Scott Walker WI governor vs the Packers & teachers (2 Viewers)

[meatwad1]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits.

Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.

I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

 

[Ilov80s]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

 

[StrikeS2k]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Uh, if you're paying more it follows that the district is paying less. If that's the case how can you say they aren't saving anything?

 

[Sarnoff]

I'm still unclear what role the Green Bay Packers played in all of this.

 

[Ilov80s]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Uh, if you're paying more it follows that the district is paying less. If that's the case how can you say they aren't saving anything?

Heavy cuts in funding from the state.

 

[StrikeS2k]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Uh, if you're paying more it follows that the district is paying less. If that's the case how can you say they aren't saving anything?

Heavy cuts in funding from the state.

You said that you paying more of your health care hasn't resulted in any savings for the district. I think you might want to rephrase that. Just because they have less money doesn't mean they haven't saved. If they were still paying all of your health care they'd be worse off than they are. Clearly they are in better shape financially than if you weren't paying part of your health care.

 

[Ilov80s]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Uh, if you're paying more it follows that the district is paying less. If that's the case how can you say they aren't saving anything?

Heavy cuts in funding from the state.

You said that you paying more of your health care hasn't resulted in any savings for the district. I think you might want to rephrase that. Just because they have less money doesn't mean they haven't saved. If they were still paying all of your health care they'd be worse off than they are. Clearly they are in better shape financially than if you weren't paying part of your health care.

Not really. 20% was the floor. We nearly are doubling to 37% ( we were 10% for the last 2 years). The district came to us and said, "This is how much money we have to trim from teacher compensation. Teachers can either cover the losses in wage cuts or through increased health case costs. We voted as a union that we'd rather pay more for health care than take a wage cut. a +27% increase in our health care costs and 3 furlough days were required to make the budget work, not decrease wages and not layoff any teachers. The 37% was what was needed to make the district financially viable, nothing to do with any mandated health care floor.

 

[StrikeS2k]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Uh, if you're paying more it follows that the district is paying less. If that's the case how can you say they aren't saving anything?

Heavy cuts in funding from the state.

You said that you paying more of your health care hasn't resulted in any savings for the district. I think you might want to rephrase that. Just because they have less money doesn't mean they haven't saved. If they were still paying all of your health care they'd be worse off than they are. Clearly they are in better shape financially than if you weren't paying part of your health care.

Not really. 20% was the floor. We nearly are doubling to 37% ( we were 10% for the last 2 years). The district came to us and said, "This is how much money we have to trim from teacher compensation. Teachers can either cover the losses in wage cuts or through increased health case costs. We voted as a union that we'd rather pay more for health care than take a wage cut. a +27% increase in our health care costs and 3 furlough days were required to make the budget work and not layoff any teachers. The 37% was what was needed to make the district financially viable, nothing to do with any mandated health care floor.

You're missing the point. They're still saving money. Your post pretty much confirms that.

 

[Ilov80s]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Uh, if you're paying more it follows that the district is paying less. If that's the case how can you say they aren't saving anything?

Heavy cuts in funding from the state.

You said that you paying more of your health care hasn't resulted in any savings for the district. I think you might want to rephrase that. Just because they have less money doesn't mean they haven't saved. If they were still paying all of your health care they'd be worse off than they are. Clearly they are in better shape financially than if you weren't paying part of your health care.

Not really. 20% was the floor. We nearly are doubling to 37% ( we were 10% for the last 2 years). The district came to us and said, "This is how much money we have to trim from teacher compensation. Teachers can either cover the losses in wage cuts or through increased health case costs. We voted as a union that we'd rather pay more for health care than take a wage cut. a +27% increase in our health care costs and 3 furlough days were required to make the budget work and not layoff any teachers. The 37% was what was needed to make the district financially viable, nothing to do with any mandated health care floor.

You're missing the point. They're still saving money. Your post pretty much confirms that.

Funny how you can save money while having less money than before. The health care floor they put in isn't worth enough to offset the budget cuts. It is a net loss for districts.

 

[StrikeS2k]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Uh, if you're paying more it follows that the district is paying less. If that's the case how can you say they aren't saving anything?

Heavy cuts in funding from the state.

You said that you paying more of your health care hasn't resulted in any savings for the district. I think you might want to rephrase that. Just because they have less money doesn't mean they haven't saved. If they were still paying all of your health care they'd be worse off than they are. Clearly they are in better shape financially than if you weren't paying part of your health care.

Not really. 20% was the floor. We nearly are doubling to 37% ( we were 10% for the last 2 years). The district came to us and said, "This is how much money we have to trim from teacher compensation. Teachers can either cover the losses in wage cuts or through increased health case costs. We voted as a union that we'd rather pay more for health care than take a wage cut. a +27% increase in our health care costs and 3 furlough days were required to make the budget work and not layoff any teachers. The 37% was what was needed to make the district financially viable, nothing to do with any mandated health care floor.

You're missing the point. They're still saving money. Your post pretty much confirms that.

Funny how you can save money while having less money than before. The health care floor they put in isn't worth enough to offset the budget cuts. It is a net loss for districts.

Your problem is you're putting the two things together. They probably lose the state money whether your situation changes or not. One is not dependent on the other. The only question is what they would have done had you not been required to contribute to your health care. My guess is, like other places where the unions won't budge, they would have laid people off.

 

[Ilov80s]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Uh, if you're paying more it follows that the district is paying less. If that's the case how can you say they aren't saving anything?

Heavy cuts in funding from the state.

You said that you paying more of your health care hasn't resulted in any savings for the district. I think you might want to rephrase that. Just because they have less money doesn't mean they haven't saved. If they were still paying all of your health care they'd be worse off than they are. Clearly they are in better shape financially than if you weren't paying part of your health care.

Not really. 20% was the floor. We nearly are doubling to 37% ( we were 10% for the last 2 years). The district came to us and said, "This is how much money we have to trim from teacher compensation. Teachers can either cover the losses in wage cuts or through increased health case costs. We voted as a union that we'd rather pay more for health care than take a wage cut. a +27% increase in our health care costs and 3 furlough days were required to make the budget work and not layoff any teachers. The 37% was what was needed to make the district financially viable, nothing to do with any mandated health care floor.

You're missing the point. They're still saving money. Your post pretty much confirms that.

Funny how you can save money while having less money than before. The health care floor they put in isn't worth enough to offset the budget cuts. It is a net loss for districts.

Your problem is you're putting the two things together. They probably lose the state money whether your situation changes or not. One is not dependent on the other. The only question is what they would have done had you not been required to contribute to your health care. My guess is, like other places where the unions won't budge, they would have laid people off.

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

 

[StrikeS2k]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

 

[timschochet]

I'm still unclear what role the Green Bay Packers played in all of this.

Best sign during all of the protests: "I BLAME FAVRE!"

 

[Ilov80s]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

Tell me how the district is saving money.

 

[StrikeS2k]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

Tell me how the district is saving money.

They're spending less than they were before. I'm leaving for the day shortly. And this is the type of discussion I hate. If you want to discuss the merits of the changes that's one thing. But wasting this much time and effort because you can't even acknowledge that they are saving money by having you pay a bit more for your benefits than you did before.

 

[dparker713]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

Tell me how the district is saving money.

They're paying people less to do the same job. They just happen to have less overall money so they had to cut beyond whatever cost savings they've gained.

 

[Ilov80s]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

Tell me how the district is saving money.

They're paying people less to do the same job. They just happen to have less overall money so they had to cut beyond whatever cost savings they've gained.

So overall, you would say my school district is saving this money this year?

 

[Ilov80s]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

Tell me how the district is saving money.

They're paying people less to do the same job. They just happen to have less overall money so they had to cut beyond whatever cost savings they've gained.

Also, I never said otherwise. They are spending less, but it is because of the budget cuts not the bill that mandated 20%. Perhaps in some wealthier districts or districts with a lot of fat to cut, it may create some savings. However, I only ever referred to mine.

 

[dparker713]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

Tell me how the district is saving money.

They're paying people less to do the same job. They just happen to have less overall money so they had to cut beyond whatever cost savings they've gained.

So overall, you would say my school district is saving this money this year?

You seem to be confusing having a decreased budget and saving money on employee compensation.

 

[dparker713]

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Also, I never said otherwise. They are spending less, but it is because of the budget cuts not the bill that mandated 20%. Perhaps in some wealthier districts or districts with a lot of fat to cut, it may create some savings. However, I only ever referred to mine.

Your union chapter may have already been at the floor, but other districts likely were not. Additionally, the floor does inform the negotiations and provides a roadmap to a bargain.

 

[Ilov80s]

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

Also, I never said otherwise. They are spending less, but it is because of the budget cuts not the bill that mandated 20%. Perhaps in some wealthier districts or districts with a lot of fat to cut, it may create some savings. However, I only ever referred to mine.

Your union chapter may have already been at the floor, but other districts likely were not. Additionally, the floor does inform the negotiations and provides a roadmap to a bargain.

If this was passed 10 years ago when finances were different, the unions just would have negotiated a pay raise to offset the 20%.

 

[Ilov80s]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

Tell me how the district is saving money.

They're paying people less to do the same job. They just happen to have less overall money so they had to cut beyond whatever cost savings they've gained.

So overall, you would say my school district is saving this money this year?

You seem to be confusing having a decreased budget and saving money on employee compensation.

The reason they are saving money on employee compensation is because of the budget. Again, I have said some wealthier districts may save money because of the mandated 20%. However, 20% does not guarantee any savings. Districts that are sound financially could always just end up compensating teachers in wages to balance the state mandated health care. In education, the budget drives everything- especially teacher compensation since districts spend 70%-80% of their entire budget on teacher wages.

 

[humpback]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

This is the original quote people are talking about. You said having teachers pay more for their health care hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. If you look at it in a vacuum, yes, it has to have resulted in savings- there is a certain cost, they used to pay a specific percentage of that cost, now they pay a smaller percentage of it. Maybe overall the district isn't saving money for a variety of other reasons, but based soley on increasing your portion of health care costs, they absolutely are.

 

[Ilov80s]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

This is the original quote people are talking about. You said having teachers pay more for their health care hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. If you look at it in a vacuum, yes, it has to have resulted in savings- there is a certain cost, they used to pay a specific percentage of that cost, now they pay a smaller percentage of it. Maybe overall the district isn't saving money for a variety of other reasons, but based soley on increasing your portion of health care costs, they absolutely are.

Well none of this is taking place in a vacuum.

 

[parasaurolophus]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

Tell me how the district is saving money.

You answered your own question.

 

[humpback]

The changes are that the districts do not actually have to pay that much money for benefits. Here is a news flash for all of you liberal hacks...benefits are worth actual money!!!!!! So over the past 20 years while all of us private sector folk have been scaling back, the public sector has been adding, adding, adding. Now there is not enough money to pay unless we either raise taxes or cut benefits.I voted to cut benefits. Kaukuana is just the beginnning. Any school district that does not have a contract in place will see these savings. MPS did a dirty deal last year and will not see savings until 2013. Its too bad they will be cutting teachers, but that is what those idiots chose.

In Michigan all teachers are now required to pay atleast 20% of their health care. I will be paying 37% this year. However, it hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. The districts are all expected to be operating with the least amount of money in nearly a decade.

This is the original quote people are talking about. You said having teachers pay more for their health care hasn't resulted in any savings for the districts. If you look at it in a vacuum, yes, it has to have resulted in savings- there is a certain cost, they used to pay a specific percentage of that cost, now they pay a smaller percentage of it. Maybe overall the district isn't saving money for a variety of other reasons, but based soley on increasing your portion of health care costs, they absolutely are.

Well none of this is taking place in a vacuum.

Not sure why this is so difficult- if I cut my expense for cable by $50 per month, but increase my expense for golf by $50 per month, I am not saving money overall. However, my decision to cut the cable bill still saves me money- my expenses would be $50 more per month if I didn't do that, regardless of what happens with my income or other expenses.Having the teachers cover more of their health care costs, which is all we're talking about here, absolutely saves them money. Maybe the whole package doesn't, but having you pay more of the health care costs does.

 

[The Kerminator]

Insurance switch saves schoold district $690,000

Eleventh-hour insurance switch saves school district $690,000

By Karen Herzog of the Journal Sentinel

June 30, 2011 7:04 p.m.

The Hartland-Lakeside School Board voted during a special meeting Thursday to switch insurance providers and save $690,000, despite an attempt by the executive committee of the union that represents teachers at Arrowhead High feeder schools to block the change.

Faced with a $1.2 million reduction in state aid for the 2011-'12 school year, the insurance plan change was one of several cost reductions by the School Board to avoid program cuts and increases in class sizes.

The board voted to switch teachers' health insurance from WEA Trust, the nonprofit company started 40 years ago by the state's largest teachers union, to United Healthcare. The contract with WEA Trust expired Thursday.

The Arrowhead United Teachers Organization's executive committee had tried to block the switch because it wanted the board to agree to bargain on wages and work rules as part of the insurance change. The union’s executive committee wanted a full labor agreement, not a side agreement on insurance.

Other districts have switched from WEA Trust insurance to save money. The Menomonee Falls School Board approved a new contract last month with teachers that allowed it to save $2.4 million by switching from WEA Trust to Humana.

Of course, the union opposed it.

 

[snogger]

And the Unions just continue to win fans:

These days, almost anything can get caught in the blender of Wisconsin's union politics.

It can even happen to a Fourth of July parade float honoring firefighters and cops killed on Sept. 11, 2001.

"Back then, the public wasn't saying, 'How sad for the union' - they were saying, 'Those were firefighters who died,'" said Matt Gorniak, a Milwaukee-area fire lieutenant who is the driving force behind the float. "That's what this is about. It's above union, nonunion."

Or at least it should be.

The same float - a re-enactment of the famous photo of three firefighters raising the American flag amid the rubble of the World Trade Center - created a rush of emotions as it passed through three parade routes in Milwaukee County back in 2002. Crowds spontaneously rose to their feet, offering thunderous applause.

With the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks coming up later this year, Gorniak and his church's youth group decided to revive the float in Racine's upcoming Independence Day parade, one of the biggest in the area.

Unexpectedly, the request set off a debate among the leaders of the Racine firefighters union.

The problem: Gorniak had recently invoked a little-used provision in his union contract and opted out of membership in the Wisconsin State Firefighters Association.

Members of the executive board of the Racine firefighters union ultimately decided not to support or march with his float.

Gorniak said Ford, the union president, was on board initially.

"I think he would have hugged me at first," Gorniak said of Ford. The two even agreed to bring in a New York City Fire Department firefighter to march in the parade, with Racine picking up the cost. Gorniak continued, "I was beside myself with joy."

All of that changed a few days later.

"Craig said, 'I've got a question for you: Are you fair share?'" Gorniak said. "I said, 'What does that have to do with anything?' "

Under state law, public employees can drop out of the union and opt to pay just their "fair share" for the cost the union incurs for negotiating contracts. These nonvoting employees don't have to foot the bill for the union's political, social and ideological activities.

Officials say it is highly unusual for Wisconsin firefighters to ask to go fair share. But Gorniak - who describes himself as a born-again Christian who supports conservative politicians, including Gov. Scott Walker - filed his resignation letter and became a fair-share worker in late March or early April. He said he made the move in response to the protests in Madison over Walker's collective-bargaining plan.

The move is so rare that union officials are still, months later, trying to figure out how much Gorniak should pay to cover negotiating costs. He was the first in his fire department to resign from the union.

Ford decided to take the parade issue to his executive board. Before the vote, Gorniak said, he offered to back out and turn over the keys to the truck, letting Ford and other Racine firefighters lead the float through the parade.

It didn't work.



Gorniak said he was told a few days later that the board had voted not to support the float.

Way to win support...

 

[Statorama]

Kaukauna story getting some national play

I've already reported the basics. Nice little blurb in the national story though

In the past, Kaukauna's agreement with the teachers union required the school district to purchase health insurance coverage from something called WEA Trust -- a company created by the Wisconsin teachers union. "It was in the collective bargaining agreement that we could only negotiate with them," says Arnoldussen. "Well, you know what happens when you can only negotiate with one vendor." This year, WEA Trust told Kaukauna that it would face a significant increase in premiums.

Now, the collective bargaining agreement is gone, and the school district is free to shop around for coverage. And all of a sudden, WEA Trust has changed its position. "With these changes, the schools could go out for bids, and lo and behold, WEA Trust said, 'We can match the lowest bid,'" says Republican state Rep. Jim Steineke, who represents the area and supports the Walker changes. At least for the moment, Kaukauna is staying with WEA Trust, but saving substantial amounts of money.

 

[Ilov80s]

The district has x amount of money to spend. They basically let the teacher's union decide if they wanted the cuts to come from health care or wages. We chose health care. If the 20% floor never passed, we still would have have x amount of money and would be paying 37% of our health care. The budget controls everything. At my school we are at about a 30:1 teacher student ratio. The $450 per kid loss in funding results in $13,500 loss per class. Our health care is about $8,000 a year. The teachers are paying 27% more this year than last year which is about $2,000. That is a net loss of $11,500. Go tell the Superintendents about how they are actually saving money though. Now keep in mind we took cuts 17% above the minimum.

You've yet to explain how the district isn't saving money. So, all I can do is ask this. You teach our future?

Tell me how the district is saving money.

You answered your own question.

The teachers are covering a % of the loss in funding and the district is covering another portion with the little they have left in reserve. That isn't saving money.

 

[LAUNCH]

Wisconsin creates half of US new jobs.

Gov. Scott Walker says the state added 9,500 jobs last month, accounting for more than half the jobs created nationwide in that period.

Walker told reporters Thursday the increase in Wisconsin jobs is the largest in about eight years. He says a total of 39,300 private-sector jobs have been created since he took office in January.

The state's unemployment rate in June was 7.6 percent. It has hovered around 7.4 percent for the first five months of the year. That's typically been about 1.5 percentage points better than the national average.

Walker's news conference comes on the same day that the U.S. Labor Department released disappointing news about the economy. Applications for unemployment benefits were up last week, evidence of rising layoffs and a weak job market.

 

[The Kerminator]

Wisconsin creates half of US new jobs.

Gov. Scott Walker says the state added 9,500 jobs last month, accounting for more than half the jobs created nationwide in that period.

Walker told reporters Thursday the increase in Wisconsin jobs is the largest in about eight years. He says a total of 39,300 private-sector jobs have been created since he took office in January.

The state's unemployment rate in June was 7.6 percent. It has hovered around 7.4 percent for the first five months of the year. That's typically been about 1.5 percentage points better than the national average.

Walker's news conference comes on the same day that the U.S. Labor Department released disappointing news about the economy. Applications for unemployment benefits were up last week, evidence of rising layoffs and a weak job market.

Obama's political wing to get involved in recall elections

Obama's political wing involved in Wisconsin recalls

By Associated Press

July 22, 2011 1:30 p.m. |(196) Comments

Madison President Barack Obama’s political arm at the Democratic National Committee is getting involved in the Wisconsin state Senate recall elections.

Obama’s Organizing for America is pulling together volunteers in Madison this weekend to knock on doors and make phone calls in support of Democrats in eight recall elections.

The group sent an email Thursday night to supporters soliciting volunteers.

The group’s Wisconsin field director says Organizing for America will be providing support to volunteers working on the recall elections. Six Republicans and two Democrats face recall elections next month.

Obama’s group was also involved with helping to organize protests in Madison in February over Gov. Scott Walker’s collective bargaining proposal, which spurred the recalls.

Seems like a funny way to thank the guy that created half of the jobs in the country last month.

 

[Statorama]

Tea Party Rally schedules for Wisconsin this week

Get out and support the good guys in these recall elections

 

[snogger]

Tea Party Rally schedules for Wisconsin this week

Get out and support the good guys in these recall elections

It is all going to be up to the turn out.We will be voting AGAINST the Union board director.. Not a huge fan of Shiela, but she is a million times better than a Special Interest board director.

The teachers and the Union are going to be out in full force so the Republicans better get their voters out..

BTW.. gotta love the Democrats "playing by the rules" out in Milwaukee :

Wisconsin Jobs Now held three parties last week and two Monday, all on Milwaukee's northwest side. Each party offered free food, prizes such as T-shirts and stuffed toys, face-painting for children, drawings for school backpacks, and free shuttles to Milwaukee City Hall, where voters could cast absentee ballots in the 8th Senate District contest.

State law prohibits anyone from offering a voter any inducement to vote or not vote. Veum said her group believed it was complying with the law because no one was required to take the rides or vote to get the food and prizes.

But "that's a distinction without a difference," said Reid Magney, spokesman for the accountability board. He said it was legal to offer rides to the polls or free food at picnics to talk about issues, but not in the same event.

 

[Class Dismissed]

This is what Democracy looks like?

 

[StrikeS2k]

Wisconsin teachers' union announces staff layoffs

By SCOTT BAUER

More from BusinessWeek

MADISON, Wis.

Wisconsin's powerful statewide teachers union said 40 percent of its staff members were laid off Monday as a result of the law pushed by Gov. Scott Walker and passed by the Legislature curbing collective bargaining rights.

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill. Opponents had argued one of the law's goals was weakening the power of unions like WEAC, which is typically one of the biggest spenders in campaigns on behalf of Democrats.

The law takes away the right of teachers and other public workers to collectively bargain over anything except salary increases no greater than the rate of inflation. It also disallows the automatic withdrawal of union dues from workers' pay checks and requires unions to vote annually on staying organized, making it tougher for public sector unions to stay viable.

About two-thirds of the state's 427 school districts reached collective bargaining agreements before the law took effect, leaving about 150 subject to the law, according to estimates by the Wisconsin Association of School Boards.

WEAC has been working to get those teachers to become members, Burkhalter said. He refused to say how many had actually been signed up, saying those were "internal figures."

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

The work to sign up previously covered teachers into the union is ongoing, Burkhalter said, and he expects to see a spike in membership once school resumes in the fall.

"Despite budget cuts and layoffs, our goal remains the same: to be a strong and viable organization that represents the voices of Wisconsin's public school employees," he said in a statement.

Before the law was passed, WEAC had about 98,000 members and was one of the most powerful unions in the state. Lobbying reports released last week showed that in 2009 and 2010, at a time when Democrats were in control of the Legislature and the governor's office, WEAC spent $2.5 million twisting the arms of lawmakers, more than any other group.

It has reported spending $500,000 in support of Democratic candidates in this summer's recall elections.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9P56LCO0.htmSo now that the unions can't have dues automatically deducted from members paychecks a good chunk of those members are choosing not to pay the union. What a surprise!!!

 

[snogger]

Wisconsin teachers' union announces staff layoffs

By SCOTT BAUER

More from BusinessWeek

MADISON, Wis.

Wisconsin's powerful statewide teachers union said 40 percent of its staff members were laid off Monday as a result of the law pushed by Gov. Scott Walker and passed by the Legislature curbing collective bargaining rights.

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill. Opponents had argued one of the law's goals was weakening the power of unions like WEAC, which is typically one of the biggest spenders in campaigns on behalf of Democrats.

The law takes away the right of teachers and other public workers to collectively bargain over anything except salary increases no greater than the rate of inflation. It also disallows the automatic withdrawal of union dues from workers' pay checks and requires unions to vote annually on staying organized, making it tougher for public sector unions to stay viable.

About two-thirds of the state's 427 school districts reached collective bargaining agreements before the law took effect, leaving about 150 subject to the law, according to estimates by the Wisconsin Association of School Boards.

WEAC has been working to get those teachers to become members, Burkhalter said. He refused to say how many had actually been signed up, saying those were "internal figures."

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

The work to sign up previously covered teachers into the union is ongoing, Burkhalter said, and he expects to see a spike in membership once school resumes in the fall.

"Despite budget cuts and layoffs, our goal remains the same: to be a strong and viable organization that represents the voices of Wisconsin's public school employees," he said in a statement.

Before the law was passed, WEAC had about 98,000 members and was one of the most powerful unions in the state. Lobbying reports released last week showed that in 2009 and 2010, at a time when Democrats were in control of the Legislature and the governor's office, WEAC spent $2.5 million twisting the arms of lawmakers, more than any other group.

It has reported spending $500,000 in support of Democratic candidates in this summer's recall elections.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9P56LCO0.htmSo now that the unions can't have dues automatically deducted from members paychecks a good chunk of those members are choosing not to pay the union. What a surprise!!!

I think you missed something there:

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

Not that they won't have future layoffs due to the changes in how they get their but these layoffs were not related to the changes made by the bill.

 

[StrikeS2k]

Wisconsin teachers' union announces staff layoffs

By SCOTT BAUER

More from BusinessWeek

MADISON, Wis.

Wisconsin's powerful statewide teachers union said 40 percent of its staff members were laid off Monday as a result of the law pushed by Gov. Scott Walker and passed by the Legislature curbing collective bargaining rights.

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill. Opponents had argued one of the law's goals was weakening the power of unions like WEAC, which is typically one of the biggest spenders in campaigns on behalf of Democrats.

The law takes away the right of teachers and other public workers to collectively bargain over anything except salary increases no greater than the rate of inflation. It also disallows the automatic withdrawal of union dues from workers' pay checks and requires unions to vote annually on staying organized, making it tougher for public sector unions to stay viable.

About two-thirds of the state's 427 school districts reached collective bargaining agreements before the law took effect, leaving about 150 subject to the law, according to estimates by the Wisconsin Association of School Boards.

WEAC has been working to get those teachers to become members, Burkhalter said. He refused to say how many had actually been signed up, saying those were "internal figures."

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

The work to sign up previously covered teachers into the union is ongoing, Burkhalter said, and he expects to see a spike in membership once school resumes in the fall.

"Despite budget cuts and layoffs, our goal remains the same: to be a strong and viable organization that represents the voices of Wisconsin's public school employees," he said in a statement.

Before the law was passed, WEAC had about 98,000 members and was one of the most powerful unions in the state. Lobbying reports released last week showed that in 2009 and 2010, at a time when Democrats were in control of the Legislature and the governor's office, WEAC spent $2.5 million twisting the arms of lawmakers, more than any other group.

It has reported spending $500,000 in support of Democratic candidates in this summer's recall elections.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9P56LCO0.htmSo now that the unions can't have dues automatically deducted from members paychecks a good chunk of those members are choosing not to pay the union. What a surprise!!!

I think you missed something there:

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

Not that they won't have future layoffs due to the changes in how they get their but these layoffs were not related to the changes made by the bill.

I think you missed something there:

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill.

They laid off 40% of their workforce. There's no way that would happen this quickly but for a major change in revenue. The only thing that has really changed is that the school districts can no longer withhold union dues. You're simply buying in to his spin.

 

[snogger]

Wisconsin teachers' union announces staff layoffs

By SCOTT BAUER

More from BusinessWeek

MADISON, Wis.

Wisconsin's powerful statewide teachers union said 40 percent of its staff members were laid off Monday as a result of the law pushed by Gov. Scott Walker and passed by the Legislature curbing collective bargaining rights.

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill. Opponents had argued one of the law's goals was weakening the power of unions like WEAC, which is typically one of the biggest spenders in campaigns on behalf of Democrats.

The law takes away the right of teachers and other public workers to collectively bargain over anything except salary increases no greater than the rate of inflation. It also disallows the automatic withdrawal of union dues from workers' pay checks and requires unions to vote annually on staying organized, making it tougher for public sector unions to stay viable.

About two-thirds of the state's 427 school districts reached collective bargaining agreements before the law took effect, leaving about 150 subject to the law, according to estimates by the Wisconsin Association of School Boards.

WEAC has been working to get those teachers to become members, Burkhalter said. He refused to say how many had actually been signed up, saying those were "internal figures."

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

The work to sign up previously covered teachers into the union is ongoing, Burkhalter said, and he expects to see a spike in membership once school resumes in the fall.

"Despite budget cuts and layoffs, our goal remains the same: to be a strong and viable organization that represents the voices of Wisconsin's public school employees," he said in a statement.

Before the law was passed, WEAC had about 98,000 members and was one of the most powerful unions in the state. Lobbying reports released last week showed that in 2009 and 2010, at a time when Democrats were in control of the Legislature and the governor's office, WEAC spent $2.5 million twisting the arms of lawmakers, more than any other group.

It has reported spending $500,000 in support of Democratic candidates in this summer's recall elections.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9P56LCO0.htmSo now that the unions can't have dues automatically deducted from members paychecks a good chunk of those members are choosing not to pay the union. What a surprise!!!

I think you missed something there:

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

Not that they won't have future layoffs due to the changes in how they get their but these layoffs were not related to the changes made by the bill.

I think you missed something there:

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill.

They laid off 40% of their workforce. There's no way that would happen this quickly but for a major change in revenue. The only thing that has really changed is that the school districts can no longer withhold union dues. You're simply buying in to his spin.

Buying into who's spin Just stating a fact that right now the layoffs are because less revenue..

My answer to the Unions.. to the recession party pal!

The economy SUCKS right now and it is time the Unions started feeling the same pain as middle America( who they claim to be protecting).

One other thing forgotten in all of this..

They had a chance to get past this.. Walker offered 3 year Union renewals( instead of every year), and took the "no automatic withdrawals" off the table but the unions and the Democrats refused to come back and vote so they got "stuck" with the original plan.

 

[Ilov80s]

Wisconsin teachers' union announces staff layoffs

By SCOTT BAUER

More from BusinessWeek

MADISON, Wis.

Wisconsin's powerful statewide teachers union said 40 percent of its staff members were laid off Monday as a result of the law pushed by Gov. Scott Walker and passed by the Legislature curbing collective bargaining rights.

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill. Opponents had argued one of the law's goals was weakening the power of unions like WEAC, which is typically one of the biggest spenders in campaigns on behalf of Democrats.

The law takes away the right of teachers and other public workers to collectively bargain over anything except salary increases no greater than the rate of inflation. It also disallows the automatic withdrawal of union dues from workers' pay checks and requires unions to vote annually on staying organized, making it tougher for public sector unions to stay viable.

About two-thirds of the state's 427 school districts reached collective bargaining agreements before the law took effect, leaving about 150 subject to the law, according to estimates by the Wisconsin Association of School Boards.

WEAC has been working to get those teachers to become members, Burkhalter said. He refused to say how many had actually been signed up, saying those were "internal figures."

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

The work to sign up previously covered teachers into the union is ongoing, Burkhalter said, and he expects to see a spike in membership once school resumes in the fall.

"Despite budget cuts and layoffs, our goal remains the same: to be a strong and viable organization that represents the voices of Wisconsin's public school employees," he said in a statement.

Before the law was passed, WEAC had about 98,000 members and was one of the most powerful unions in the state. Lobbying reports released last week showed that in 2009 and 2010, at a time when Democrats were in control of the Legislature and the governor's office, WEAC spent $2.5 million twisting the arms of lawmakers, more than any other group.

It has reported spending $500,000 in support of Democratic candidates in this summer's recall elections.

http://www.businessw...s/D9P56LCO0.htmSo now that the unions can't have dues automatically deducted from members paychecks a good chunk of those members are choosing not to pay the union. What a surprise!!!

I think you missed something there:

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

Not that they won't have future layoffs due to the changes in how they get their but these layoffs were not related to the changes made by the bill.

I think you missed something there:

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill.

They laid off 40% of their workforce. There's no way that would happen this quickly but for a major change in revenue. The only thing that has really changed is that the school districts can no longer withhold union dues. You're simply buying in to his spin.

Buying into who's spin Just stating a fact that right now the layoffs are because less revenue..

My answer to the Unions.. to the recession party pal!

The economy SUCKS right now and it is time the Unions started feeling the same pain as middle America( who they claim to be protecting).

One other thing forgotten in all of this..

They had a chance to get past this.. Walker offered 3 year Union renewals( instead of every year), and took the "no automatic withdrawals" off the table but the unions and the Democrats refused to come back and vote so they got "stuck" with the original plan.

Once school starts, don't they expect a large % of those 150 districts whom didn't renegotiate in time to vote to keep the union and start paying dues again?

 

[Road Warriors]

Wisconsin teachers' union announces staff layoffs

By SCOTT BAUER

More from BusinessWeek

MADISON, Wis.

Wisconsin's powerful statewide teachers union said 40 percent of its staff members were laid off Monday as a result of the law pushed by Gov. Scott Walker and passed by the Legislature curbing collective bargaining rights.

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill. Opponents had argued one of the law's goals was weakening the power of unions like WEAC, which is typically one of the biggest spenders in campaigns on behalf of Democrats.

The law takes away the right of teachers and other public workers to collectively bargain over anything except salary increases no greater than the rate of inflation. It also disallows the automatic withdrawal of union dues from workers' pay checks and requires unions to vote annually on staying organized, making it tougher for public sector unions to stay viable.

About two-thirds of the state's 427 school districts reached collective bargaining agreements before the law took effect, leaving about 150 subject to the law, according to estimates by the Wisconsin Association of School Boards.

WEAC has been working to get those teachers to become members, Burkhalter said. He refused to say how many had actually been signed up, saying those were "internal figures."

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

The work to sign up previously covered teachers into the union is ongoing, Burkhalter said, and he expects to see a spike in membership once school resumes in the fall.

"Despite budget cuts and layoffs, our goal remains the same: to be a strong and viable organization that represents the voices of Wisconsin's public school employees," he said in a statement.

Before the law was passed, WEAC had about 98,000 members and was one of the most powerful unions in the state. Lobbying reports released last week showed that in 2009 and 2010, at a time when Democrats were in control of the Legislature and the governor's office, WEAC spent $2.5 million twisting the arms of lawmakers, more than any other group.

It has reported spending $500,000 in support of Democratic candidates in this summer's recall elections.

http://www.businessw...s/D9P56LCO0.htmSo now that the unions can't have dues automatically deducted from members paychecks a good chunk of those members are choosing not to pay the union. What a surprise!!!

I think you missed something there:

The cuts announced Monday were necessary due to drops in school district employees caused by lay-offs and retirements, not any projections about where union membership will stand later in the year, Burkhalter said.

Not that they won't have future layoffs due to the changes in how they get their but these layoffs were not related to the changes made by the bill.

I think you missed something there:

Wisconsin Education Association Council executive director Dan Burkhalter said the laying off of 42 workers resulted from what he called Walker's "union-busting" bill.

They laid off 40% of their workforce. There's no way that would happen this quickly but for a major change in revenue. The only thing that has really changed is that the school districts can no longer withhold union dues. You're simply buying in to his spin.

Buying into who's spin Just stating a fact that right now the layoffs are because less revenue..

My answer to the Unions.. to the recession party pal!

The economy SUCKS right now and it is time the Unions started feeling the same pain as middle America( who they claim to be protecting).

One other thing forgotten in all of this..

They had a chance to get past this.. Walker offered 3 year Union renewals( instead of every year), and took the "no automatic withdrawals" off the table but the unions and the Democrats refused to come back and vote so they got "stuck" with the original plan.

Once school starts, don't they expect a large % of those 150 districts whom didn't renegotiate in time to vote to keep the union and start paying dues again?

I don't think so, due to a couple of non-scientific theories.1. If they really expected the 150 districts to re-up with the union and start paying dues, they wouldn't cut such a large portion of their union staff. I don't have exact numbers, but I don't think the teacher layoffs from budget cuts across the school boards was anywhere near 40% of last year's headcount. Such a drastic layoff of union administration would indicate they do not believe they'll be getting anywhere near the same revenue in dues as previously.

2. From the article:

WEAC has been working to get those teachers to become members, Burkhalter said. He refused to say how many had actually been signed up, saying those were "internal figures."

Reading into this a bit, but this sounds like a significant number of teachers are not members, and may not become members now that they're not compelled to contribute. Refusing to say how many is a tactic when you're not getting the numbers you want. If they were pulling in 80-90%, I'd expect he'd be touting that as proof that the teachers want and need the union. If a large % of those districts that didn't renegotiate choose to forego the union, it would be a big blow to the union power, and could become a larger trend when the other 400 + districts come to the next decision point.

 

[Statorama]

Wow, guess that $30M the unions spent on the recall elections might have gone to something more worthwhile than what they actually ended up accomplishing.

 

[cr8f]

Figured I'd put this here. Ron Johnson Teaparty senator who beat Feingold when he got $3.5 million in Pac money said Wisconsin encourages people not to work. He also claimed working people get $40,000 in entitlements but didn't explain.

Does this guy consider roads entitlements?Police, fire? $40,000 on top of $22,000 people earn?

His company has 5 people on state healthcare so I assume he knows how to game the system, but I don't know anyone getting $40 grand.

 

[sho nuff]

Figured I'd put this here.

Next time you figure you will put something on this board.DON"T.

 

[Teumessian Fox]

Figured I'd put this here. Ron Johnson Teaparty senator who beat Feingold when he got $3.5 million in Pac money said Wisconsin encourages people not to work. He also claimed working people get $40,000 in entitlements but didn't explain.

Does this guy consider roads entitlements?Police, fire? $40,000 on top of $22,000 people earn?

His company has 5 people on state healthcare so I assume he knows how to game the system, but I don't know anyone getting $40 grand.

No idea what Johnson is referring to but I know people that get half that amount in child care subsidies alone. Throw in food share and things like rent/heat assistance and it's not too big a leap to get to his figure. Probably not typical but not unheard of either.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Figured I'd put this here. Ron Johnson Teaparty senator who beat Feingold when he got $3.5 million in Pac money said Wisconsin encourages people not to work. He also claimed working people get $40,000 in entitlements but didn't explain.

Does this guy consider roads entitlements?Police, fire? $40,000 on top of $22,000 people earn?

His company has 5 people on state healthcare so I assume he knows how to game the system, but I don't know anyone getting $40 grand.

I see nothing wrong with what he said. Or have your liberal masters just drummed up the daily outrage for you to focus on today?

 

[The Kerminator]

Remember the secret probe investigation of Walker's administration that cr8f referred to much earlier in this thread? The Milwaukee County DA issued charges today as a result of it.

Three Charged in John Doe Investigation of Walker Aides

Three individuals - including a former top aide to Gov. Scott Walker - were charged Thursday with felonies as part of the ongoing John Doe investigation into Walker staffers.

Tim Russell, a longtime Walker campaign and county staffer, was charged with two felonies and one misdemeanor count of embezzlement. Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm said the charges are tied to Operation Freedom, an annual military appreciation day held at the Milwaukee County Zoo.

The complaint says that Russell diverted to his personal bank account more than $21,000 intended for Operation Freedom, using some of those dollars to go on Hawaiian and Caribbean vacations with his domestic partner.

Other funds were used, the complaint says, for Russell to attend a weekend political strategy session in December 2010 with Herman Cain and his chief of staff, Mark Block, to discuss Cain's now-defunct presidential campaign.

Chisholm said some of the stolen money was intended for the families of Wisconsin soldiers who were killed in action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Funds also were used for wounded veterans of the war in Iraq. In 2010, Walker's county administration had asked prosecutors to investigate what had happened to $11,000 raised in 2007 for the event.

Chisholm said at a press conference that he could not take questions because of the ongoing investigation. He noted that Walker's administration had asked for the investigation and said his office was following the evidence without regard to politics.

"We go where the evidence leads and partisan politics plays no role in any decision by this office," Chisholm said.

Russell's attorney, Michael Maistelman, had no comment.

In a terse eight-minute conference call Thursday with reporters, Walker took four questions after making a statement that it was his office that had been responsible for bringing the theft to light and appreciated the efforts of Chisholm's office. He said he was "very disappointed" about the alleged theft but said he didn't believe the charges would affect an ongoing attempt to gather 540,000 signatures to force a recall election against him.

"In terms of the recall, obviously anyone can try and twist things but I in the end think people will realize it was my office at the time that brought this to the attention of the district attorney's office," Walker said.

Also charged Thursday was Brian Pierick, Russell's longtime partner and a staffer at the state Department of Public Instruction, and Kevin Kavanaugh, Walker's appointee to the Milwaukee County Veteran Service Commission.

Kavanaugh, 61, of Cudahy, is charged with five felonies for theft and fraudulent writings by a corporate officer. He was the treasurer of the Milwaukee Purple Heart chapter at the time of the dispute over the $11,000 for Operation Freedom.

Prosecutors say he stole more than $42,000 in donations intended to families of U.S. service members killed or wounded in Iraq.

Russell appeared in court Thursday afternoon, wearing handcuffs and dressed in a t-shirt and jeans. He was released on a $20,000 signature bond. Russell pleaded not guilty to a single misdemeanor embezzlement count, for taking $550 from the campaign fund of a County Board candidate, Larry Spicer.

A preliminary hearing on Russell's two felony embezzlement charges was set for Jan. 23.

Kavanaugh was also released on a $20,000 signature bond on his five felony counts related to plundering the Purple Heart funds.

Kavanaugh embezzled money given to the Military Order of the Purple Heart , according to the complaint. Kavanaugh was finance officer for the organization's Milwaukee-area chapter, named for the late war veteran Michelle Witmer.

The bulk of the Purple Heart money Kavanaugh took came from money raised for "Operation Freedom," an annual event for veterans sponsored by Walker during his stint as county executive and held at the Milwaukee County Zoo, according to a criminal complaint.

The donations for the event were obtained by Russell on behalf of Walker from local businesses.

He also siphoned Purple Heart money that came from three different sources: former state Rep. Mark Gundrum (R-New Berlin), a grant from the Rolfs Family Foundation and the Purple Heart's own foundation. Gundrum, now a state appeals court justice, donated more than $28,000 of his legislative salary to the Purple Heart while he was on active duty in Iraq in 2008; Kavanaugh peeled off $4,800 of that amount.

That year, Gundrum's wife nine wrote checks to the Military Order of the Purple Heart Relief Fund. While transferring those funds to the Purple Heart general fund, Kavanaugh got $300 to $800 cash back each time, according to the complaint.

"My wife and I are just saddened that at least a portion of the money we donated to aid veterans wounded in war appears as if it may never have been used for that purpose," said Gundrum. In a 2010 interview with the Journal Sentinel, Kavanaugh said he was unaware that there was any concern by prosecutors over some $11,000 in Operation Freedom believed missing at the time.

He attributed bookkeeping problems to a shortage of help at the local Purple Heart chapter.

"I don't really know what they are talking about," he said, when asked about the concern over missing money.

In a brief interview, Bob Bruhns said he was the organizer of a new local chapter of the Military Order of the Purple Heart. But he cut short the interview without commenting on Kavanaugh, saying he and all the other leaders of the organization were under orders from the court and the district attorney not to speak of the matter.

"I have a gag order," Bruhns said.

A December 2010 story in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel detailed Kavanaugh's tradition of placing wreaths on the graves of soldiers who died serving in Iraq. That story said that Kavanaugh earned a Purple Heart when he was hit by shrapnel from a booby trap in November 1970 while serving in the Army west of Chu Lai, Vietnam.

In the complaints, the Alonzo Cudworth American Legion Post 23 was listed as handling the veterans funds correctly before the responsibility was handed over to Russell and the Heritage Guard Preservation Society in October 2009 - a decision personally signed off on by Walker as county executive. Mike Herkowski, adjutant for the post, said that his group did bookkeeping and disbursing of the money but not fundraising.

He said he was in "total shock" over the allegations of theft from needy veterans and their families.

"Anybody that would stoop that low to do something like that, I'm totally amazed," Herkowski said.

Herkowski said that he was surprised when he was informed by Milwaukee County officials that his group would no longer be handling the money and it would be handed over to Heritage Guard. He said he had turned over all his information on the matter to investigators and answered questions from them.

He said that he was told by Milwaukee County officials that the responsibility for the money was being taken away from the American Legion because it has an unusual non-profit status that was difficult to explain to corporate donors. Milwaukee County wanted a more typical 501©3 type non-profit to make it easy to understand the donations were tax-exempt so fundraising would be easier, Herkowski said he was told.

"They said it would be easier to get the money," he said.

Ironically, Herkowski pointed out, the criminal complaint alleges that the Heritage Guard group may not have had a valid 501©3 status.

"Somebody just pulled the wool over somebody's eyes, Herkowski said.

Walker said Thursday that the decision to transfer the funds from the American Legion to Russell's group had been made to safeguard the money.

"The focus was instead of moving around from one group to another it's probably best to have one group that just did this so the funds couldn't be comingled with anything else," Walker said.

Pierick, 48, was charged with two felony counts for child enticement. He is an office operations assistant for education for homeless youth at DPI dealing with education for homeless children and youth, according to the agency's website.

Patrick Gasper, a spokesman for the Department of Public Instruction, said Pierick was being let go from his job Thursday at the decision of agency human resources and state schools superintendent Tony Evers.

Pierick was essentially a secretary and made $13.96 an hour, which would work out to about $29,000 a year. He started in October 2011 at the civil service job and was still in his six-month probationary period and so could be fired for any reason, Gasper said.

"We're drafting the letter right now," Gasper said.

Gasper said Pierick had no contact with children as part of his office job and underwent and passed a background check at the time of the hire. He said to his knowledge Walker's office played no role in getting Pierick the job, which was not a political appointment.

Walker spokesman Chris Schrimpf also said the job was not an appointment. Schrimpf had no immediate comment on the news of the arrests but said the office would provide one later in the day.

"We're still looking at it," he said.

Russell, who was housing director for Walker at the county, is facing Class G and Class I felonies. A Class G felony carries a fine of up to $25,000 and up to 10 years in prison or both. A Class I felony carries a fine of up to $10,000 and up to three and a half years in prison or both.

In August 2010, authorities seized Russell's county computer just weeks before the gubernatorial primary.

A longtime political hand, Russell, 48, used to run former Gov. Tommy Thompson's Milwaukee office and had been with Walker since he ran for county executive in 2002. Russell did not get a job in the Walker administration in Madison.

Last year, Russell and Pierick had their Milwaukee residence foreclosed on, and the pair moved to the Madison suburb of Sun Prairie.

Chisholm's office has been overseeing the investigation for more than 1 1/2 years.

Walker set up the annual Operation Freedom as a military appreciation day at the zoo for veterans, who got free admission and food. It was run through the county executive's office.

Russell was the coordinator of the event and worked on it with Darlene Wink, another former Walker aide at the county who has been under investigation in the John Doe probe.

The Journal Sentinel reported in June 2010 that the district attorney's office was investigating the finances of Operation Freedom after Walker's office alleged an $11,000 shortfall in a dispute with the local chapter of the Military Order of the Purple Heart. The Purple Heart had acted as fiscal agent for the program in 2006, '07 and '08.

Later, in 2010, the financial end of the event was transferred to an entity known as the Heritage Guard Preservation Society, Russell told the newspaper in 2010. In 2009, an American Legion Post handled those duties.

The Heritage Guard Preservation Society was incorporated for a different purpose as a nonprofit in 2004. But Russell said in 2010 that the dormant firm was shifted to Operation Freedom.

The financing setup for the event drew ethics scrutiny in 2006, when two county Ethics Board members questioned the practice of county officials asking private companies for money for public programs, saying it raised conflict-of-interest questions. Walker said then that he was trying to save taxpayer dollars and that he'd resolve ethics concerns by asking a veterans organization to solicit funds for the event.

Walker got legal advice that the fundraising should be handled by a separate charitable entity.

In 2010, an official with the Milwaukee Purple Heart chapter said he thought the dispute over the $11,000 was resolved when the chapter paid $10,000 to the zoo for 2007. Russell said even with the zoo payment, there was still an $11,000 shortfall from 2007 receipts.

"Nobody's making accusations about anything here," Russell said then. Bookkeeping errors could ultimately explain the shortfall, he said.

Wink quit her job as Walker's constituent relations director in 2010 after she acknowledged posting political comments on the Journal Sentinel website while at work. She monitored the finances for the program in 2007, but did not collect checks or pay the bills, Russell said. That was Purple Heart's job.

In a May 26, 2010 posting on his county website, Walker said Operation Freedom was a way to thank military personnel and families.

"The picnic, patriotic program and Supermarket of Veterans Benefits are a small way for us to show our appreciation and give back for all our military has done for us," Walker wrote.

Operation Freedom includes free admission to the zoo, as well as free food and entertainment. Veterans' organizations also are on hand. This year's program will include a military honor guard and Air Force flyover.

Probably not the result the recall-Walker folks and cr8f were hoping for. Many were convinced that this was a result of Walker's corruptness.Even more interesting is that Walker's office as Milwaukee County Exec. initiated the investigation when it discovered the money missing.

 

[jon_mx]

So Walker helped rid the government of a corrupt person and that was suppose to be bad thing for Walker.

 

[MaxThreshold]

So Walker helped rid the government of a corrupt person and that was suppose to be bad thing for Walker.

Poor cr8f. He was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO sure this was going to be the smoking gun on Walker that they were hoping for. Now all we hear are :crickets:

 

[Topes]

Judge strikes down Wisconsin law restricting union rights