Wisconsin Unions to Businesses- you are with us or against us, period

[DaGoose]

I am a public sector union employee- the union can disappear anytime they like.

I look at my paycheck and wonder that too, I wonder why the next guy next to me and who works half as hard and is as half as effective gets exactly what I get as a raise AND because hes there 2 years longer than me would stay while I got the axe if it came to it.......

A raise btw given to us AFTER the union negotiated har har for a 5 year 4.5% raise a year because we were told starting in 4 years we have to start paying gosh!! 5% of our salaries towards our defined pension plan, you are living in the past, what was in 30 thru the 50’s is no longer required now ala collective bargaining etc. due to Civil Service Laws, Ohsa, the Equal Opp. Commission, the Nat. labor Relations Board and...the media.

time to buck up and work in the real world like private sector folks AND at the end of the day MY job like yours is paid BY the taxpayer and we should be infinitely more amendable to city county or state governance to THEIR wishes than some arbitration board which is a joke as the split the baby almost all the time, and decided we would get that raise ahead of the payroll deductions, in effect we didn't lose a thing, we are in fact ahead, and the state is on the hook for even more money. It blows and its not honest anymore imho.


give this a read, its all fine by me.

here ya go.

Civil service law offers less than union contracts

As an elected county official I have negotiated with the unions on the county level. And maybe it's different where you are but the ones that work in my county earn everything they get.

If you have a lot of slackers then get rid of them. And don't say you can't.

.

as an elected county official I don't think you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about,sorry, but based on that response and prior ones, unless you're hiding it, Earn whoever said anything about Earning? what does that have to do with it?

are you a member of a public sector union, pay dues, go to meeting, work in a 'shop' etc.? And, How long have you worked in the private sector?

I have been a union member in the private sector for more than 30 years. It was a bit different sitting on the opposite side of the table while serving in my elected position. And EARNING has everything to do with it. Like I said, these employees work their asses off and any talk of cutting wages and/or benefits only shows the hatred the GOP has for the common working man and woman. They are not your enemy.

Second of all, pensions are EARNED. It's part of a total compensation package not unlike most other jobs.

Is there a reason some posters continue to post this bullshit over and over, even after it got de-bunked like 3 weeks and 10 threads ago?

Many public employees contribute little or nothing to their pension, and the taxpayer is on the hook in case there is a shortfall, like to make up for amazingly shocking events like the market not achieving 9% returns EVERY YEAR, or future juiced benefits promised for new hires, or allowances for those retiring at age 40, etc.

All of these fall on ME - the taxpayer to fill the gap. Explain how the fuck a pension or any other benefit is "earned," this sounds like my 6 year old: "daddy, can I have the Wii game now since I earned it by cleaning my room..."

Are you really that stupid? NOTHING has been "debunked" except in your pea sized brain. You don't realize that teachers hire in at 25K a year? If you want to take away their pension then you'd better raise their salary by at least 10K to compensate.

The total compensation package (that's never been debunked) pays lower wages that's made up with benefits. When you add it all up it adds another 10K or so to what teachers are REALLY paid. It's common knowledgeand I'm surprised at your ignorance of it.

Every year I get a statement of benefits and what it costs the company to provide. They add that to my hourly wage and use that to compute the "total compensation package".

And yes, it falls on YOU, the taxpayer, to provide the pay and benefits of those workers that pick up your garbage, teach your stupid kids and save your sorry ass from fire and burglars.

And....if you think education is expensive..........TRY IGNORANCE.


.

 

[Trajan]

As an elected county official I have negotiated with the unions on the county level. And maybe it's different where you are but the ones that work in my county earn everything they get.

If you have a lot of slackers then get rid of them. And don't say you can't.

.

as an elected county official I don't think you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about,sorry, but based on that response and prior ones, unless you're hiding it, Earn whoever said anything about Earning? what does that have to do with it?

are you a member of a public sector union, pay dues, go to meeting, work in a 'shop' etc.? And, How long have you worked in the private sector?

I have been a union member in the private sector for more than 30 years. It was a bit different sitting on the opposite side of the table while serving in my elected position. And EARNING has everything to do with it. Like I said, these employees work their asses off and any talk of cutting wages and/or benefits only shows the hatred the GOP has for the common working man and woman. They are not your enemy.

So, you have never worked in the private sector, I see (and note I am not surprised), I did not ask if you were a private sector UNION employee, I asked if you had worked in the PRIVATE sector...full stop.

And as a private sector union employee,I have to ask how this dubs you with any expertise ala PUBLIC sector unions? The relationship is very different.

That is why your comment on EARNING caught my attention and I remarked on it.

private sector unions and private companies negotiate over dividing private profits, it is an adversarial relationship.

Public sector unions negotiate with politicians who want their votes over how to divide money that belongs to the taxpayer. It's party 1 and party 2 agreeing on how to divide money from party 3.


Do you understand the differences here?

Earning is added into a quotient or that is it should be ala what the absnet party 3 the taxpayer vis a vis the civic entity can AFFORD in situ as there are no profits to make claim upon. BUT the taxpayer is not represented is he? IF he was, we would not be having this conversation.


Their is no hatred involved, except from your position aptly described by you yourself ala the GOP.

 

[Sallow]

now we hate boycotts?

Basically.

Unless it's "The Dixie Chicks".

 

[Trajan]

now we hate boycotts?

Basically.

Unless it's "The Dixie Chicks".

*sigh* I see your ability to parse the English language has lapsed, sorry to see it..bang on.

 

[DaGoose]

as an elected county official I don't think you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about,sorry, but based on that response and prior ones, unless you're hiding it, Earn whoever said anything about Earning? what does that have to do with it?

are you a member of a public sector union, pay dues, go to meeting, work in a 'shop' etc.? And, How long have you worked in the private sector?

I have been a union member in the private sector for more than 30 years. It was a bit different sitting on the opposite side of the table while serving in my elected position. And EARNING has everything to do with it. Like I said, these employees work their asses off and any talk of cutting wages and/or benefits only shows the hatred the GOP has for the common working man and woman. They are not your enemy.

So, you have never worked in the private sector, I see (and note I am not surprised), I did not ask if you were a private sector UNION employee, I asked if you had worked in the PRIVATE sector...full stop.

And as a private sector union employee,I have to ask how this dubs you with any expertise ala PUBLIC sector unions? The relationship is very different.

That is why your comment on EARNING caught my attention and I remarked on it.

private sector unions and private companies negotiate over dividing private profits, it is an adversarial relationship.

Public sector unions negotiate with politicians who want their votes over how to divide money that belongs to the taxpayer. It's party 1 and party 2 agreeing on how to divide money from party 3.


Do you understand the differences here?

Earning is added into a quotient or that is it should be ala what the absnet party 3 the taxpayer vis a vis the civic entity can AFFORD in situ as there are no profits to make claim upon. BUT the taxpayer is not represented is he? IF he was, we would not be having this conversation.


Their is no hatred involved, except from your position aptly described by you yourself ala the GOP.

I guess I should add that I worked in a non-union coal mine before my current union position.

And if you think that negotiations with public unions NOT "adversarial" I question your honesty on being a member of one. At the very least you have no clue on what goes on behind those doors. I had to balance my pledge to hold the line on taxes and yet provide the employees with a fair contract. It was VERY adversarial. And I got paid a whopping $25 per meeting.

You're trying to sound educated and wise but failing. I'm guessing you're in your 20's?


.

 

[rhodescholar]

I have been a union member in the private sector for more than 30 years. It was a bit different sitting on the opposite side of the table while serving in my elected position. And EARNING has everything to do with it.

Personally, I smell a BS artist here. If you truly worked in the private sector, you'd know that a public sector union has nothing in common with a private sector one.

Like I said, these employees work their asses off and any talk of cutting wages and/or benefits only shows the hatred the GOP has for the common working man and woman. They are not your enemy.

No one here is attacking the "working man," just public sector unions. I have been and will continue to be a supporter of private sector unions.

Are you really that stupid? NOTHING has been "debunked" except in your pea sized brain. You don't realize that teachers hire in at 25K a year? If you want to take away their pension then you'd better raise their salary by at least 10K to compensate.

You CLEARLY do not understand how pensions work, or how the benefits are calculated, so let me help with some basic concepts...

A pension plan is a DEFINED BENEFIT program, which means that the amount the retiree will receive is a set amount. It is affected directly by each of the following events:

1) if the proscribed rate of return is not achieved, taxes on the taxpayers will have to rise to make up the shortfall. Since no one has a crystal ball, and municipalities are known for using overly aggressive rates of return based upon a growing market rate, the WI plan and others around the country are now underfunded.

2) if the rate of inflation exceeds what was originally projected, the COLA adjustments will have to be made up by increasing taxes on the taxpayers to make up the shortfall. Since no one has a crystal ball, and municipalities are known for using overly conservative inflation rates, the WI plan and others around the country are now underfunded.

3) As time passes, politicians beholden to the public employee unions continue to sweeten the plan by decreasing the mandatory retirement age, increasing the percentage of salary covered by the plan, and increasing the COLAs. All of these directly lead to the shortfalls we are seeing in the WI and other states' plans.

Do you get it now, dipshit? The money that the politicians set aside while a person is working for the state will NOT COME EVEN CLOSE to covering market downturns and ever increasing sweeteners and COLAs. It would require OVER 100% of the budgets of some cities/states to pay for the pension benefits, and I'm not even getting into the lavish health benefit plans...

It would be like paying a public employee like $10/year, and providing an increasing scale starting at retirement of like $50 inflated...it is totally unsustainable. Europe is trying to achieve the unsustainable by importing huge numbers of new workers, but their method will lead to disaster as well, either culturally or when all of those new immigrants retire in 30 years.

The total compensation package (that's never been debunked) pays lower wages that's made up with benefits.

Again, the benefits are NOT FUCKING KNOWN at the time they are offered to the employee, but are continuously grossed up while the employee is working.

When you add it all up it adds another 10K or so to what teachers are REALLY paid. It's common knowledgeand I'm surprised at your ignorance of it.

Dipshit, I know more about pensions and retiree benefits than you can possibly understand, I do it for a fucking living.

Every year I get a statement of benefits and what it costs the company to provide. They add that to my hourly wage and use that to compute the "total compensation package".

A true defined benefit retiree plan cannot calculate exactly what it will cost in the future to provide a COLA-adjusted benefit, since inflation is not known at the present time.

And yes, it falls on YOU, the taxpayer, to provide the pay and benefits of those workers that pick up your garbage, teach your stupid kids and save your sorry ass from fire and burglars.

I am happy to pay them a reasonable wage with SOME retirement benefits that are not inflation adjusted, nor guaranteed as to the defined amount to be delivered.

 

[Trajan]

I have been a union member in the private sector for more than 30 years. It was a bit different sitting on the opposite side of the table while serving in my elected position. And EARNING has everything to do with it. Like I said, these employees work their asses off and any talk of cutting wages and/or benefits only shows the hatred the GOP has for the common working man and woman. They are not your enemy.

So, you have never worked in the private sector, I see (and note I am not surprised), I did not ask if you were a private sector UNION employee, I asked if you had worked in the PRIVATE sector...full stop.

And as a private sector union employee,I have to ask how this dubs you with any expertise ala PUBLIC sector unions? The relationship is very different.

That is why your comment on EARNING caught my attention and I remarked on it.

private sector unions and private companies negotiate over dividing private profits, it is an adversarial relationship.

Public sector unions negotiate with politicians who want their votes over how to divide money that belongs to the taxpayer. It's party 1 and party 2 agreeing on how to divide money from party 3.


Do you understand the differences here?

Earning is added into a quotient or that is it should be ala what the absnet party 3 the taxpayer vis a vis the civic entity can AFFORD in situ as there are no profits to make claim upon. BUT the taxpayer is not represented is he? IF he was, we would not be having this conversation.


Their is no hatred involved, except from your position aptly described by you yourself ala the GOP.

I guess I should add that I worked in a non-union coal mine before my current union position.

And if you think that negotiations with public unions NOT "adversarial" I question your honesty on being a member of one.

Ahh yes, so I must be a lair becasue I don't feel the way you do, that is I am not sheep.And hey, I am not the one back tracking on my personal history eh?

unfortunately for you I have made that know since I got here long before Walker or Wisconsin etc. way before November, and, MAYBE I just am just fiscally con. and when I see what I see and have experienced from both sides of the fence I don't buy it, even IF it helps my bottom line, its ultimately destructive.

At the very least you have no clue on what goes on behind those doors. I had to balance my pledge to hold the line on taxes and yet provide the employees with a fair contract. It was VERY adversarial. And I got paid a whopping $25 per meeting.

uh huh.

You're trying to sound educated and wise but failing. I'm guessing you're in your 20's?
.

and you're not even trying. whatever dude.

 

[Jroc]

Uhhhh....that would be like asking what has the Constitution done for YOU lately? Or the soldiers that have fought and died for your freedoms.

.

Just another example of how far down into the union mantra you are. Nothing else need be added to your comments. Thanks.

And your post shows just how little today's youth understands the history of our nation.

.

Well here's a little history for you.. it's been posted before you must have missed it

“It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government.”
That wasn’t Newt Gingrich, or Ron Paul, or Ronald Reagan talking. That was George Meany — the former president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O — in 1955. Government unions are unremarkable today, but the labor movement once thought the idea absurd.

Public sector unions insist on laws that serve their interests — at the expense of the common good.

The founders of the labor movement viewed unions as a vehicle to get workers more of the profits they help create. Government workers, however, don’t generate profits. They merely negotiate for more tax money. When government unions strike, they strike against taxpayers. F.D.R. considered this “unthinkable and intolerable.”
Government collective bargaining means voters do not have the final say on public policy. Instead their elected representatives must negotiate spending and policy decisions with unions. That is not exactly democratic – a fact that unions once recognized.
George Meany was not alone. Up through the 1950s, unions widely agreed that collective bargaining had no place in government

http://a12iggymom.wordpress.com/201...ainst-public-employees-collective-bargaining/

 

[Trajan]

I have been a union member in the private sector for more than 30 years. It was a bit different sitting on the opposite side of the table while serving in my elected position. And EARNING has everything to do with it.

Personally, I smell a BS artist here. If you truly worked in the private sector, you'd know that a public sector union has nothing in common with a private sector one.

Like I said, these employees work their asses off and any talk of cutting wages and/or benefits only shows the hatred the GOP has for the common working man and woman. They are not your enemy.

No one here is attacking the "working man," just public sector unions. I have been and will continue to be a supporter of private sector unions.



You CLEARLY do not understand how pensions work, or how the benefits are calculated, so let me help with some basic concepts...

A pension plan is a DEFINED BENEFIT program, which means that the amount the retiree will receive is a set amount. It is affected directly by each of the following events:

1) if the proscribed rate of return is not achieved, taxes on the taxpayers will have to rise to make up the shortfall. Since no one has a crystal ball, and municipalities are known for using overly aggressive rates of return based upon a growing market rate, the WI plan and others around the country are now underfunded.

2) if the rate of inflation exceeds what was originally projected, the COLA adjustments will have to be made up by increasing taxes on the taxpayers to make up the shortfall. Since no one has a crystal ball, and municipalities are known for using overly conservative inflation rates, the WI plan and others around the country are now underfunded.

3) As time passes, politicians beholden to the public employee unions continue to sweeten the plan by decreasing the mandatory retirement age, increasing the percentage of salary covered by the plan, and increasing the COLAs. All of these directly lead to the shortfalls we are seeing in the WI and other states' plans.

Do you get it now, dipshit? The money that the politicians set aside while a person is working for the state will NOT COME EVEN CLOSE to covering market downturns and ever increasing sweeteners and COLAs. It would require OVER 100% of the budgets of some cities/states to pay for the pension benefits, and I'm not even getting into the lavish health benefit plans...

It would be like paying a public employee like $10/year, and providing an increasing scale starting at retirement of like $50 inflated...it is totally unsustainable. Europe is trying to achieve the unsustainable by importing huge numbers of new workers, but their method will lead to disaster as well, either culturally or when all of those new immigrants retire in 30 years.



Again, the benefits are NOT FUCKING KNOWN at the time they are offered to the employee, but are continuously grossed up while the employee is working.



Dipshit, I know more about pensions and retiree benefits than you can possibly understand, I do it for a fucking living.

Every year I get a statement of benefits and what it costs the company to provide. They add that to my hourly wage and use that to compute the "total compensation package".

A true defined benefit retiree plan cannot calculate exactly what it will cost in the future to provide a COLA-adjusted benefit, since inflation is not known at the present time.

And yes, it falls on YOU, the taxpayer, to provide the pay and benefits of those workers that pick up your garbage, teach your stupid kids and save your sorry ass from fire and burglars.

I am happy to pay them a reasonable wage with SOME retirement benefits that are not inflation adjusted, nor guaranteed as to the defined amount to be delivered.

In my private sector job, my TC package had a year to year breakout which included say my profit sharing...and my medical plans coverage cost. 401 K was easy to compute and gauge.

exactly, you can only ball park pension benes, if I drop dead at 70, what then? If I retire say at 60 what then? Live till 90? I get 2.5% a year of service averaged over my last 4 years salary....and when I die, my wife gets 25% of that amount till she dies, what a game eh? .....plus the biggey- free medical coverage in retirement. Its ridiculous.

Oh and when I got this job, I only took a 15k a year chop, sounds like a lot but it wasn't considering I was at my last private sector job for 15 years and was a top performer.

 

[georgephillip]

Wisconsin Is...

"Broke Unless You Count the $67 Billion Pension Fund . . .

"That’s what he (Walker) says, but according to Wisconsin’s 2010 CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report), the state has $67 billion in pension and other employee benefit trust funds, invested mainly in stocks and debt securities drawing a modest return.

"A recent study by the PEW Center for the States showed that Wisconsin’s pension fund is almost fully funded, meaning it can meet its commitments for years to come without drawing on outside sources. It requires a contribution of only $645 million annually to meet pension payouts. Zach Carter, writing in the Huffington Post, notes that the pension program could save another $195 million annually just by cutting out its Wall Street investment managers and managing the funds in-house.

"The governor is evidently eying the state’s lucrative pension fund, not because the state cannot afford the pension program, but as a source of revenue for programs that are not fully funded.

"This tactic, however, is not going down well with state employees.

"Fortunately, there is another alternative.

"Wisconsin could draw down the fund by the small amount needed to meet pension obligations, and put the bulk of the money to work creating jobs, helping local businesses, and increasing tax revenues for the state.

"It could do this by forming its own bank, following the lead of North Dakota, the only state to have its own bank — and the only state to escape the credit crisis."

 

[Trajan]

UPDATE - April 1st ( no not Aprils fools )


Since threatening business's that sppted Walker with a boycott back in early March they, the Unions have introduced a new paradigm, they had requested that business not just stop at supporting Walker, they wanted a denunciation and active for the unions.



So the twist is ( and is a prophetic throw back to my thread title; "you are with us or against us, period") they have come full circle to making that a harsh reality, even if you did NOT support Walker, IF you do not actively support the Union(s), you are now against them and they will target you.


Now they're threatening businesses that stay neutral in the state's budget battle.

snip-

A letter we've seen that was sent to businesses in southeastern Wisconsin shows that Big Labor's latest strategy is to threaten small businesses with boycotts if they don't publicly declare their support for government union monopoly power.

Dated March 28, 2011, the letter is addressed to "DEAR UNION GROVE AREA BUSINESS OWNER/MANAGER," in Racine County. And it begins with this warm greeting: "It is unfortunate that you have chosen 'not' to support public workers rights in Wisconsin. In recent past weeks you have been offered a sign(s) by a public employee(s) who works in one of the state facilities in the Union Grove area. These signs simply said 'This Business Supports Workers Rights,' a simple, subtle and we feel non-controversial statement given the facts at this time."

We doubt "subtle" is the word a business owner would use to describe this offer he is being told he can't refuse.

The letter is signed by Jim Parrett, the "Field Rep." for Council 24 of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, which is the most powerful union in the AFL-CIO. The letter presents a litany of objections to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's changes to benefits and public union collective bargaining power, describing them as "things that make life working in a 24-7 facility tolerable."

The missive concludes by noting that, "With that we'd ask that you reconsider taking a sign and stance to support public employees in this community. Failure to do so will leave us no choice but do [sic] a public boycott of your business. And sorry, neutral means 'no' to those who work for the largest employer in the area and are union members."

So even businesses that stay neutral in the political battle are considered the enemy and will be punished. Charming stuff, and especially coming from a union that claims (wrongly) to be losing its constitutional rights. Free speech for others apparently isn't all that important.

more at-
Review & Outlook: Wisconsin Unions Get Ugly - WSJ.com


Sounds like something akin to extortion to me, yes yes, thats loaded word/term, but, thats a lot closer a definition than the word/term ‘boycott’ as it applies to any of the actions unions have undertaken as ascribed in either of my OP's.

If they think they will convince any fence sitters, or those truly in the middle, those with no real skin in the game other than they pay net taxes in Wisconsin, using this tactic well, good luck to them.

In addition, we have what appears to be a concrete case of death threats ...well, read for yourself, I guess this is what Richard Trumka meant when he said; “if you strike a match and you put your finger in it, you're likely to get burned.”



Woman charged with email threats

By Bill Glauber of the Journal Sentinel

March 31, 2011 |(222) Comments

Madison - A 26-year-old woman was charged Thursday with two felony counts and two misdemeanor counts for allegedly making email threats against Wisconsin lawmakers during the height of the battle over Gov. Scott Walker's budget-repair bill.
snip-
Atten: Death Threat!!!! Bomb!!!" In that email, she purportedly wrote, "Please put your things in order because you will be killed and your families will also be killed due to your actions in the last 8 weeks."

"I hope you have a good time in hell," she allegedly wrote in the lengthy email in which she purportedly listed scenarios in which the legislators and their families would die, including bombings and by "putting a nice little bullet in your head."

more at-

Woman charged with email threats - JSOnline

 

[Shogun]

now we hate boycotts?

Basically.

Unless it's "The Dixie Chicks".

It's ironic that these same cock smoking right wingers who hate unions are NOW crying about boycotts when, otherwise, they would insist that such is well within the rights of consumers in a capitalist system.

What is HILARIOUS is watching these same drama queens cry economic terrorism as if the general population should be compelled to shop at stores that affect then negatively. It's the same ole right wing "don't look while we shit on the floor and complain about the stink" mentality, I guess.

 

[Jack Fate]

now we hate boycotts?

Basically.

Unless it's "The Dixie Chicks".

It's ironic that these same cock smoking right wingers who hate unions are NOW crying about boycotts when, otherwise, they would insist that such is well within the rights of consumers in a capitalist system.

What is HILARIOUS is watching these same drama queens cry economic terrorism as if the general population should be compelled to shop at stores that affect then negatively. It's the same ole right wing "don't look while we shit on the floor and complain about the stink" mentality, I guess.

I really hope the union boycotts businesses. I sincerely hope they do. The American people are in no mood for union shit any more. Keep pushing. It's gonna blow up in their faces. OUR government belongs to the American people, not Marxist unions.

 

[bodecea]

Basically.

Unless it's "The Dixie Chicks".

It's ironic that these same cock smoking right wingers who hate unions are NOW crying about boycotts when, otherwise, they would insist that such is well within the rights of consumers in a capitalist system.

What is HILARIOUS is watching these same drama queens cry economic terrorism as if the general population should be compelled to shop at stores that affect then negatively. It's the same ole right wing "don't look while we shit on the floor and complain about the stink" mentality, I guess.

I really hope the union boycotts businesses. I sincerely hope they do. The American people are in no mood for union shit any more. Keep pushing. It's gonna blow up in their faces. OUR government belongs to the American people, not Marxist unions.

You seem to forget that the Unions are made up of American people.

 

[ba1614]

Basically.

Unless it's "The Dixie Chicks".

It's ironic that these same cock smoking right wingers who hate unions are NOW crying about boycotts when, otherwise, they would insist that such is well within the rights of consumers in a capitalist system.

What is HILARIOUS is watching these same drama queens cry economic terrorism as if the general population should be compelled to shop at stores that affect then negatively. It's the same ole right wing "don't look while we shit on the floor and complain about the stink" mentality, I guess.

I really hope the union boycotts businesses. I sincerely hope they do. The American people are in no mood for union shit any more. Keep pushing. It's gonna blow up in their faces. OUR government belongs to the American people, not Marxist unions.

I too would like to see them boycott business that don't fly their propaganda. It would, I think, be a public relations disaster for the unions.

 

[Jackson]

It's ironic that these same cock smoking right wingers who hate unions are NOW crying about boycotts when, otherwise, they would insist that such is well within the rights of consumers in a capitalist system.

What is HILARIOUS is watching these same drama queens cry economic terrorism as if the general population should be compelled to shop at stores that affect then negatively. It's the same ole right wing "don't look while we shit on the floor and complain about the stink" mentality, I guess.

I really hope the union boycotts businesses. I sincerely hope they do. The American people are in no mood for union shit any more. Keep pushing. It's gonna blow up in their faces. OUR government belongs to the American people, not Marxist unions.

I too would like to see them boycott business that don't fly their propaganda. It would, I think, be a public relations disaster for the unions.

I certainly agree and hope this interferes with their recall attempts.

 

[Big Fitz]

I have been a union member in the private sector for more than 30 years. It was a bit different sitting on the opposite side of the table while serving in my elected position. And EARNING has everything to do with it. Like I said, these employees work their asses off and any talk of cutting wages and/or benefits only shows the hatred the GOP has for the common working man and woman. They are not your enemy.

So, you have never worked in the private sector, I see (and note I am not surprised), I did not ask if you were a private sector UNION employee, I asked if you had worked in the PRIVATE sector...full stop.

And as a private sector union employee,I have to ask how this dubs you with any expertise ala PUBLIC sector unions? The relationship is very different.

That is why your comment on EARNING caught my attention and I remarked on it.

private sector unions and private companies negotiate over dividing private profits, it is an adversarial relationship.

Public sector unions negotiate with politicians who want their votes over how to divide money that belongs to the taxpayer. It's party 1 and party 2 agreeing on how to divide money from party 3.


Do you understand the differences here?

Earning is added into a quotient or that is it should be ala what the absnet party 3 the taxpayer vis a vis the civic entity can AFFORD in situ as there are no profits to make claim upon. BUT the taxpayer is not represented is he? IF he was, we would not be having this conversation.


Their is no hatred involved, except from your position aptly described by you yourself ala the GOP.

I guess I should add that I worked in a non-union coal mine before my current union position.

And if you think that negotiations with public unions NOT "adversarial" I question your honesty on being a member of one. At the very least you have no clue on what goes on behind those doors. I had to balance my pledge to hold the line on taxes and yet provide the employees with a fair contract. It was VERY adversarial. And I got paid a whopping $25 per meeting.

You're trying to sound educated and wise but failing. I'm guessing you're in your 20's?


.

As a very reluctant member of the public sector ATU, the union reps are already getting phone lists for 'calling up members to go support the union at the capital'.

Basically, dial a protest mob because the legislature is voting on a budget that currently slashes hundreds of millions out of it. Of course they're talking about laying off all the new employees and blah blah blah. Just as a way to fire up the union membership to go protest.

The truth is they'll do what they did last time. Hiring freezes, halt service expansion, reduce some services and offer early retirement to the old timers. They've never had a layoff, because it's incredibly damaging to the union to lose power like that.

And besides, if they did do a layoff, you'd end up getting 2/3rds your income for 99weeks, minimum and not have to work, probably be called back in a few months of essentially paid vacation because it's easier to bring you back than hire someone new.

Unions have their uses and points, but public sector is still the problem is that the contract negotiation is a corrupted process and needs lots of fixing before I'd agree to being in full support of their existance again.

 

[Jack Fate]

It's ironic that these same cock smoking right wingers who hate unions are NOW crying about boycotts when, otherwise, they would insist that such is well within the rights of consumers in a capitalist system.

What is HILARIOUS is watching these same drama queens cry economic terrorism as if the general population should be compelled to shop at stores that affect then negatively. It's the same ole right wing "don't look while we shit on the floor and complain about the stink" mentality, I guess.

I really hope the union boycotts businesses. I sincerely hope they do. The American people are in no mood for union shit any more. Keep pushing. It's gonna blow up in their faces. OUR government belongs to the American people, not Marxist unions.

You seem to forget that the Unions are made up of American people.

Wow. Brilliant. Man, you're a sharp one. The Civil War was made up of American people also. Go take a shower kid. You're done here.

 

[Oddball]

UPDATE - April 1st ( no not Aprils fools )


Since threatening business's that sppted Walker with a boycott back in early March they, the Unions have introduced a new paradigm, they had requested that business not just stop at supporting Walker, they wanted a denunciation and active for the unions.



So the twist is ( and is a prophetic throw back to my thread title; "you are with us or against us, period") they have come full circle to making that a harsh reality, even if you did NOT support Walker, IF you do not actively support the Union(s), you are now against them and they will target you.


Now they're threatening businesses that stay neutral in the state's budget battle.

This is exactly what makes this a protection racket goon shakedown, rather than a "boycott"....The person who wants to just mind their own business and be left alone is also targeted.