What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

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

I haven't made up my mind on this issue yet. I can see both sides, based on the arguments being made.

However, is there ANY justification for what the Democrat officials are doing? It seems absolutely shameful to me. Their job is to vote for or against this proposal, and if they lose they need to go to the voters and argue their case for the next election. Refusing to vote, an attempt to derail the process, is an attack on our political system. Or am I wrong about this?

 
How about this on a state and national level

1. All benefits are taxed as ordinary income.

2. No defined benefits for retirement from a company or govt., contributions go to your own IRA or 401k.

3. 70 to get full social security.

4. No bank can have more than 1% of the total deposits of the nation. They can fail and who care.

5. You want FDIC on your deposits, go buy it like any other insurance.

6. The average wage for a govt employee can not be greater than the private sector.

7. # of Govt employees return to 1963 levels. If it was good enough for JFK...

8. Forget points 1 and 2 and abolish the IRS and go with a consumption tax.

9. Next time we send troops over there, Congress actually has to declare war. Then fight like it is a war.

enough for now, thanks for letting me vent. Sorry if a highjack.

 
timschochet said:
I haven't made up my mind on this issue yet. I can see both sides, based on the arguments being made. However, is there ANY justification for what the Democrat officials are doing? It seems absolutely shameful to me. Their job is to vote for or against this proposal, and if they lose they need to go to the voters and argue their case for the next election. Refusing to vote, an attempt to derail the process, is an attack on our political system. Or am I wrong about this?
Click to expand...
It's called taking your ball and going home.....It's Obama and the Democrat's policies that got the Republicans elected, and the people protesting this are the very same people that put those democrats in office. Kinda funny. :fishing:
 
thatguythere said:
timschochet said:
I haven't made up my mind on this issue yet. I can see both sides, based on the arguments being made. However, is there ANY justification for what the Democrat officials are doing? It seems absolutely shameful to me. Their job is to vote for or against this proposal, and if they lose they need to go to the voters and argue their case for the next election. Refusing to vote, an attempt to derail the process, is an attack on our political system. Or am I wrong about this?
Click to expand...
It's called taking your ball and going home.....It's Obama and the Democrat's policies that got the Republicans elected, and the people protesting this are the very same people that put those democrats in office. Kinda funny. :fishing:
Click to expand...
I don't believe this to be the case. The public employee pensions have been an issue that has been simmering for quite some time.
 
BigSteelThrill said:
Mr.Pack said:
mr. furley said:
i think people should stop thinking of themselves as individuals and just let the state dictate to us how to run our lives.
Click to expand...
Except the state isn't doing that, the unions are.
Click to expand...
Again... Shouldn't the EMPLOYERS be better at bargaining?

this is the Employer (state) agreeing upon the terms with the Employees.
Click to expand...
No it is not really the state agreeing to terms with the employees, it is a politician looking to be elected and promising anything to get elected. Corrupt politicians in with corrupt union leaders. Win win for them both, I get elected now and make promises to you in 20 years when I am gone.So you really don't see a problem with this kind of deal? If the state (governor) does not fix this now them what do you think it will look like in 15 years?

This is going to happen in states all over the country, how long before each state blows up. Heck even Jerry Brown and Cuomo in NY know their states are in big big trouble and they are Democrats. I don't think the Federal Government can or should bail out states for their mistakes.

If you cannot see a problem here or in any state facing a huge debt in future years then you are only out for yourself and really don't care about the future of whatever state you live in and I don't understand that kind of thinking.

Seems like what you are willing to do is burden your children and grand children so you can live high on the hog yourself.

 
Mr Two Cents said:
I don't think the Federal Government can or should bail out states for their mistakes.
Click to expand...
Hopefully Governor Moonbeam and our legislature in Sacramento will figure out a way to solve this. But if we do default, you're going to have to bail us out. Otherwise, your economy goes to crap along with us. That's just the facts. Just like the bank bailouts, you won't be able to stand on principle.
 
Mr Two Cents said:
Corrupt politicians in with corrupt union leaders. Win win for them both, I get elected now and make promises to you in 20 years when I am gone.
Click to expand...
That doesn't make the union guy corrupt, that's exactly how politics is designed in America. Lobbyist buying influence. He is representing the Employees as best he can. It certainly does make the politician corrupt -- but operating within the system.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr Two Cents said:
BigSteelThrill said:
Mr.Pack said:
mr. furley said:
i think people should stop thinking of themselves as individuals and just let the state dictate to us how to run our lives.
Click to expand...
Except the state isn't doing that, the unions are.
Click to expand...
Again... Shouldn't the EMPLOYERS be better at bargaining?

this is the Employer (state) agreeing upon the terms with the Employees.
Click to expand...
No it is not really the state agreeing to terms with the employees, it is a politician looking to be elected and promising anything to get elected. Corrupt politicians in with corrupt union leaders. Win win for them both, I get elected now and make promises to you in 20 years when I am gone.So you really don't see a problem with this kind of deal? If the state (governor) does not fix this now them what do you think it will look like in 15 years?

This is going to happen in states all over the country, how long before each state blows up. Heck even Jerry Brown and Cuomo in NY know their states are in big big trouble and they are Democrats. I don't think the Federal Government can or should bail out states for their mistakes.

If you cannot see a problem here or in any state facing a huge debt in future years then you are only out for yourself and really don't care about the future of whatever state you live in and I don't understand that kind of thinking.

Seems like what you are willing to do is burden your children and grand children so you can live high on the hog yourself.
Click to expand...
Who really isn't out for themselves though? Me...I worry about my children now, when they are three and one....not when they might be having children of their own.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BoneYardDog said:
Layoff the 6000 workers and blame the democrats and teachers union...

Teachers should be ashamed of themselves, democrats that ran should be targeted in the next election...

They pay nothing, all they care about is themselves and screw everyone else, especially the kids they say they care about...
Click to expand...
This sentence succinctly sums up the Republican platform.
 
timschochet said:
I haven't made up my mind on this issue yet. I can see both sides, based on the arguments being made. However, is there ANY justification for what the Democrat officials are doing? It seems absolutely shameful to me. Their job is to vote for or against this proposal, and if they lose they need to go to the voters and argue their case for the next election. Refusing to vote, an attempt to derail the process, is an attack on our political system. Or am I wrong about this?
Click to expand...
:thumbup: No, you are 100% correct.
 
timschochet said:
Mr Two Cents said:
I don't think the Federal Government can or should bail out states for their mistakes.
Click to expand...
Hopefully Governor Moonbeam and our legislature in Sacramento will figure out a way to solve this. But if we do default, you're going to have to bail us out. Otherwise, your economy goes to crap along with us. That's just the facts. Just like the bank bailouts, you won't be able to stand on principle.
Click to expand...
If there is a bailout for Cali, which I still don't think will happen with the mood of the country, there will be huge strings attached and an effort will have to be made to show that the state is ready to face its own problems first with major belt tightening.
 
I'm watching MSNBC, and that obnoxious fool Ed Schultz is in Madison. But behind him somebody is holding up a big yellow sign which reads, "I BLAME FAVRE".

 
BigSteelThrill said:
Mr Two Cents said:
Corrupt politicians in with corrupt union leaders. Win win for them both, I get elected now and make promises to you in 20 years when I am gone.
Click to expand...
That doesn't make the union guy corrupt, that's exactly how politics is designed in America. Lobbyist buying influence. He is representing the Employees as best he can. It certainly does make the politician corrupt -- but operating within the system.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with you here. But the time for the gravy train is over, in my work there was either going to be pay cuts or layoffs, we accepted pay cuts and a 2 year freeze. Would it not be in the best interest of the union members to do the same, seems like they would rather see people out of a job than make any sacrifice themselves.
 
Thunderlips said:
Mr Two Cents said:
BigSteelThrill said:
Mr.Pack said:
mr. furley said:
i think people should stop thinking of themselves as individuals and just let the state dictate to us how to run our lives.
Click to expand...
Except the state isn't doing that, the unions are.
Click to expand...
Again... Shouldn't the EMPLOYERS be better at bargaining?

this is the Employer (state) agreeing upon the terms with the Employees.
Click to expand...
No it is not really the state agreeing to terms with the employees, it is a politician looking to be elected and promising anything to get elected. Corrupt politicians in with corrupt union leaders. Win win for them both, I get elected now and make promises to you in 20 years when I am gone.So you really don't see a problem with this kind of deal? If the state (governor) does not fix this now them what do you think it will look like in 15 years?

This is going to happen in states all over the country, how long before each state blows up. Heck even Jerry Brown and Cuomo in NY know their states are in big big trouble and they are Democrats. I don't think the Federal Government can or should bail out states for their mistakes.

If you cannot see a problem here or in any state facing a huge debt in future years then you are only out for yourself and really don't care about the future of whatever state you live in and I don't understand that kind of thinking.

Seems like what you are willing to do is burden your children and grand children so you can live high on the hog yourself.
Click to expand...
Who really isn't out for themselves though? Me...I worry about my children now, when they are three and one....not when they might be having children of their own.
Click to expand...
Then it seems like you are ensuring that they will struggle in adulthood and will not be able to sustain the kind of life you have now. Maybe not in your specific case but in general for certain. It is just not sustainable for future generations. Had our founding fathers only thought about the present, we would not have the country we have now.

I would expect better from any parent, seems like you are willing to doom future generations to get yours now.

 
BigSteelThrill said:
BoneYardDog said:
BigSteelThrill said:
BoneYardDog said:
No the point of employee unions is to bankrupt companies
Click to expand...
No, that's the EMPLOYEES doing that. They are the union. Of course most employees typically want as much as they can get, just as most companies do also. This isn't anything new for either side of the bargaining table. Major companies often are world leaders in sales and income and then start outsourcing despite massive profits. Shouldn't the EMPLOYERS be better at bargaining?
Click to expand...
They are not employers they are elected officials who the unions had in their back pockets, they didn't care it got them elected, let the next guys worry about it...Come on you know better than this... Screw the people, just get me elected, it will be someone elses problem...
Click to expand...
You just admitted that the problem isn't the Union. You are placing the blame squarely on the politician(s) and the people who elected him.

So if you want to have a proper fix, you need to fix... as I stated in the US budget thread...

BigSteelThrill said:
You aren't ever going to fix a ### #### thing in Washington... until you remove the lobbyist and money that buys the politicians.

And they are bought just as much on both sides, because its the system we allow and its how it all works.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Well?

 
Mr.Pack said:
Thunderlips said:
Mr.Pack said:
pantagrapher said:
CrossEyed said:
Everyone wants the problems fixed but nobody is willing to make any sacrifices to make it happen.
Click to expand...
Which is why we keep lowering taxes on the rich?
Click to expand...
Right out of the liberal playbook. Nicely done.Because the rich should rake care of this problem right?

:goodposting:
Click to expand...
They have as much interest as anyone else what with the nature in which our political system works.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%, but the Left thinks they alone should be paying the bill.
Click to expand...
I think taxes should be higher on everyone. Taxes haven't been this low in 60 years. Why do the people complaining about the budget deficit keep inflating it with tax cuts?
 
Exactly how much tax is too much:

Federal Income Tax

State Income Tax

School Tax

Property Tax

Sales Taxes

Gasoline Tax

Social Security Tax

Capital Gains Tax

Federal Unemployment Tax

Local Income Tax

State Unemployment Tax

Telephone Federal Excise Tax

Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes

Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax

Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax

Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax

Telephone State and Local Tax

Telephone Usage Charge Tax

Workers’ Compensation Tax

Vehicle License Registration Tax

Vehicle Sales Tax

Medicare Tax

Cigarette Tax

Corporate Income Tax

Dog License Tax

Fishing License Tax

Hunting License Tax

Inheritance Tax

Luxury Taxes

Marriage License Tax

Hotel Tax

Plus anything that is called a Fee is really a Tax, by another name.

 
Check the facts folks. There was no budget deficit when Walker took office. He's been dishing out cash to special interests groups and giving tax breaks to corporations while paying for it with this stupid amedment which is causing all the outrage.

 
Bring The Stink said:
Check the facts folks. There was no budget deficit when Walker took office. He's been dishing out cash to special interests groups and giving tax breaks to corporations while paying for it with this stupid amedment which is causing all the outrage.
Click to expand...
This is not true:In October 2010, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that Wisconsin’s shortfall in the current budget -- 2010-2011 -- was $3.4 billion, or 23.9 percent of its budget. That indicated Wisconsin was in slightly worse shape than California, whose deficit was $17.9 billion, or 21.6 percent of its state budget.Next Wisconsin governor faces big deficit Wisconsin budget rated in worst 10Wisconsin has a total state debt of $17,971,519,547 when calculated by adding the total of outstanding debt, pension and OPEB UAAL’s, unemployment trust funds and the 2010 budget gap as of July 2010
 
Bring The Stink said:
Check the facts folks. There was no budget deficit when Walker took office. He's been dishing out cash to special interests groups and giving tax breaks to corporations while paying for it with this stupid amedment which is causing all the outrage.
Click to expand...
Well I did what you suggested and checked the facts, took all of 30 seconds on Google to see that your post was a total lie. Been sitting here waiting for you to come back and defend your post but it seems you are not around, so I will assume that it was a hit and run post based on zero facts.You do indeed "Bring The Stink" and not in name only. :lol:
 
BoneYardDog said:
Love that they took the students with them and some of the signs they are holding, where is the outrage you hypocritical lefties???

Typical left coward attitude, Hitler signs okay as long as they are not on obamas face???

And no one says a thing here, you have no core values or convictions...
Click to expand...
Hitler signs, Scott Walkers face in cross hairs, Mubarak/dictator signs directed at Walker...even an impeach Bush sign! :lmao: http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/17/the-...onsin-teachers/

Good youtube about the protest-

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tony Jabroni said:
Milwaukee Public Schools are closed today due to 600 teachers calling in sick.
Click to expand...
They're doing it for the children...or maybe the elderly...or is it the working families...no, it must be the children...the playbook is so tired...I'm all for getting what you can but let's be serious here...can anyone in the private sector imagine being in a job interview and when they discuss the benefits they tell you you will get a week off in December, a week off in Februay a week off in April, two months off in the summer, a half-day every month (that's a Massachusetts special and it's such a fraud) and almost every holiday off that makes it onto a Hallmark calendar as well as a benefits package that runs laps around almost anything non-public employees will ever come close to...I'd be lying if I wouldn't love to have that package...that being said it's not reality...some of these benefits and especially the silly pensions are breaking budgets all over the country and any politician that isn't addressing it in one form or another is not doing his job...Unions can fight as hard as they want to keep these antiquated packages but to think their ability to get a pension or not contribute much money to their health insurance has any effect on their students ability to get a quality education is simply using kids as a prop to get what is good for them...calling in sick when you're not sick is effecting their ability to learn...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why are these people mad? They lost some elections that allowed this to happen. Either get more votes, or move. There are 49 other states in this country.

 
Clarence the barber said:
Why are these people mad? They lost some elections that allowed this to happen. Either get more votes, or move. There are 49 other states in this country.
Click to expand...
I don't think you really understand what's going on here. it has nothing to do with elections and who lost and whether someone can just leave.There's a collective bargaining agreement currently in place. The state negotiated it with public employees. Both parties agreed to the terms. And people who accepted jobs or continued at jobs any time since the formation of that agreement did so based in part on the terms of the CBA. However, the state has now decided that it doesn't like the agreement that was negotiated. And because they're the state, they are seeking to enact an "emergency measure" that would unilaterally nullify the agreement that both parties agreed to, despite the fact that any other labor agreement would be binding on both parties (and this agreement is binding on the public employees). The government is basically saying that because it makes the law, it is above the law with respect to the binding nature of a contract. Anyone who is opposed to "big government" should be absolutely outraged by this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Boston said:
Tony Jabroni said:
Milwaukee Public Schools are closed today due to 600 teachers calling in sick.
Click to expand...
They're doing it for the children...or maybe the elderly...or is it the working families...no, it must be the children...the playbook is so tired...I'm all for getting what you can but let's be serious here...can anyone in the private sector imagine being in a job interview and when they discuss the benefits they tell you you will get a week off in December, a week off in Februay a week off in April, two months off in the summer, a half-day every month (that's a Massachusetts special and it's such a fraud) and almost every holiday off that makes it onto a Hallmark calendar as well as a benefits package that runs laps around almost anything non-public employees will ever come close to...I'd be lying if I wouldn't love to have that package...that being said it's not reality...some of these benefits and especially the silly pensions are breaking budgets all over the country and any politician that isn't addressing it in one form or another is not doing his job...Unions can fight as hard as they want to keep these antiquated packages but to think their ability to get a pension or not contribute much money to their health insurance has any effect on their students ability to get a quality education is simply using kids as a prop to get what is good for them...calling in sick when you're not sick is effecting their ability to learn...
Click to expand...
Then why not get a teaching job? I don't understand all this "teachers have it so much better than the rest of usalready!!" whining. If that's the case, why aren't you teaching? It's not like you need to get a Ph.D from Harvard and go through a long residency in order to teach in a public school.

And you're analyzing it wrong. It's not whether the gig is a sweet one or not. It's that they were told the gig was sweet, and now some of that is being pulled out from under them. No matter how sweet the terms of employment, if you took or kept a job based on those sweet terms, and the understanding that the terms were agreed to by your employer by contract to cover a certain time period, and then your agreement was voided, you'd be pissed.

 
cr8f said:
Clarence the barber said:
Why are these people mad? They lost some elections that allowed this to happen. Either get more votes, or move. There are 49 other states in this country.
Click to expand...
Because the governor is lying about the states budget shortfall in order to break the unions?

The projection, even with lower revenue, projected a surplus until he took office.
Click to expand...
:lol: Yes, this is what's happening. Our state (iowa) had a surplus as well until Branstad took over and now we are supposedly broke. This is a way for the politicians to do what they want, raise taxes and cut programs, and still keep their jobs. people need to quit buying all this bunk and see what's really happening.
 
TobiasFunke said:
Clarence the barber said:
Why are these people mad? They lost some elections that allowed this to happen. Either get more votes, or move. There are 49 other states in this country.
Click to expand...
I don't think you really understand what's going on here. it has nothing to do with elections and who lost and whether someone can just leave.There's a collective bargaining agreement currently in place. The state negotiated it with public employees. Both parties agreed to the terms. And people who accepted jobs or continued at jobs any time since the formation of that agreement did so based in part on the terms of the CBA. However, the state has now decided that it doesn't like the agreement that was negotiated. And because they're the state, they are seeking to enact an "emergency measure" that would unilaterally nullify the agreement that both parties agreed to, despite the fact that any other labor agreement would be binding on both parties (and this agreement is binding on the public employees). The government is basically saying that because it makes the law, it is above the law with respect to the binding nature of a contract. Anyone who is opposed to "big government" should be absolutely outraged by this.
Click to expand...
Well, everyone is against "big government" except the stuff that they like. :lol: If the new government officials want to cut the budget, then why can't they? Is there a court that states they can't? I didn't read anything in your 2nd paragraph that explains to me why this isn't about lost elections. Help me understand the connection.
 
TobiasFunke said:
Boston said:
Tony Jabroni said:
Milwaukee Public Schools are closed today due to 600 teachers calling in sick.
Click to expand...
They're doing it for the children...or maybe the elderly...or is it the working families...no, it must be the children...the playbook is so tired...I'm all for getting what you can but let's be serious here...can anyone in the private sector imagine being in a job interview and when they discuss the benefits they tell you you will get a week off in December, a week off in Februay a week off in April, two months off in the summer, a half-day every month (that's a Massachusetts special and it's such a fraud) and almost every holiday off that makes it onto a Hallmark calendar as well as a benefits package that runs laps around almost anything non-public employees will ever come close to...I'd be lying if I wouldn't love to have that package...that being said it's not reality...some of these benefits and especially the silly pensions are breaking budgets all over the country and any politician that isn't addressing it in one form or another is not doing his job...Unions can fight as hard as they want to keep these antiquated packages but to think their ability to get a pension or not contribute much money to their health insurance has any effect on their students ability to get a quality education is simply using kids as a prop to get what is good for them...calling in sick when you're not sick is effecting their ability to learn...
Click to expand...
Then why not get a teaching job? I don't understand all this "teachers have it so much better than the rest of usalready!!" whining. If that's the case, why aren't you teaching? It's not like you need to get a Ph.D from Harvard and go through a long residency in order to teach in a public school.

And you're analyzing it wrong. It's not whether the gig is a sweet one or not. It's that they were told the gig was sweet, and now some of that is being pulled out from under them. No matter how sweet the terms of employment, if you took or kept a job based on those sweet terms, and the understanding that the terms were agreed to by your employer by contract to cover a certain time period, and then your agreement was voided, you'd be pissed.
Click to expand...
yeah but that happens all the time in small businesses. Cutbacks need to be made. The company I worked for (freelance now) did away with doubletime pay on Sundays and shifts to flex-time instead of overtime during especially slow periods. No one likes it but they realize it is what is needed to keep the company afloat during the recession. Everyone gets their 40 hours, no one was laid off and things are starting to turn around and get busier. I don't know where I stand yet on all of this but people have to realize that sacrifices need to be made by everyone.

 
TobiasFunke said:
Clarence the barber said:
Why are these people mad? They lost some elections that allowed this to happen. Either get more votes, or move. There are 49 other states in this country.
Click to expand...
I don't think you really understand what's going on here. it has nothing to do with elections and who lost and whether someone can just leave.There's a collective bargaining agreement currently in place. The state negotiated it with public employees. Both parties agreed to the terms. And people who accepted jobs or continued at jobs any time since the formation of that agreement did so based in part on the terms of the CBA. However, the state has now decided that it doesn't like the agreement that was negotiated. And because they're the state, they are seeking to enact an "emergency measure" that would unilaterally nullify the agreement that both parties agreed to, despite the fact that any other labor agreement would be binding on both parties (and this agreement is binding on the public employees). The government is basically saying that because it makes the law, it is above the law with respect to the binding nature of a contract. Anyone who is opposed to "big government" should be absolutely outraged by this.
Click to expand...
So you are for taking unions right to strike away if they are under contract I take it? The state is doing what it has the ability to do to change a current contract just as unions do that strike to try to get changes to their contracts. TF, I actually think you are pretty smart (even if I don't agree with you) so what am I missing about this one? Are they not doing basically the same thing as unions do when they strike?

 
Wisconsin is like Tunisia. As a fervor of discontent spread throughout the Middle East post-Tunisia, a Wisconsin inspired fervor is now spreading through the Midwest.

COLUMBUS — Organized labor Thursday told legislators that outlawing collective bargaining for public employees would not end strikes but could return Ohio to the days when walkouts occurred frequently, illegally, and sometimes violently.

A crush of about 3,800 protesters inside the Statehouse and many others outside punctuated their point with heated debate about the proposed reforms. Link

 
Clarence the barber said:
TobiasFunke said:
Clarence the barber said:
Why are these people mad? They lost some elections that allowed this to happen. Either get more votes, or move. There are 49 other states in this country.
Click to expand...
I don't think you really understand what's going on here. it has nothing to do with elections and who lost and whether someone can just leave.There's a collective bargaining agreement currently in place. The state negotiated it with public employees. Both parties agreed to the terms. And people who accepted jobs or continued at jobs any time since the formation of that agreement did so based in part on the terms of the CBA. However, the state has now decided that it doesn't like the agreement that was negotiated. And because they're the state, they are seeking to enact an "emergency measure" that would unilaterally nullify the agreement that both parties agreed to, despite the fact that any other labor agreement would be binding on both parties (and this agreement is binding on the public employees). The government is basically saying that because it makes the law, it is above the law with respect to the binding nature of a contract. Anyone who is opposed to "big government" should be absolutely outraged by this.
Click to expand...
Well, everyone is against "big government" except the stuff that they like. :thumbup: If the new government officials want to cut the budget, then why can't they? Is there a court that states they can't? I didn't read anything in your 2nd paragraph that explains to me why this isn't about lost elections. Help me understand the connection.
Click to expand...
Because they're not just cutting the budget, they're breaching a contract. I honestly don't know enough about the details, (government contract law generally, what the "emergency power" cited by the governor does, etc.) to answer exactly why or how they can do this. All I know is that a private entity couldn't do this. That's why, for example, the NFL owners have to wait until March 3 to commence the lockout- that's when their previously negotiated agreement with the players' union expires. But because the government is one of the parties here, the rules essentially don't apply to them as far as I can tell. I haven't really looked into this in much detail. Mostly when I read about this I just thank God I don't live in Wisconsin.The government is also exercising its heavy hand to tell public employees that they can't negotiate collectively in the future- which is obviously their right as the employer, just as any other private employer could refuse to hire union employees. But it leaves a funny taste in some mouths, just as it does when private employers do it.
 
jamny said:
TobiasFunke said:
Boston said:
Tony Jabroni said:
Milwaukee Public Schools are closed today due to 600 teachers calling in sick.
Click to expand...
They're doing it for the children...or maybe the elderly...or is it the working families...no, it must be the children...the playbook is so tired...I'm all for getting what you can but let's be serious here...can anyone in the private sector imagine being in a job interview and when they discuss the benefits they tell you you will get a week off in December, a week off in Februay a week off in April, two months off in the summer, a half-day every month (that's a Massachusetts special and it's such a fraud) and almost every holiday off that makes it onto a Hallmark calendar as well as a benefits package that runs laps around almost anything non-public employees will ever come close to...I'd be lying if I wouldn't love to have that package...that being said it's not reality...some of these benefits and especially the silly pensions are breaking budgets all over the country and any politician that isn't addressing it in one form or another is not doing his job...Unions can fight as hard as they want to keep these antiquated packages but to think their ability to get a pension or not contribute much money to their health insurance has any effect on their students ability to get a quality education is simply using kids as a prop to get what is good for them...calling in sick when you're not sick is effecting their ability to learn...
Click to expand...
Then why not get a teaching job? I don't understand all this "teachers have it so much better than the rest of usalready!!" whining. If that's the case, why aren't you teaching? It's not like you need to get a Ph.D from Harvard and go through a long residency in order to teach in a public school.

And you're analyzing it wrong. It's not whether the gig is a sweet one or not. It's that they were told the gig was sweet, and now some of that is being pulled out from under them. No matter how sweet the terms of employment, if you took or kept a job based on those sweet terms, and the understanding that the terms were agreed to by your employer by contract to cover a certain time period, and then your agreement was voided, you'd be pissed.
Click to expand...
yeah but that happens all the time in small businesses. Cutbacks need to be made. The company I worked for (freelance now) did away with doubletime pay on Sundays and shifts to flex-time instead of overtime during especially slow periods. No one likes it but they realize it is what is needed to keep the company afloat during the recession. Everyone gets their 40 hours, no one was laid off and things are starting to turn around and get busier. I don't know where I stand yet on all of this but people have to realize that sacrifices need to be made by everyone.
Click to expand...
Cutbacks happen. Breaches of collective bargaining agreements do not. They can't.I'm not a labor lawyer or an expert on Wisconsin state law, so I feel like I'm getting in a little over my head here. Anyone out there that can tag in for me?

 
Bogeys said:
TobiasFunke said:
Clarence the barber said:
Why are these people mad? They lost some elections that allowed this to happen. Either get more votes, or move. There are 49 other states in this country.
Click to expand...
I don't think you really understand what's going on here. it has nothing to do with elections and who lost and whether someone can just leave.There's a collective bargaining agreement currently in place. The state negotiated it with public employees. Both parties agreed to the terms. And people who accepted jobs or continued at jobs any time since the formation of that agreement did so based in part on the terms of the CBA. However, the state has now decided that it doesn't like the agreement that was negotiated. And because they're the state, they are seeking to enact an "emergency measure" that would unilaterally nullify the agreement that both parties agreed to, despite the fact that any other labor agreement would be binding on both parties (and this agreement is binding on the public employees). The government is basically saying that because it makes the law, it is above the law with respect to the binding nature of a contract. Anyone who is opposed to "big government" should be absolutely outraged by this.
Click to expand...
So you are for taking unions right to strike away if they are under contract I take it? The state is doing what it has the ability to do to change a current contract just as unions do that strike to try to get changes to their contracts. TF, I actually think you are pretty smart (even if I don't agree with you) so what am I missing about this one? Are they not doing basically the same thing as unions do when they strike?
Click to expand...
I just don't know enough about what motivates most strikes to give you a good answer. But yeah, I generally feel that if there's a collective bargaining agreement in place, employees should be bound by the terms of the agreement until it expires. Obviously a court can't enforce it because of the 13th Amendment, but in that case I'd personally side with management every time. Just like most of us do when, say, athletes under contract hold out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

chet
Legal Question--Can't find the Lawyer Thread
Replies
11
Views
559
STEADYMOBBIN 22
STEADYMOBBIN 22
DJackson10
My GF and I are being targeted at work and my store manager is telling us to stop drama despite being the ones bullied
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
Jayrod
Jayrod
playin4beer
Any real estate experts in the house?
Replies
11
Views
445
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top