Mr.Pack
Footballguy
Actually he never said anything of the sort.Keep the lies coming though.
And good for Walker, no compromise!
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Scott Walker WI governor vs the Packers & teachers (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter cr8f
- Start date
And good for Walker, no compromise!
jamny
Footballguy
Good luck to you all.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
I do. There are probably hundreds, maybe even thousands, of private sector unions.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
Of course he should. That's how things get done. That's why we have two parties (should be more), checks and balances, House and Senate, etc...Walker's platform that he ran on was getting back to Fiscal Conservatism and job creation. Everything he did as Milwaukee County Executive was what people should have expected when he ran.
None of this should be a surprise to anyone in WI, and no way should he compromise.
jamny
Footballguy
Right. C'mon in and vote!
Mr.Pack
Footballguy
That's why we have elections.One thing sweeney is right about, is that their should be more parties.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
Elected officials aren't elected for legitimate no compromise platforms. Partisans may wish it to be so, but it doesn't work that way. Otherwise what's with the opposition to Obama's policies?
Last edited by a moderator:
seahawk 17
Footballguy
Teachers should not be making a total of $100,000 in compensation...and I come from a family of educators.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Why? Many private workers with masters degrees and many years of experience make 100,000. I don;t know any figures in Wisconsin, but in Michigan (which is one the best paying states for teachers) private sector pay and benefits are still higher for private workers than public employees when education is factored in.
Mr.Pack
Footballguy
I don't agree with this. If you're good at what you do, like in the private sector, you should make better wages.
jamny
Footballguy
Right. Great teachers should be making $100,000
Mr.Pack
Footballguy
Does anyone seriously think that worker oppression is really going to happen if we don't have a union?
This isn't the 50's or 60's.
Walker isn't trying to bust the Union anyway, but I don't get why people feel the need for them unless you're a bad worker.
I've been in unions before and 2 of them took the companies down.
This isn't the 50's or 60's.
Walker isn't trying to bust the Union anyway, but I don't get why people feel the need for them unless you're a bad worker.
I've been in unions before and 2 of them took the companies down.
Jewell
Footballguy
Smart employers don't pay based on an employee's education and experience. They pay based on the employee's productivity and the ease to replace that employee. If the employee produces positive results and he's difficult to replace he'll demand a high salary. If the employee doesn't produce then his education and experience are for naught.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
Absolutely. Look at Wal Mart. There's a serious need for them, but like anyone anywhere with power, they can overstep their bounds. But if you really think that management is not going to nickel and dime and cheat and screw employees out of everything they can to increase their profit margin if they can't band together for protection then you are seriously out of touch.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
The point is that when you compare overall numbers, public employees make more in money and benefits. However, the public sector tends have have a significantly higher % of college graduates than the private sector. In addition, there are very few part time public positions. Total wages comparison doesn't make sense. Sure education is not the only factor in how much someone gets paid, but in public and private, it weighs heavily.
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
Taking away most of the collective bargaining rights, and stipulating yearly certification is essentially union-busting. Even the collective bargaining component that was left in tact is fairly meaningless, because when 2/3rd of the compensation components are going to be dictated by the State legislature the remaining portion is next to meaningless. For the record, I tend to agree that unions are largely unneeded today. Ironically, because most of the important areas they helped safeguard are now monitored and/or regulated by Federal and State governments. On the other hand, when the government acts more like a tool of industry - like the handling of the meat-processing facilities and workers in this country - there can still be a need.
Teachers...I'm not convinced.
PIK95
Footballguy
Mr.Pack
Footballguy
For crying out loud, I'm not talking Wal-Mart, I'm talking in the Teaching profession.
BoneYardDog
Footballguy
Are you not one of the ones that lied about Walker causing this budget crisis???Why do you continue to pile lie, upon lie, upon lie...If you cannot make your point with facts then you don't have a point to make...
:teachers:
mad sweeney
Footballguy
The discussion has been ranging quite a bit about unions in general (including in the very same post) so it's a little hard to tell that you're only talking about the teacher's union when you make a statement like that, especially when you use the word "worker" instead of "teacher". Try to be a little bit clearer for crying out loud.Even so, yes there's a need for a TEACHER'S union otherwise they will get trampled down just like any worker in any profession most likely would.
BTW, I am not arguing that the teacher's shouldn't have to deal with changes in their current compensation, though I think they're horribly underappreciated (as necessary as fire/police IMO), but in his insistence at removing their collective bargaining power. That goes beyond anything that needs to get done and for those of you trying to say otherwise, it's exactly what you do to bust a union. So yes, he is trying to bust the union.
And they don't... I don't know of any districts in WI where teachers on average make anything close to 100,000...
The Kerminator
Footballguy
MPS TeacherCompensation tops $100K/year
[Milwaukee, Wisconsin] MacIver News Service – For the first time in history, the average annual compensation for a teacher in the Milwaukee Public School system will exceed $100,000.
That staggering figure was revealed last night at a meeting of the MPS School Board.
The average salary for an MPS teacher is $56,500. When fringe benefits are factored in, the annual compensation will be $100,005 in 2011.
Edit to add: The graduation rate in Milwaukee public schools is 46 percent. The graduation rate for African-Americans in Milwaukee public schools is 34 percent. Shouldn’t we be protesting that?
Last edited by a moderator:
Sarnoff
Footballguy
It's not just crazy in Milwaukee, the average teacher across the whole state earns 50K, more than twice the average per capita income in WI. More than the average household earns in WI.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow... I had no clue pension plans and health insurance plans cost that much per teacher... But if you want to debate the failures of the MPS system you'll need a whole new thread for that.
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
And that's part of the problem -- the relative levels/expectations of accountability are completely different in the private sector compared to the public sector.
timschochet
Footballguy
Well, IMO that's going too far. I don't think they should be recalled or removed or put in jail. It's not at that level, IMO. But they really have a duty to return.
Johnnymac
Footballguy
Really? How so?
snogger
Footballguy
The main thing to point out there is Good at what you doThe "well you've been a teacher for 5 years so you must be good" mentality needs to go.
Like the rest of us, PROVE you are good and the rewards will come.. Otherwise
snogger
Footballguy
and they took major heat for it
including congressional investigations and have changed. That is how America works now, there is no way getting rid of the unions(which btw has nothing to do with what Walker is purposing) is going to return us back to the non-union days.Too much has changed since then.
snogger
Footballguy
snogger
Footballguy
Why not?? They were "hired" to do a job. They are not doing that job. Removing them from office is probably a little steep since we need representation.
But there needs to be consequences for their actions. How about, if you are a no show for more than 5 days then you forfeit your ability for re-election?
If myself and a few co-workers didn't like the way things were happening at work ( which is about every week) and decided to just disappear so we didn't have to deal with it I guarantee you there wouldn't be a job for us to return to.
snogger
Footballguy
I have an idea for a compromise.
*Foot note.. I'm just pulling this out of my
as I know very little about Collective Bargaining and the normal way it works.
Put Collective Bargaining agreements back in with a caveat.
Leave Collective bargaining in as is, if they agree to the other terms(Increase in what they pay for benefits, pension, etc.) for two years.
In two years we will then, through collective bargaining, look at the state of the economy and update the agreement accordingly.
Under this agreement, every Union member will get a "re-vote" over the next 6 months on whether they want to still be unionized or not and that agreement will stay in place for two years, until another vote will be needed.
I'll even throw in removing the voluntary union dues from the bill.
*Foot note.. I'm just pulling this out of my
as I know very little about Collective Bargaining and the normal way it works.Put Collective Bargaining agreements back in with a caveat.
Leave Collective bargaining in as is, if they agree to the other terms(Increase in what they pay for benefits, pension, etc.) for two years.
In two years we will then, through collective bargaining, look at the state of the economy and update the agreement accordingly.
Under this agreement, every Union member will get a "re-vote" over the next 6 months on whether they want to still be unionized or not and that agreement will stay in place for two years, until another vote will be needed.
I'll even throw in removing the voluntary union dues from the bill.
Last edited by a moderator:
squidrope
Footballguy
Oh Please Pleeeease...1. Please lower the tone. We're trying to have a civil debate here. If it's going to devolve into a yelling match or insults, I'm out.2. In the press conference, Walker did not acknowledge that the unions were willing to compromise by accepting his requested budget cuts. He claimed he couldn't compromise himself because he couldn't afford it, which by implication means that the unions were trying to negotiate over monies- this is dishonest. He then went on to argue that collective bargaining needed to be taken away in order for local governments to avoid massive layoffs in the future when cuts were made. He was vague about what layoffs he was talking about here, and anyhow it's a nonsensical argument, because if the unions are willing to renegotiate their contracts with the governor, then they will be just as willing to renegotiate with local governments- as if the unions would hold to their position and invite layoffs! Sorry, but that's ridiculous logic.Answer the damn question! You say he wants to crush the unions! Which unions is he including in this bill? How many unions? Since you seem to act like you know so tell us. Also, if you just watched his press conference he stated why layoffs will happen if it doesn't pass.
It's clear you don't have any idea on this since you didn't even know some kids were dependent on schools for hot lunches.
3. I believe the reason that the police and firemen unions were excluded was because they are mostly Republican and those unions supported the governor. This was an assumption on my part, and Mr. Pack told me that the facts contradicted this. But he hasn't explained what those facts are.
4. I did know that there are kids dependant on hot lunches. What I did not know, and still do not know, is whether or not the teachers calling in sick the last few days actually prevented those students from getting those lunches. That's what Stat claimed, but I can't find any evidence of this, and I seriously doubt it happened.
No? What should the state do? Just ask them to come back, pretty please?
Sabertooth
Footballguy
We all know many many unqualified people who make great coin because of personal relationships and nepotism. Don't act like you move up in the world only because you are good at what you do.
Last edited by a moderator:
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
Correct. People always fail to look at the hours actually worked when you look at a teacher's salary. It is a part time job. Most people with paper routes put in about the same amount of hours over the course of an entire year and they have to work when it snows. Also, let's not act like a Masters in Elementary Education is like a year of medical school, law school, or even a decent MBA program.
That's what I think is going to be difficult. Determining and comparing teachers to decide who is better. What do you use as the benchmarks to prove teacher performance? Is it strictly looking at student test scores? If so... good luck with recruitment of top teachers to struggling inner city schools...
The "well you've been a teacher for 5 years so you must be good" mentality needs to go.
Like the rest of us, PROVE you are good and the rewards will come.. Otherwise
Walker told journal sentinel he would not consider this. He feels that collective bargaining cripples local governments from balancing their budgets...I have an idea for a compromise.
*Foot note.. I'm just pulling this out of my
Put Collective Bargaining agreements back in with a caveat.
Leave Collective bargaining in as is, if they agree to the other terms(Increase in what they pay for benefits, pension, etc.) for two years.
In two years we will then, through collective bargaining, look at the state of the economy and update the agreement accordingly.
Under this agreement, every Union member will get a "re-vote" over the next 6 months on whether they want to still be unionized or not and that agreement will stay in place for two years, until another vote will be needed.
I'll even throw in removing the voluntary union dues from the bill.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
It seems to me you Dropped the last of your Knowledge a while back.
Statorama
Footballguy
Liberals, this is what your side does and one of the reasons we dislike you so much.Preach tolerance and civility, but promote something else altogether when things don't go your way.
snogger
Footballguy
From listening to him yesterday, it mainly sounded like he wanted to insure that next year the unions aren't back at the table bargaining for more money, etc. By putting a two year "lock", IMO, would avoid this.Again, what the hell do I know, just throwing things out there.Walker told journal sentinel he would not consider this. He feels that collective bargaining cripples local governments from balancing their budgets...I have an idea for a compromise.
*Foot note.. I'm just pulling this out of myas I know very little about Collective Bargaining and the normal way it works.
Put Collective Bargaining agreements back in with a caveat.
Leave Collective bargaining in as is, if they agree to the other terms(Increase in what they pay for benefits, pension, etc.) for two years.
In two years we will then, through collective bargaining, look at the state of the economy and update the agreement accordingly.
Under this agreement, every Union member will get a "re-vote" over the next 6 months on whether they want to still be unionized or not and that agreement will stay in place for two years, until another vote will be needed.
I'll even throw in removing the voluntary union dues from the bill.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
The average worker in Wisconsin does not have a bachelor's degree and is far less likely to have a master's degree when compared to a teacher. In fact, the average Wisconsin worker is likely working a job that requires little skills or training.
The already took down private sector unions, it is about time they came after the public sector unions. Labor is dead, and has been for quite some time if you look at the marketplace for wages.And of course it reminiscent of 1932, most conservatives would have no problem rolling back the progress of the last 80 years on a variety of fronts. Some around here would go back even further.
Last edited by a moderator:
mad sweeney
Footballguy
First of all, understand that I think you have a good point here. However, if doing something other than the way you say you're going to (or being hypocritical for short) is you criteria for not liking a political group, it would follow that you'd dislike conservatives just as much. It's certainly not an activity only practiced by the left. And that's why guys like jon and other hardcore righties are so disliked. They act as if their own side weren't just as guilty as the other side in everything they rail on them about. Sorry to add another label to you jon, but if the shoe fits you must wear it.
Eric Stratton
Footballguy
pantagrapher
Footballguy
I remember when right-wingers were outraged at the idea that individuals who made $250K in income per year were wealthy. Now $50K in income plus benefits is outrageously high.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/s/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}