Should Gov. Walker be Recalled?

[SoCal]

i simply see this as a contract dispute. the unions have a contract in place with the state. the state no longer likes that contract, so they need to negotiate a new one. instead walker simply wants to take away their ability to negotiate for the whole, and that is wrong.

Did Obama's federal pay freeze lead you to make polls too?

a pay freeze, is different. if those employees were part of a union and their contract gave him the ability to do so, he was well within his rights. if their contract did not, then they would have a right to protest a breach of contract.

 

[WillowTree]

i simply see this as a contract dispute. the unions have a contract in place with the state. the state no longer likes that contract, so they need to negotiate a new one. instead walker simply wants to take away their ability to negotiate for the whole, and that is wrong.

Did Obama's federal pay freeze lead you to make polls too?

Wonder why he didn't start a poll about recalling the 14 derelict demonRats?

 

[Nosmo King]

People don't get recalled for keeping their promises.

Was the elimination of public sector unions something Walker campaigned on?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Collective bargaining is a process of negotiations between employers and the representatives of a unit of employees aimed at reaching agreements which regulate working conditions. Collective agreements usually set out wage scales, working hours, training, health and safety, overtime, grievance mechanisms and rights to participate in workplace or company affairs.[1]

The union may negotiate with a single employer (who is typically representing a company's shareholders) or may negotiate with a federation of businesses, depending on the country, to reach an industry wide agreement. A collective agreement functions as a labor contract between an employer and one or more unions. Collective bargaining consists of the process of negotiation between representatives of a union and employers (generally represented by management, in some countries[which?] by an employers' organization) in respect of the terms and conditions of employment of employees, such as wages, hours of work, working conditions and grievance-procedures, and about the rights and responsibilities of trade unions. The parties often refer to the result of the negotiation as a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) or as a collective employment agreement (CEA).

The unions agreed to the cuts proposed by Walker, but they wanted to RETAIN their collective bargaining rights.

They should be allowed to keep them. Walker is the one that started this shit storm because he gave massive tax breaks to corporations.

Now, he's trying to bust the unions.

Wanna know why other GOP governors aren't doing the same? They know he's gonna fail.

 

[SoCal]

Their "right" was the right to ask for collective bargaining.

Collective bargaining was a negotiated item in a contract.

youre correct. they were granted the rights of collective bargaining per the contract. the semantics of this isnt the issue i wanted to discuss.

i simply see this as a contract dispute. the unions have a contract in place with the state. the state no longer likes that contract, so they need to negotiate a new one. instead walker simply wants to take away their ability to negotiate for the whole, and that is wrong.

Actually....

and to really put it in context...and using a metaphore...

A new CEO (governor) came into a company (state) that had serious financial issues. He had proimised the stockholders (voters) that he will not only do what he can to clean up the mess BUT ALSO DO WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO to prevent the mess from happening again.

He reviewed the financials and had to make some very difficult decisions. Knowing these decisions may not be popular, he made them anyway as he truly believed that the employees were a bit overpaid and their tactics of negotiating may put them in a difficult situation in the future.

Knowing that it may not go over well with the employees, he opted to allow the board of directors (the state senate) vote on it...and let the majority win. Sure, he knew he had like thinkers as a majority on the board, but if the idea was THAT BAD, he would lose the vote.

THAT is how it happened....without the spin.

but.....if those employees had a contract with that company, the CEO would not have had the power to make such drastic cuts unless that language was specifically put in the contract. he would have been in breach of that contract. now he could have gone to the employees and renegotiated the terms of that agreement, but he could not eliminate that agreements.

walker is trying to do something totally different here. he is trying to take away their ability to negotiate the terms of their employment.

 

[SoCal]

i simply see this as a contract dispute. the unions have a contract in place with the state. the state no longer likes that contract, so they need to negotiate a new one. instead walker simply wants to take away their ability to negotiate for the whole, and that is wrong.

Did Obama's federal pay freeze lead you to make polls too?

Wonder why he didn't start a poll about recalling the 14 derelict demonRats?

under current WI law, what they did was not illegal. Try to stay on topic.

 

[Jarhead]

People don't get recalled for keeping their promises.

Was the elimination of public sector unions something Walker campaigned on?

He campaigned on cleaning the financial mess and also preventing it from ahppening again.

Ironicalluy, all a=gree that the deal the public employees had was way to sweet to sustain.

Well how do you think they got it?

Collective bargaining.

He does not want it to happen again.

He is living up to his campaign proimise.

Got an issue with it?

Vote him out when his term expires.

 

[martybegan]

I would just like to point out that the original poster just tried to negative rep me, with no rep, for pointing out the flaws in his post. He also edited out his knee jerk cranky response when I pointed out said issue, and has yet to respond to it in the body of the thread.

A simple clarification would have sufficed.

I STING YOU WITH MY BELOW 50 REP IN THE NEGATIVE

 

[WillowTree]

Did Obama's federal pay freeze lead you to make polls too?

Wonder why he didn't start a poll about recalling the 14 derelict demonRats?

under current WI law, what they did was not illegal. Try to stay on topic.

Under current law what Walker did was not illegal. So what was the topic again?

 

[WillowTree]

I would just like to point out that the original poster just tried to negative rep me, with no rep, for pointing out the flaws in his post. He also edited out his knee jerk cranky response when I pointed out said issue, and has yet to respond to it in the body of the thread.

A simple clarification would have sufficed.

I STING YOU WITH MY BELOW 50 REP IN THE NEGATIVE

I know, I got a little gray box too. He needs some math lessons.

 

[SoCal]

I would just like to point out that the original poster just tried to negative rep me, with no rep, for pointing out the flaws in his post. He also edited out his knee jerk cranky response when I pointed out said issue, and has yet to respond to it in the body of the thread.

A simple clarification would have sufficed.

I STING YOU WITH MY BELOW 50 REP IN THE NEGATIVE

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA are you done crying now?

 

[martybegan]

I would just like to point out that the original poster just tried to negative rep me, with no rep, for pointing out the flaws in his post. He also edited out his knee jerk cranky response when I pointed out said issue, and has yet to respond to it in the body of the thread.

A simple clarification would have sufficed.

I STING YOU WITH MY BELOW 50 REP IN THE NEGATIVE

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA are you done crying now?

I always enjoy people's response when they get caught with thier hand in the cookie jar. Is that the best you can do?

 

[martybegan]

I would just like to point out that the original poster just tried to negative rep me, with no rep, for pointing out the flaws in his post. He also edited out his knee jerk cranky response when I pointed out said issue, and has yet to respond to it in the body of the thread.

A simple clarification would have sufficed.

I STING YOU WITH MY BELOW 50 REP IN THE NEGATIVE

I know, I got a little gray box too. He needs some math lessons.

LOL

so thats why he went red so quick, I figured it wasnt my rep # doing it.

 

[Jarhead]

youre correct. they were granted the rights of collective bargaining per the contract. the semantics of this isnt the issue i wanted to discuss.

i simply see this as a contract dispute. the unions have a contract in place with the state. the state no longer likes that contract, so they need to negotiate a new one. instead walker simply wants to take away their ability to negotiate for the whole, and that is wrong.

Actually....

and to really put it in context...and using a metaphore...

A new CEO (governor) came into a company (state) that had serious financial issues. He had proimised the stockholders (voters) that he will not only do what he can to clean up the mess BUT ALSO DO WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO to prevent the mess from happening again.

He reviewed the financials and had to make some very difficult decisions. Knowing these decisions may not be popular, he made them anyway as he truly believed that the employees were a bit overpaid and their tactics of negotiating may put them in a difficult situation in the future.

Knowing that it may not go over well with the employees, he opted to allow the board of directors (the state senate) vote on it...and let the majority win. Sure, he knew he had like thinkers as a majority on the board, but if the idea was THAT BAD, he would lose the vote.

THAT is how it happened....without the spin.

but.....if those employees had a contract with that company, the CEO would not have had the power to make such drastic cuts unless that language was specifically put in the contract. he would have been in breach of that contract. now he could have gone to the employees and renegotiated the terms of that agreement, but he could not eliminate that agreements.

walker is trying to do something totally different here. he is trying to take away their ability to negotiate the terms of their employment.

Yes...in a way he is.
So?
No one is saying they have to stay on the job. They dont like it? They can interview for a different job.
Most companies DONT have unions....and colllective bargaining.....so I dont get it. Whats the big deal here?

Yes...he is changing the structure of the "company" in an effort to avoid another fianncial mess....like any company would do.

The way it was being run wasnt working.....so he is making infrastructure changes.

 

[WillowTree]

I would just like to point out that the original poster just tried to negative rep me, with no rep, for pointing out the flaws in his post. He also edited out his knee jerk cranky response when I pointed out said issue, and has yet to respond to it in the body of the thread.

A simple clarification would have sufficed.

I STING YOU WITH MY BELOW 50 REP IN THE NEGATIVE

I know, I got a little gray box too. He needs some math lessons.

LOL

so thats why he went red so quick, I figured it wasnt my rep # doing it.

well he was fine til he accused you of whining.

 

[R.D.]

i simply see this as a contract dispute. the unions have a contract in place with the state. the state no longer likes that contract, so they need to negotiate a new one. instead walker simply wants to take away their ability to negotiate for the whole, and that is wrong.

Did Obama's federal pay freeze lead you to make polls too?

a pay freeze, is different. if those employees were part of a union and their contract gave him the ability to do so, he was well within his rights. if their contract did not, then they would have a right to protest a breach of contract.

You're clueless aren't you?

 

[Oddball]

I would just like to point out that the original poster just tried to negative rep me, with no rep, for pointing out the flaws in his post. He also edited out his knee jerk cranky response when I pointed out said issue, and has yet to respond to it in the body of the thread.

A simple clarification would have sufficed.

I STING YOU WITH MY BELOW 50 REP IN THE NEGATIVE

I know, I got a little gray box too. He needs some math lessons.

 

[DiveCon]

People don't get recalled for keeping their promises.

Was the elimination of public sector unions something Walker campaigned on?

no, and thats not what he is doing

 

[Nosmo King]

People don't get recalled for keeping their promises.

Was the elimination of public sector unions something Walker campaigned on?

no, and thats not what he is doing

What would you call it after a union is stripped of collective bargaining rights? I call it a coffee clatch. Certainly not a labor union.

And if the elimination of collective bargaining rights was not a campaign issue, why is Walker doing it? I know you'll say to balance the state budget as if that's the only way that can happen. But we both know Walker is settling some political scores.

 

[WillowTree]

Was the elimination of public sector unions something Walker campaigned on?

no, and thats not what he is doing

What would you call it after a union is stripped of collective bargaining rights? I call it a coffee clatch. Certainly not a labor union.

And if the elimination of collective bargaining rights was not a campaign issue, why is Walker doing it? I know you'll say to balance the state budget as if that's the only way that can happen. But we both know Walker is settling some political scores.

here's a clue.. Look beyond the tip of your nose into the F U T U R E!