Wisconsin votes anti-union bill in

[Annie]

Again, the teachers have already accepted wage and benefit cuts.

I have no problem with people forming a group to bargain with an employer.

I have a problem with mandatory union shop states where YOU HAVE to join the union to get the job.
Not everyone is the same. How many of those teachers would like to negotiate INDIVIDUALLY their skills for what they believe a fair wage is FOR THEM?
Innocent Americans ASSUME that unions use collective bargaining to obtain better benefits and pay. Nope. Unions INSIST AND DEMAND that the cash RUNS THROUGH THEM, giving them the power over the state.
In Wisconsin the teachers union spends as much time or more on their own interests rather than on the teacher's interests. They force union members to buy insurance from THEIR INSURANCE PLAN, the WEA Trust. That plan gives THE UNION, not the state that has to pay for the plan, ALL and UNTIMATE say over health benefits. That plan costs SEVENTY FUCKING MILLION DOLLARS MORE than if those same teachers were in the state of Wisconsin's plan, a plan that has THE EXACT SAME BENEFITS.
And guess where that extra DOUGH goes? Into the pockets of union cronies disguised as "insurance executives and administrators".
Time for Americans to wake up and expose the fraud that goes on with labor unions. Walker is doing it so sit back and applaud him, not every move as we all make mistakes, but his motive IS CORRECT for an entity that represents TAXPAYERS, and not the private business sector.

It is my understanding that teachers are not required to join a union.

If this is incorrect, please provide a credible source that proves me wrong.

Like many positions at the phone companies, one can't be hired without agreeing to pay the dues, whether they wish to belong to the union or not. It's a de facto closed shop.

closed shop

Definition

Place of employment bound by a union (collective bargaining) agreement to hire only the members of a particular union. This practice is generally illegal.
​

Right Turn - Yes, there is a reason to rein in public employee unions

...And yet liberals insist that Walker is singling out public-employee unions unfairly. Ezra Klein wrote:

There's been a lot of concern lately that states or municipalities will default on their debt. This is considered the height of fiscal irresponsibility -- an outcome so dire that some are considering various forms of federal support. But the talk that states or cities will default on their obligations to teachers or DMV employees? That's considered evidence of fiscal responsibility. And perhaps it's a better outcome, as defaulting to the banks makes future borrowing costs higher and can hurt the state economy in the long run. But it's not a more just outcome.​

Perhaps Ezra doesn't understand the legal definition of "default," but the analogy is inaccurate. Walker is seeking to reset the terms of union wages and benefits; no one is proposing to simply stop paying. Union contracts and "give backs" are negotiated every year by labor and management. The notion that whatever is given can never be lost is the sort of maximalist labor mind-set that led to the demise of multiple private industries in the United States.

The Wisconsin debate comes down to a simple question: do the voters and their elected representatives have the final say in how the state spends its money? The unions and their backers argue that through a variety of hardball tactics -- sick outs, legislative absenteeism, etc. -- that the unions, a small sliver of the population, get to control the outcome.

This is at the root of the objections to the very concept of public employee unions. On this I'll defer to the liberal icon FDR who warned against collective bargaining being "tranplanted" into the public sector. ("A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government.")...

 

[Tea Bag Partier]

Wisconsin votes anti-union bill in

]If there is another thread - please merge it...couldn't believe I couldn't find one.

After 59 hours straight of Democrat speeches...bill passes.
Then the Democrats complained they hadn't been heard....now that's funny.

Wisconsin Assembly Passes Bill Limiting Union Rights - FoxNews.com

Holy crap, I don't know if this thread title was a freudian slip, but this is the second totally honest NeoCon post on Wisconsin today.

Interesting that you consider this bill an "anti-union" bill first and foremost, not even attempting to make the case for it as an innocent attempt to balance budgets.

There's another thread around here that characterized this as a way to "destroy" liberals.


Outstanding! After two weeks of pretending this was some innocent attempt to balance a budget, I appreciate your total honesty that this is really about a hate fetish regarding unions! Honesty is always more honorable than spin or deception. Well done!

 

[Claudette]

What a bunch of bs. LMAO

 

[American Horse]

Fill me in here...I haven't seen much news since Tuesday, had the flu.
What do I not know? You guys are saying this is just symbolic...so the bill that passed...what is not as it appears?

Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeyyyyy......

It passed in the House, now goes to the Senate. The Senators are the ones who ran away, so that now moves to the front.

Passage in the House was pretty much a formality, as is passage in the Senate, once a quorum is achieved.

The Wisconsin Republicans could bring the union shop issues up for a vote at any time; that issue requires only a simple majority. Only budget (fiscal) matters require a "quorum."

I wonder why they haven't already done that, and the only thing I can think of is that there is not a solid enough voting block to do it solely as Republicans; they want the Dems to be there for the legitimacy they bring even in the vote would be almost certainly completely along party lines. They're afraid to do it with only themselves in the Senate chamber casting votes on a sensitive issue like this

Walker told "Fox News Sunday" that he's not willing to hammer out a compromise that leaves collective bargaining rights in place -- even if the state Senate Democrats who skipped town in order to prevent a vote agree on raising benefits contributions.

He said wants to give local governments "the tools they need to balance the budget now and in the future" by changing the collective bargaining laws. His office released a fact sheet Monday giving examples of benefits won through collective bargaining, including health insurance that covers Viagara.

Plus, Walker said workers must have the "flexibility" to stay out of a union -- and in turn avoid dues payments -- if they choose.

"For us, if you want to have democracy, if you want to have the American way, which is allowing people to have a choice, that's exactly what we're allowing there," Walker said. "People see the value, they see the work, they can continue to vote to certify that union and they can continue to voluntarily have those union dues, and write the check out and give it to the union to make their case, but they shouldn't be forced to be a part of this if that's not what they want to do."

Part of the Republican bill is to stop taking out union dues automatically as a governemt funtion. Each union member would have to make their own payments directly to the union.

FOX News - Politics - Latest Headlines - Wisconsin Union Battle Could Set Stage for National 'Right-to-Work' Debate

 

[Annie]

Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeyyyyy......

It passed in the House, now goes to the Senate. The Senators are the ones who ran away, so that now moves to the front.

Passage in the House was pretty much a formality, as is passage in the Senate, once a quorum is achieved.

The Wisconsin Republicans could bring the union shop issues up for a vote at any time; that issue requires only a simple majority. Only budget (fiscal) matters require a "quorum."

I wonder why they haven't already done that, and the only thing I can think of is that there is not a solid enough voting block to do it solely as Republicans; they want the Dems to be there for the legitimacy they bring even in the vote would be almost certainly completely along party lines. They're afraid to do it with only themselves in the Senate chamber casting votes on a sensitive issue like this

Walker told "Fox News Sunday" that he's not willing to hammer out a compromise that leaves collective bargaining rights in place -- even if the state Senate Democrats who skipped town in order to prevent a vote agree on raising benefits contributions.

He said wants to give local governments "the tools they need to balance the budget now and in the future" by changing the collective bargaining laws. His office released a fact sheet Monday giving examples of benefits won through collective bargaining, including health insurance that covers Viagara.

Plus, Walker said workers must have the "flexibility" to stay out of a union -- and in turn avoid dues payments -- if they choose.

"For us, if you want to have democracy, if you want to have the American way, which is allowing people to have a choice, that's exactly what we're allowing there," Walker said. "People see the value, they see the work, they can continue to vote to certify that union and they can continue to voluntarily have those union dues, and write the check out and give it to the union to make their case, but they shouldn't be forced to be a part of this if that's not what they want to do."

Part of the Republican bill is to stop taking out union dues automatically as a governemt funtion. Each union member would have to make their own payments directly to the union.

FOX News - Politics - Latest Headlines - Wisconsin Union Battle Could Set Stage for National 'Right-to-Work' Debate

The two bolded parts are where a compromise could be found. Employees would have the choice of whether to belong or not. If yes, they could choose to fill out a form for auto deduct of dues or pay them yearly. It wouldn't just be auto done, they would need to take a positive step to fill out a form that should be readily available at building of employ.

 

[Big Fitz]

If there is another thread - please merge it...couldn't believe I couldn't find one.

After 59 hours straight of Democrat speeches...bill passes.
Then the Democrats complained they hadn't been heard....now that's funny.

Wisconsin Assembly Passes Bill Limiting Union Rights - FoxNews.com

I'm laughing at the Dems. Serves em right.

Good for the GOP in WI. About time the corruption of public unions in collective bargaining to start to go away and fiscal responsibility to come back.

Wisconsin is finally moving it's way back to prosperity.

 

[Avorysuds]

funny... i think that's thanks to their governor.

but whatever.

Ohh look Jillian agrees with Democrats that refuse to follow the rule of law, the policy of their chamber and the will of the people. Go figure.

They are doing everything in their power to stop a bill from being rammed down the people's throats. Isn't democracy fun?

Everything but figuring out where to get the money to pay the Union teachers.

 

[Avorysuds]

Wisconsin votes anti-union bill in

]If there is another thread - please merge it...couldn't believe I couldn't find one.

After 59 hours straight of Democrat speeches...bill passes.
Then the Democrats complained they hadn't been heard....now that's funny.

Wisconsin Assembly Passes Bill Limiting Union Rights - FoxNews.com

Holy crap, I don't know if this thread title was a freudian slip, but this is the second totally honest NeoCon post on Wisconsin today.

Interesting that you consider this bill an "anti-union" bill first and foremost, not even attempting to make the case for it as an innocent attempt to balance budgets.

There's another thread around here that characterized this as a way to "destroy" liberals.


Outstanding! After two weeks of pretending this was some innocent attempt to balance a budget, I appreciate your total honesty that this is really about a hate fetish regarding unions! Honesty is always more honorable than spin or deception. Well done!

What... The... Fuck...

 

[Annie]

It passed in the House, now goes to the Senate. The Senators are the ones who ran away, so that now moves to the front.

Passage in the House was pretty much a formality, as is passage in the Senate, once a quorum is achieved.

The Wisconsin Republicans could bring the union shop issues up for a vote at any time; that issue requires only a simple majority. Only budget (fiscal) matters require a "quorum."

I wonder why they haven't already done that, and the only thing I can think of is that there is not a solid enough voting block to do it solely as Republicans; they want the Dems to be there for the legitimacy they bring even in the vote would be almost certainly completely along party lines. They're afraid to do it with only themselves in the Senate chamber casting votes on a sensitive issue like this

Walker told "Fox News Sunday" that he's not willing to hammer out a compromise that leaves collective bargaining rights in place -- even if the state Senate Democrats who skipped town in order to prevent a vote agree on raising benefits contributions.

He said wants to give local governments "the tools they need to balance the budget now and in the future" by changing the collective bargaining laws. His office released a fact sheet Monday giving examples of benefits won through collective bargaining, including health insurance that covers Viagara.

Plus, Walker said workers must have the "flexibility" to stay out of a union -- and in turn avoid dues payments -- if they choose.

"For us, if you want to have democracy, if you want to have the American way, which is allowing people to have a choice, that's exactly what we're allowing there," Walker said. "People see the value, they see the work, they can continue to vote to certify that union and they can continue to voluntarily have those union dues, and write the check out and give it to the union to make their case, but they shouldn't be forced to be a part of this if that's not what they want to do."

Part of the Republican bill is to stop taking out union dues automatically as a governemt funtion. Each union member would have to make their own payments directly to the union.

FOX News - Politics - Latest Headlines - Wisconsin Union Battle Could Set Stage for National 'Right-to-Work' Debate

The two bolded parts are where a compromise could be found. Employees would have the choice of whether to belong or not. If yes, they could choose to fill out a form for auto deduct of dues or pay them yearly. It wouldn't just be auto done, they would need to take a positive step to fill out a form that should be readily available at building of employ.

BUMP

Over and over again I'm reading that there's no compromise on the part of the governor. This is an area where compromise IS possible. The workers would have the right to opt in or out. Those that opt in would have the right to pay dues on their own or fill out form for auto-deduct.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Ohh look Jillian agrees with Democrats that refuse to follow the rule of law, the policy of their chamber and the will of the people. Go figure.

They are doing everything in their power to stop a bill from being rammed down the people's throats. Isn't democracy fun?

Everything but figuring out where to get the money to pay the Union teachers.

The money portion was agreed to.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Wisconsin Republicans could bring the union shop issues up for a vote at any time; that issue requires only a simple majority. Only budget (fiscal) matters require a "quorum."

I wonder why they haven't already done that, and the only thing I can think of is that there is not a solid enough voting block to do it solely as Republicans; they want the Dems to be there for the legitimacy they bring even in the vote would be almost certainly completely along party lines. They're afraid to do it with only themselves in the Senate chamber casting votes on a sensitive issue like this



Part of the Republican bill is to stop taking out union dues automatically as a governemt funtion. Each union member would have to make their own payments directly to the union.

FOX News - Politics - Latest Headlines - Wisconsin Union Battle Could Set Stage for National 'Right-to-Work' Debate

The two bolded parts are where a compromise could be found. Employees would have the choice of whether to belong or not. If yes, they could choose to fill out a form for auto deduct of dues or pay them yearly. It wouldn't just be auto done, they would need to take a positive step to fill out a form that should be readily available at building of employ.

BUMP

Over and over again I'm reading that there's no compromise on the part of the governor. This is an area where compromise IS possible. The workers would have the right to opt in or out. Those that opt in would have the right to pay dues on their own or fill out form for auto-deduct.

That's no compromise. That's simple uniion-busting.

 

[Tea Bag Partier]

It is my understanding that teachers are not required to join a union.

If this is incorrect, please provide a credible source that proves me wrong.

Wisconsin is a union shop state. If I amwrong on that show me.
What about the WEA Trust? You support that?

I asked you a question. If you don't know the answer please admit that.

From what I have read on the internet teachers are NOT required to belong to the union.

I'm pretty sure it illegal to force people to join unions anywhere, in spite of what Sean Hannity claims. But, if you willing choose to accept a job, and accept the compensation package that a union fought for and bargained for, in some states you are required to pay the union dues. That doesn't mean you have to sign up to be a union member. It costs the union a lot of money and time for lawyers and negotiators to arbitrate for compensation and working conditions. That shit doesn't come for free.

If somebody wants to accept the compensation a union fought for, they should pony up a few bucks to pay for the people who actually invested time and money negotiating the contract.

Otherwise, if you don't want to pay the union a few bucks, you shouldn't accept the union compensation package - you would be a free loader - and you should have to negotiate your own compensation.

In most so called "right to work" states, I think the unions are still required to represent employees who aren't willing to pony up a few bucks to pay the union to negotiate for them, or to represent them on work safety and grievance issues. That pretty much seems like free loading. If you don't want union lawyers representing you, negotiate your own freaking wage, benefits, and work place safety rules.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You support slime, you couldn't shut me up if you showed up at my door. You are a coward and shit for brains. You had better NOT EVER claim someone else is partisan after this display of Un American Undemocratic support for criminals.

I've shut you up more times than I can remember.

You are welcome to support bringing charges up against these Senators they are innocent until proven guilty. As of right now they have committed no crime. They are innocent.

And I will make whatever damn claim I want. The day you start calling out right wing posters to the same extent you do liberals with your retarded hypotheticals and whines about how your hero BOOOOOOOOOOOOSHHHHH was treated differently by the left than they do Obama I will take what you have to say seriously. Until then if you think I am a partisan I suggest you take a look at the crusty face of yours in the mirror. Your shit stinks.

You might be able to brow beat a 5 year old into being quiet. You have never managed the feat with me. You dumb asses think cause I do not spend my entire day on here playing semantics with your bullshit you somehow won.

Guess what you RETARD..... I happen to enjoy playing several games and in between that I sometimes log on here. By the way fuck stain if there are more then a couple pages of threads I almost ALWAYS just log off till the server clears them if I wanna log back on and check later.

I do enjoy though, when I get the chance to point out just how big a hypocrite, liar and fuckstain you and the rest of your liberal buddies are.

Ohh ya, time to declare you won again, you see fuck face I am going to log off drive my son where he needs to go and then when I get back probably play one of my games. Feel free to declare you won again.

Enjoying that government pension??

lol

 

[shintao]

Mostly Symbolic, but glad we now have a focus on Wisconsin state politics.

Looks to me like the vote is inevitable. As soon as the Dems do show, the Senate will pass it, and that will be the end of unions in Wisconsin. I wonder if there will be a massive evacuation of union members from the state. Oh well!!

 

[Annie]

The two bolded parts are where a compromise could be found. Employees would have the choice of whether to belong or not. If yes, they could choose to fill out a form for auto deduct of dues or pay them yearly. It wouldn't just be auto done, they would need to take a positive step to fill out a form that should be readily available at building of employ.

BUMP

Over and over again I'm reading that there's no compromise on the part of the governor. This is an area where compromise IS possible. The workers would have the right to opt in or out. Those that opt in would have the right to pay dues on their own or fill out form for auto-deduct.

That's no compromise. That's simple uniion-busting.

No, it's following the law about freedom of association, just not compelling membership of an organization.

 

[shintao]

Why is it that over the last 30 years businesses with unions have lost jobs and business without unions have gained jobs?
Could it be that unions do not care about the growth and profitability of business?
And government is non profit so unions could care less.

Your so right.

The Gov of WI is trying to make his State more business friendly. More business. More jobs. If the folks in WI don't like what he's doing or how he's doing it he can be voted out of office in 4 years. The Dems will be back in power and the staus quo will be up and running once again in WI.

Having worked twice in Union jobs I can tell you the only thing the Union is interested in is making things better for the Union members. Period.

They don't give a shit about the taxpayers who provide the money to pay those union members in the case of public sector unions. Hell. The Union I belonged to spent loads of time defending drunks, druggies and thieves.

They also wanted the company I worked for to pay for the rehab for those druggies and alcoholics and went to the wall defending the thieves.

As for the teachers Union?? I for one think education would be better off without the Union.

Just a couple points. The Union is interested in making things better for the people who hire them,...any other argument is illogical. As for education without Unions, I suppose that would work, but the state would be the one defending the drunks, druggies and thieves as their employees. The derelects don't disappear just because they are not union.

The Union I worked for had zero tolerance for such people, and had drug tests and screening. Do you think I would want a druggie working next to me at 250 feet in the air, while I am landing steel? I don't think so.

 

[Gadawg73]

It is my understanding that teachers are not required to join a union.

If this is incorrect, please provide a credible source that proves me wrong.

Wisconsin is a union shop state. If I amwrong on that show me.
What about the WEA Trust? You support that?

I asked you a question. If you don't know the answer please admit that.

From what I have read on the internet teachers are NOT required to belong to the union.

Wisconsin is a closed shop union state and not a right to work union state.
You have to join the union to teach in Wisconsin. Period, no exceptions.
Wisconsin is a forced unionism state.
The VERY FACT of the law that Walker wants to pass is:
"It will be against the law to force someone to join a union or pay dues to a union".
They want to make Wisconsin a right to work union state. Do you even know what that means?
Facts sure are a bitch, aren't they?

 

[Gadawg73]

Wisconsin is a union shop state. If I amwrong on that show me.
What about the WEA Trust? You support that?

I asked you a question. If you don't know the answer please admit that.

From what I have read on the internet teachers are NOT required to belong to the union.

I'm pretty sure it illegal to force people to join unions anywhere, in spite of what Sean Hannity claims. But, if you willing choose to accept a job, and accept the compensation package that a union fought for and bargained for, in some states you are required to pay the union dues. That doesn't mean you have to sign up to be a union member. It costs the union a lot of money and time for lawyers and negotiators to arbitrate for compensation and working conditions. That shit doesn't come for free.

If somebody wants to accept the compensation a union fought for, they should pony up a few bucks to pay for the people who actually invested time and money negotiating the contract.

Otherwise, if you don't want to pay the union a few bucks, you shouldn't accept the union compensation package - you would be a free loader - and you should have to negotiate your own compensation.

In most so called "right to work" states, I think the unions are still required to represent employees who aren't willing to pony up a few bucks to pay the union to negotiate for them, or to represent them on work safety and grievance issues. That pretty much seems like free loading. If you don't want union lawyers representing you, negotiate your own freaking wage, benefits, and work place safety rules.

You people are ignorant.
The ENTIRE argument is that Wisconsin and many states ARE CLOSED SHOP UNION STATES. You HAVE TO JOIN THE UNION to be hired. THAT IS THE LAW.
Georgia and many other states ARE RIGHT TO WORK STATES. You do not have to join the union to work for a company even if the company has union workers and their contracts.
I am not surprised at all that many here have NO CLUE as to that fact and that AND THAT ISSUE ALONE, is what is the main issue in Wisconsin.

 

[Ravi]

Wisconsin is a union shop state. If I amwrong on that show me.
What about the WEA Trust? You support that?

I asked you a question. If you don't know the answer please admit that.

From what I have read on the internet teachers are NOT required to belong to the union.

Wisconsin is a closed shop union state and not a right to work union state.
You have to join the union to teach in Wisconsin. Period, no exceptions.
Wisconsin is a forced unionism state.
The VERY FACT of the law that Walker wants to pass is:
"It will be against the law to force someone to join a union or pay dues to a union".
They want to make Wisconsin a right to work union state. Do you even know what that means?
Facts sure are a bitch, aren't they?

Subsequent posters have basically proven you wrong.

How many laws are written when no law is needed?

 

[Dr.House]

funny... i think that's thanks to their governor.

but whatever.

Ohh look Jillian agrees with Democrats that refuse to follow the rule of law, the policy of their chamber and the will of the people. Go figure.

They are doing everything in their power to stop a bill from being rammed down the people's throats. Isn't democracy fun?

So THATS how 0bamacare should have been stopped...

The R's should just have run away....


Thanks...