mean right.

People are tired of supporting Pubic Employee Unions and wasteful spending, watching their Tax dollars subsidize golden retirement plans way above and beyond what their own benefits will ever be, and you call their disgust stupid? It has nothing to do with your disingenuous connections to slavery, segregation, and sexism. The masses have EVERY Right to vote against the Unions and reckless spending, in favor of Walker, when it IS THE MASSES who are footing the Bill. Funny how all of the sudden popular vote isn't sitting too well with the Left, when it is their guy on the losing end of it.

 

[Charles_Main]

What do unions do when 70% of voters back pension reform?

File a lawsuit.

It seems that Wisconsin is not the only place where voters are not all that happy with public employee unions. This story is pretty big here in CA.

In San Jose, Measure B — a serious pension reform measure that reduces benefits for current workers – passed overwhelmingly, with little opposition from the unions, which are gearing up for a legal fight. They know they can’t win in the democratic arena. The measure was leading with 71 percent of the vote in that Democratic city, which along with Scott Walker’s victory suggests that unions are now going to be backpedaling fast. Councilwoman Rose Herrera, the swing vote on the council, is leading in her race to retain her seat, which is more good news for San Jose pension reformers.
In San Diego, pension-reform councilman Carl DeMaio was leading the race for mayor, followed by Democrat Bob Filner, which is the best-possible news. A DeMaio-Filner general-election race will be great for DeMaio.

Unions trounced in Wisconsin, California | CalWatchDog

No excuses for the Left on this one. They got their Asses handed to them by a Direct Popular Vote of the people of California.

And of Course instead of Excepting Democracy, they take it to Court. Can't sell their Shit at the Polls so they will try and find a Sympathetic Judge to help them out.

 

[MeBelle]

And so it begins:

San Jose unions move forward with challenge to pension reform | abc7news.com

 

[Quantum Windbag]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

Yeah, we want all popular things like slavery, segregation, and sexism. those were all landslide victories in the past. The masses should always be able to vote your rights away, right? because the public never does anything stupid.

Maybe you should wake the fuck up and realize that popular doesn't mean right.

The slaves are the taxpayers in this scenario, not the public sector employees, but thanks for proving you have no idea how to debate the merits of the issue.

 

[gallantwarrior]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

Yeah, we want all popular things like slavery, segregation, and sexism. those were all landslide victories in the past. The masses should always be able to vote your rights away, right? because the public never does anything stupid.

Maybe you should wake the fuck up and realize that popular doesn't mean right.

Oh, you mean like your messiah, Barry S.?

 

[chanel]

I have no problem with changing the rules for new hires. However the former employees had a contract. We are facing the same situation in NJ. For over a decade, public employees contributed to the pension system, and the lawmakers STOLE the pension money for pet projects.

I respect Gov. Christie for trying to save the system, and certainly he wasn't responsible for the mess. But most people don't understand the complexities of the issue.

I don't understand why the state is not held to the same standard as Bernie Madoff. It's the same damn thing.

Social security might be viable today if these crooks didn't have their hands in the cookie jar.

A referendum without the TRUTH, is bad law.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I have no problem with changing the rules for new hires. However the former employees had a contract. We are facing the same situation in NJ. For over a decade, public employees contributed to the pension system, and the lawmakers STOLE the pension money for pet projects.

I respect Gov. Christie for trying to save the system, and certainly he wasn't responsible for the mess. But most people don't understand the complexities of the issue.

I don't understand why the state is not held to the same standard as Bernie Madoff. It's the same damn thing.

Social security might be viable today if these crooks didn't have their hands in the cookie jar.

A referendum without the TRUTH, is bad law.

State lawmakers and Ponzi schemes, I figure the old lawmakers should loose their benefits first before the taxpayers get screwed over... just sayin.

..and Hello beautiful....

 

[jillian]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

desegretation wouldn't "win at the polls" either.

that's what courts are for.

or used to be.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I have no problem with changing the rules for new hires. However the former employees had a contract. We are facing the same situation in NJ. For over a decade, public employees contributed to the pension system, and the lawmakers STOLE the pension money for pet projects.

I respect Gov. Christie for trying to save the system, and certainly he wasn't responsible for the mess. But most people don't understand the complexities of the issue.

I don't understand why the state is not held to the same standard as Bernie Madoff. It's the same damn thing.

Social security might be viable today if these crooks didn't have their hands in the cookie jar.

A referendum without the TRUTH, is bad law.

If they held the state to the same standard you wouldn't get squat.

Measure B in San Jose applies to all future contracts, the employees still get their contractually obligated pension, they just have to contribute to any future pension benefits. This law simply restricts the city from promising unlimited benefits at the taxpayer expense,

By the way, San Jose is so red it glows at night.

 

[Skull Pilot]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

Yeah, we want all popular things like slavery, segregation, and sexism. those were all landslide victories in the past. The masses should always be able to vote your rights away, right? because the public never does anything stupid.

Maybe you should wake the fuck up and realize that popular doesn't mean right.

No one has the right to a guaranteed pension at the cost of another.

 

[Skull Pilot]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

desegretation wouldn't "win at the polls" either.

that's what courts are for.

or used to be.

So pension reform is somehow equivalent to segregation?

puhlease.

Government jobs are just that; jobs.

The terms of employment are set by the employers not the employees.

Taxpayers are the employers of government workers and we should have a say in the terms of employment.

We've seen what happens when public unions sit at a negotiation with politicians who receive campaign contributions and endorsement from the very unions with whom they are negotiating and it's about time it stopped.

 

[RockyRacoon]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

desegretation wouldn't "win at the polls" either.

that's what courts are for.

or used to be.

So pension reform is somehow equivalent to segregation?

puhlease.

Government jobs are just that; jobs.

The terms of employment are set by the employers not the employees.

Taxpayers are the employers of government workers and we should have a say in the terms of employment.

We've seen what happens when public unions sit at a negotiation with politicians who receive campaign contributions and endorsement from the very unions with whom they are negotiating and it's about time it stopped.

Terms of employment should not be set by the employer alone. When that happens you end up with 80 hour work weeks with no overtime. No safety guidelines. No recourse for grievances. No benefits. No job security whatsoever. No joint sacrifice in the well being of the company. There's a reason why the unions rose to power and government rules and regs were enacted at the turn of the 20th century. Left to their own accord, an employer has no incentive to treat their employees any differently then any other resource it needs to function. Obtain it at the lowest cost possible. The health, safety and well-being of the employees be damned! All employees whether public or private should have the right to collectively bargain for pay, benefits and working conditions. As a taxpayer, you do have a say in the terms of employment for public employees. It's called the voting booth.

 

[RockyRacoon]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

Yeah, we want all popular things like slavery, segregation, and sexism. those were all landslide victories in the past. The masses should always be able to vote your rights away, right? because the public never does anything stupid.

Maybe you should wake the fuck up and realize that popular doesn't mean right.

Oh, you mean like your messiah, Barry S.?

In response to your tag line. People are divided into those who want to be controlled by the government and those that want to be controlled by big business/the wealthy elite. There are no other choices for most people.

 

[Skull Pilot]

desegretation wouldn't "win at the polls" either.

that's what courts are for.

or used to be.

So pension reform is somehow equivalent to segregation?

puhlease.

Government jobs are just that; jobs.

The terms of employment are set by the employers not the employees.

Taxpayers are the employers of government workers and we should have a say in the terms of employment.

We've seen what happens when public unions sit at a negotiation with politicians who receive campaign contributions and endorsement from the very unions with whom they are negotiating and it's about time it stopped.

Terms of employment should not be set by the employer alone. When that happens you end up with 80 hour work weeks with no overtime. No safety guidelines.

Moot points all. Labor laws are in place to address these issues.

No recourse for grievances. No benefits. No job security whatsoever. No joint sacrifice in the well being of the company.

Every private company i have ever worked at has a grievance policy and job security is never guaranteed nor should it be. We've seen what happens when people can't be fired.

And Sorry but as a business owner I've already sacrificed and risked more than any employee of mine ever will.

There's a reason why the unions rose to power and government rules and regs were enacted at the turn of the 20th century. Left to their own accord, an employer has no incentive to treat their employees any differently then any other resource it needs to function. Obtain it at the lowest cost possible. The health, safety and well-being of the employees be damned! All employees whether public or private should have the right to collectively bargain for pay, benefits and working conditions. As a taxpayer, you do have a say in the terms of employment for public employees. It's called the voting boot

h.[/QUOTE]

Unions had their place but now they are not needed. We have a myriad of labor laws on the books that the public will not allow to be repealed.

And you have the right to bargain but your employer does not have to accept your terms. If you want to walk off a job and strike then you should take the risk of losing your job. There are plenty of people who want to work and if you don't that's your problem. What you don't realize is that a job is the employers property not yours.

And when was the last time the terms of a public employee contract were put on a ballot?

I'll help you out here: Never.

Public union contracts are negotiated by people who accept union money. It's the very definition of conflict of interest and corruption.

 

[bodecea]

They can't win at the polls, so now they will turn to the Courts to waste more Taxpayer money.

Yeah, we want all popular things like slavery, segregation, and sexism. those were all landslide victories in the past. The masses should always be able to vote your rights away, right? because the public never does anything stupid.

Maybe you should wake the fuck up and realize that popular doesn't mean right.

A tad extreme on the comparisons there..don't Ya think?

The corruption and absolute greed of the unions in California have had the legislators and the private sector by the "boys" for all too long, let the private sector free in my opinion.

I agree that some of the union benefits here in CA are over the top...but the unions did not create these contracts alone. They were agreed to by both parties...and now one side wants to renig. Would you want that to happen to any contract YOU'VE signed?

 

[RockyRacoon]

So pension reform is somehow equivalent to segregation?

puhlease.

Government jobs are just that; jobs.

The terms of employment are set by the employers not the employees.

Taxpayers are the employers of government workers and we should have a say in the terms of employment.

We've seen what happens when public unions sit at a negotiation with politicians who receive campaign contributions and endorsement from the very unions with whom they are negotiating and it's about time it stopped.

Terms of employment should not be set by the employer alone. When that happens you end up with 80 hour work weeks with no overtime. No safety guidelines.

Moot points all. Labor laws are in place to address these issues.

No recourse for grievances. No benefits. No job security whatsoever. No joint sacrifice in the well being of the company.

Every private company i have ever worked at has a grievance policy and job security is never guaranteed nor should it be. We've seen what happens when people can't be fired.

And Sorry but as a business owner I've already sacrificed and risked more than any employee of mine ever will.

There's a reason why the unions rose to power and government rules and regs were enacted at the turn of the 20th century. Left to their own accord, an employer has no incentive to treat their employees any differently then any other resource it needs to function. Obtain it at the lowest cost possible. The health, safety and well-being of the employees be damned! All employees whether public or private should have the right to collectively bargain for pay, benefits and working conditions. As a taxpayer, you do have a say in the terms of employment for public employees. It's called the voting boot

h.

Unions had their place but now they are not needed. We have a myriad of labor laws on the books that the public will not allow to be repealed.

And you have the right to bargain but your employer does not have to accept your terms. If you want to walk off a job and strike then you should take the risk of losing your job. There are plenty of people who want to work and if you don't that's your problem. What you don't realize is that a job is the employers property not yours.

And when was the last time the terms of a public employee contract were put on a ballot?

I'll help you out here: Never.

Public union contracts are negotiated by people who accept union money. It's the very definition of conflict of interest and corruption.[/QUOTE]

I was addressing your statement that only employers should set the terms of employment. Government laws and regs are a way to help insure the rights of the working class are not trampled. I wasn't suggesting that job security doesn't means you can't get fired for just cause. I mean that you shouldn't be fired because your bosses brother needs a job, or because your gay or black or fat or your boobs arent big enough.