Rham Emanuel tackles the teachers unions/ where are the demands for a recall electio?

[tjvh]

Really? You start a thread at3:21AM, then try to call out Dems for not responding...

Then you try to equate tough negotiations with removing collective bargaining. You are the DJ here, not me.

I'll give you that... At 3:21AM Dems are still loaded.

 

[g5000]

I have been looking around and it appears the Chicago public employee unions do enjoy collective bargaining rights for their pension contributions. I do not have anything definitive to link to, but the circumstantial evidence I have found is pretty strong.

If so, this means Emanuel is going to run into the same opposition Walker did. How he approaches this problem will be interesting to observe.

Chicago made the identical mistake so many other municipalities and states made. During the heyday of the derivatives bubble, they either decreased or stopped their payments into the public employee pension plans altogether. This was due to an expected higher return on investment everyone was expecting during the bubble. If you expect higher returns, you will lower your payments into a plan since the higher returns will still meet your expected obligations.

Then the bubble burst and ROI is not only lower, it is lower than ever. Time to up the payments, radically.

This is going to be very painful.

Oh crap, now what's he gonna do??

CNN.com - Transcripts

ZAKARIA: Tell me your reaction to the Wisconsin election. You have, in your own way, been trying to take on some of the issues of pension, retirement benefit cost, cost of living adjustments.

What do you think one should interpret from that victory? What does it say that Governor Walker was reaffirmed with such a strong majority?

EMANUEL: I think, well -- I don't go where the interpretation's going that somehow this is an affirmation for doing that type of politics. I think people know that when you recall, there's got to be something severe. You've committed corruption or something of that level.

And I think that that's where the judgment was. This was not the tool for disagreeing with his policies on collective bargaining or other issues. So I'm not where the conventional wisdom is about oh, this means it's war on public employees.

I think public employees should be partners in solving problems. Labor should be a partner. If you're view when you sit at the table is, I want to get to a yes and I want to work a way that's a win-win, I'll not only pull up a chair, I'll get you a cup of coffee.

But if you're attitude is we did it this way for 30 years, we're going to keep doing it this way for 30 years, that's not feasible. The taxpayers can't support that anymore.

ZAKARIA: Is there a danger that the Democratic Party is going to end up on the wrong side of this issue because the public sector unions are such a large funder of the party.

EMANUEL: Well, it requires everybody being straightforward and honest with each other. I think the truth is you could say, on my side -- meaning, obviously, you're talking about from a partisan or a party affiliate, you cannot put your head in the sand and say this will go away, it will take care of itself.

As I always joke around, denial is not a long-term strategy. It doesn't work. We have to take on these issues -- I don't want to say, "man up to them," but deal with them, confront them, but from a position of being honest with people as long as painful it is.

No city today can function as if the past and the past responsibilities are going to hold true. And that means saying to people and I say this when I go to firehouses, "You did nothing wrong. This is not your fault, but I can't be your mayor and tell you if we don't change it, everything's going to be OK and that's just not true."

"And you and your spouse have made plans all along the way. I want you to have a pension not a defined contribution, a defined benefit. I want you to have it, but to have it, if you want it, we're going to have to make changes."

And remember, I'm making changes to expectations. That's the hardest thing to do in life, but it starts with, "It's not your fault things weren't done right, but we're going to get them right so when you contribute, you know it will be there."

ZAKARIA: The biggest piece of this is cost of living adjustments, am I right?

EMANUEL: On the pensions.

ZAKARIA: On the pensions.

EMANUEL: That's the automatic increase. I testify to this, unless you deal with what's happening for present retirees as part of a solution. You can do everything else on top to current. If you don't stop the bleeding, none of the other stuff will take hold and really fix the system.

And cost of living adjustments are the ones that move the needle of fastest to health and I think -- I'm not going to win popularity points with retirees, but I want to be honest. They're getting it as part of our pensions, not all, they're getting an automatic 3 percent.

An employee, I think the statistic is, that retired in '95 at $60,000 a year, now makes $100 plus thousand. The employee current that is paying that took a furlough, a pay cut, while the other person's get a 3 percent annually increase. And that's just -- and that's not sustainable. Maybe in a different era that's sustainable. It's not sustainable now and that's what I meant when people agree to things in -- maybe the heady days, but they're not sustainable long-term.

And you have to deal with retirement age, you have to deal with benefit structure, you have to deal with contribution, you have to deal with choice, but you're also going to have to deal with what was once an agreement, contractual, that you can't sustain, otherwise the current employees and the young employees will never get the pension that they're earning.

 

[Black_Label]

Really? You start a thread at3:21AM, then try to call out Dems for not responding...

Then you try to equate tough negotiations with removing collective bargaining. You are the DJ here, not me.

I'll give you that... At 3:21AM Dems are still loaded.

No, they are asleep as they need to get up for work in the morning to pay for all the welfare the lazy GOP'ers live off of.

 

[Conservative]

Emanuel allies stand in for mayor in union battle - chicagotribune.com

Big letter (D) got your tongue lefties? Especially you Chris.

I see no where in there where Emanuel tries to block a unions right to exist

See the difference?

You seem to be under the impression that Scott Walker blocked a union's right to exist.

That is not the case. Walker only changed the public employee union's collective rights on pension benefits. He did not take away their right to exist, nor did he change their right to collectively bargain for salary.

In Chicago and in Wisconsin, the public employees need to increase their contributions to their pensions. To accomplish that in Wisconsin, their ability to block that increase had to be removed.

Does Chicago have the same roadblock to contribution increases that Wisconsin did? If not, then Emanuel does not have to use the same kind of tactics as were required in Wisconsin. So that may explain the difference.

Please don't speak from ignorance. It unneccesarily muddies the water.

It's all he has.

 

[Seawytch]

Emanuel allies stand in for mayor in union battle - chicagotribune.com

Big letter (D) got your tongue lefties? Especially you Chris.

Where's the legislation taking away the unions' rights to bargain, as Walker did?

Wisconsin only took away certain collective bargaining rights. The public employee unions still retain their collective bargaining rights for salary.

That is why I say the end effect is identical between Walker and Emanuel. To wit, increased contributions to their pension plans and other benefits.

The paths may be different, but the endpoint is the same.

But it is the path that makes the difference. One is done WITH while the other is done TO.

Consensual sex versus rape.

 

[Conservative]

Where's the legislation taking away the unions' rights to bargain, as Walker did?

Wisconsin only took away certain collective bargaining rights. The public employee unions still retain their collective bargaining rights for salary.

That is why I say the end effect is identical between Walker and Emanuel. To wit, increased contributions to their pension plans and other benefits.

The paths may be different, but the endpoint is the same.

But it is the path that makes the difference. One is done WITH while the other is done TO.

Consensual sex versus rape.

thankfully, the unions ability to rape the tax payers in Wisconsin has been ended by walker

 

[signelect]

What, a democrate attacking the unions. Is the world ending and I missed the announcement. He is looking for votes pure and simple. If teachers were allowed to teach and get rid of kids who don't want to learn I would agree they need more money but until they get back control of class rooms and send the little darling who to parents who won't make the beause nothing will happen.

 

[Seawytch]

Wisconsin only took away certain collective bargaining rights. The public employee unions still retain their collective bargaining rights for salary.

That is why I say the end effect is identical between Walker and Emanuel. To wit, increased contributions to their pension plans and other benefits.

The paths may be different, but the endpoint is the same.

But it is the path that makes the difference. One is done WITH while the other is done TO.

Consensual sex versus rape.

thankfully, the unions ability to rape the tax payers in Wisconsin has been ended by walker

So their bargained for contact is akin to rape? Not by a long stretch.

 

[Jackson]

Emanual is probably calling Walker for help. Hope Walker tells his where to go.

 

[Charles_Main]

Emanuel allies stand in for mayor in union battle - chicagotribune.com

Big letter (D) got your tongue lefties? Especially you Chris.

Wow.

You really don't understand the difference between ending collective bargaining with the union and negotiating with the union for the best interests of the people.

Its sad your capacity for complex thought is that limited.

Is that what you think? That Unions negotiate with the Best Interest of the People in mind? and not with only their members interests in mind?

 

[g5000]

So their bargained for contact is akin to rape? Not by a long stretch.

The public employee unions bargained with the government. The government governs by the consent of the people. The people spoke and said they did not like the contract the government bargained for. So the people negated that contract by electing Walker to remove the right to bargain for pension contributions.

The taxpayers were being forced to pay for a contract to which they did not consent.

So, yeah. Rape.

 

[Seawytch]

Emanual is probably calling Walker for help. Hope Walker tells his where to go.

Except that the actions taken are in no way similar. That fact does't matter though does it?

 

[g5000]

Emanual is probably calling Walker for help. Hope Walker tells his where to go.

Except that the actions taken are in no way similar. That fact does't matter though does it?

Rahm Emanuel knows that if he doesn't get the public employee unions to see the writing on the wall, the people of Chicago are going to elect someone who will.

His opponent's campaign rhetoric will be very simple. "Do you want higher taxes or do you want to remove collective bargaining rights for these fat public employees?"

 

[Steelplate]

Emanuel allies stand in for mayor in union battle - chicagotribune.com

Big letter (D) got your tongue lefties? Especially you Chris.

Wow.

You really don't understand the difference between ending collective bargaining with the union and negotiating with the union for the best interests of the people.

Its sad your capacity for complex thought is that limited.

Is that what you think? That Unions negotiate with the Best Interest of the People in mind? and not with only their members interests in mind?

Literacy is bliss. Re-read the post again...he is talking about Emmanuel negotiating with union in the best interest of the people.

 

[naturegirl]

Emanual is probably calling Walker for help. Hope Walker tells his where to go.

Except that the actions taken are in no way similar. That fact does't matter though does it?

Rahm Emanuel knows that if he doesn't get the public employee unions to see the writing on the wall, the people of Chicago are going to elect someone who will.

His opponent's campaign rhetoric will be very simple. "Do you want higher taxes or do you want to remove collective bargaining rights for these fat public employees?"

Ok that made me laugh......

Back to the topic..........Rahm is playing a game of political suicide if he takes on the teacher's unions. Don't forget all those "organized people" live there.

 

[EriktheRed]

Emanuel allies stand in for mayor in union battle - chicagotribune.com

Big letter (D) got your tongue lefties? Especially you Chris.

I see no where in there where Emanuel tries to block a unions right to exist

See the difference?

lol, figures this would be the spin put it..

Oh, it's more than "spin". That's the main difference, and it's a significant one.

 

[Listening]

Really? You start a thread at3:21AM, then try to call out Dems for not responding...

Then you try to equate tough negotiations with removing collective bargaining. You are the DJ here, not me.

It's the definition of right wing trolling at it's finest. I'm glad I'm not a right right winger, being that stupid would be embarrassing.

So what is your excuse (for being stupid) ?

 

[JoeB131]

and doing away with the CB in Wisconsin did exactly that. Local districts were able to address their budget shortfalls, balancing their budgets, without major layoffs.

But they could have done that without eliminating Collective Bargaining... that was the point. The unions were willing to make concessions. And most of the budgets were balanced at the local level without any help from Walker.

Again, none of this issue about Public Sector unions would be an issue if the wages and benefits of private sector workers hadn't been gutted over the last 30 years.

BUt instead of being angry at the arsonist who burns down your house, you want him to burn down your neighbor's house, too. Just so everyone is equally miserable.

Not without firing dozens to hundreds or massive tax increases.

You can't get private sector deals as nice as the teachers had, why should they have them?

Oh, I don't know, maybe because being a teacher is a really important job...

Maybe because the burnout rate for teachers is 50%, and you want to attract the best talent you can...

I'm sure I can come up with a few hundred other reasons why teachers should be well-compensated...

 

[Seawytch]

So their bargained for contact is akin to rape? Not by a long stretch.

The public employee unions bargained with the government. The government governs by the consent of the people. The people spoke and said they did not like the contract the government bargained for. So the people negated that contract by electing Walker to remove the right to bargain for pension contributions.

The taxpayers were being forced to pay for a contract to which they did not consent.

So, yeah. Rape.

The Public Unions had a CONTRACT. The government said "here, take lower wages in exchange for benefits down the road." then, through no fault of the PUs, their governments had no money (thanks in large part to the Bush recession) and want them to NOW pay more. The Unions have shown a willingness to do so, WHEN ASKED. Walker didn't ask, he took. (just like Ohio's governor did. What happened there when the voters actually spoke?)