Newsflash: Wisconsin teachers keep jobs! Democratic /union vitriole unfounded.

Perhaps you'll remember some political high Drama from Wisconsin last year when newly elected republican governor Scott Walker submitted a budget plan limiting collective bargaining for state employees?
The media circus it generated was replete with protests; clueless "students"urinating in state capital halls and spouting marxism; dire predictions of"the end of the world"; Threats of union violence and heaps of vulgar "anti republican" name calling.

Democratic state legislators literally driving across the state line overnight to hole-up in a hotel in an adjoining state in an effort to "not be available "to vote and stop the process..
Well; it's been a few months( andfinally after the legal challenges have been resolved); the stories are trickling in:Gov walkers plans have allowed the adjustment of wages and benefits to fit real state budgets. Real Jobs have literally been saved.

Walker’s Vindication
The controversial Wisconsin budget reform saves teachers’ jobs.
Aug 1, 2011, Vol. 16, No. 43 • By JOHN MCCORMACK



Emily Koczela had been anxiously waiting for months for Wisconsin governor Scott Walker’s controversial budget repair bill to take effect. Koczela, the finance director for the Brown Deer school district, had been negotiating with the local union, trying to get it to accept concessions in order to make up for a $1 million budget shortfall. But the union wouldn’t budge.
Teachers Union Protest Photo

Newscom

“We laid off 27 [teachers] as a precautionary measure,” Koczela told me. “They were crying. Some of these people are my friends.”

On June 29 at 12:01 a.m., Koczela could finally breathe a sigh of relief. The budget repair bill​—​delayed for months by protests, runaway state senators, and a legal challenge that made its way to the state’s supreme court​—​was law. The 27 teachers on the chopping block were spared.

With “collective bargaining rights” limited to wages, Koczela was able to change the teachers’ benefits package to fill the budget gap. Requiring teachers to contribute 5.8 percent of their salary toward pensions saved $600,000. Changes to their health care plan​—​such as a $10 office visit co-pay (up from nothing)​—​saved $200,000. Upping the workload from five classes, a study hall, and two prep periods to six classes and two prep periods saved another $200,000. The budget was balanced.

“Everything we changed didn’t touch the children,” Koczela said. Under a collective bargaining agreement, she continued, “We could never have negotiated that​—​never ever.” Koczela, a graduate of Smith College and Duke University Law School, is no Republican flack. She says she’s a “classic Wisconsin independent. I vote both parties. I voted for Senator [Russ] Feingold but I voted for [Republican state] Senator Alberta Darling too.”



More at:
www.weeklystandard.com...

"Much ado about nothing": We're still here.Cops and firemen are still on the job; The earth did not open up and swallow Wisconsin.

So we can take this episode as an example of political panic and hype that was self serving partisan "hot air".


This is only one article (in an admittedly conservative leaning publication).

Gee... cutting costs without raising taxes worked? Amazing!

Originally posted by 46ACE

Democratic state legislators literally driving across the state line overnight to hole-up in a hotel in an adjoining state in an effort to "not be available "to vote and stop the process..
Well; it's been a few months and the storiesare trickling in:Gov walkers plans have allowed the adjustment of wages and benefits to fit state budgets. Real Jobs have literally been saved.

With all due respect, what the heck are you talking about? That fight was not about losing or retaining jobs. It was about bargaining rights. What Democratic rhetoric are you referring to with your fallacious title?

You're actually advocating the stoppage of workers organizing to bargain for proper pay and benefits?
You must employ 50 people and hate paying them.
Employees having bargaining power is what made the middle class great. You want to take that away.

The Weekly Standard is a fundamental conservative news site.

The issue was keeping bargaining rights so there could be negotiations when the budget crisis stabilized.

reply to post by spinalremain


The phrase all people are created equal isn't perfect, but it did turn the US into a world superpower in record time. I personally believe in the merit system where your talents and abilities should trump knowing someone connected. Really, what's wrong with giving a job to someone when they are the best at doing it? Had it not been for those who exploited the Constitution for their own personal gain, God knows what we would have accomplished without gov permissions.

Originally posted by spinalremain
You're actually advocating the stoppage of workers organizing to bargain for proper pay and benefits?
You must employ 50 people and hate paying them.
Employees having bargaining power is what made the middle class great. You want to take that away.

edit on 27-7-2011 by spinalremain because: (no reason given)

These are not private sector unions. Would you like to have your taxes raised and pay more for their salaries.??? By all means let the private sector negotiate for outrageous salaries and benefits, but when it comes to public unions it must stop. It is tantamount to theft to expect more taxes, fees and levies to hit the poor and middle class to finance 70,000 dollar salaries for teachers, firefighters, etc.

reply to post by Hillbilly123069


I agree with your sentiment that one should be paid based on their merits. This is why I am for unions that educate their members. Nepotism is one negatice effect of some union jobs, but hey, nepotism exists in many many employment areas.

A days work for a days pay that goes along with the cost of living. People who work hard should be offered medical benefits. At the very least they should be able to bargain for these things.

reply to post by ohioriver


It isn't theft if they are collectively bargaining. No one is forcing anyone to accept said terms. If the taxpayers don't want to spend their money to support their local government employees, is it not up to the local reps to know this? They were elected to represent what the majority wants.

If the state doesn't see fit to pay their employees what they're asking, then they don't have to. I'm saying it is wrong to demonize the process and to pidgeon hole CB into "theft"

Originally posted by Crapspackle

Originally posted by 46ACE

Democratic state legislators literally driving across the state line overnight to hole-up in a hotel in an adjoining state in an effort to "not be available "to vote and stop the process..
Well; it's been a few months and the stories are trickling in:Gov walkers plans have allowed the adjustment of wages and benefits to fit state budgets. Real Jobs have literally been saved.

With all due respect, what the heck are you talking about? That fight was not about losing or retaining jobs. It was about bargaining rights. What Democratic rhetoric are you referring to with your fallacious title?

You re kidding right: (short memory?)

We lived for weeks here with fanatical screaming "end of the world"; "The End of unions" Republicans eat babys" rhetoric.

We are currently hearing about" the end of the world" (caused solely by the teaparty republicans.) over the current federal budget impasse. (not unlike February of this year in wi).

I am just saying "after all the "spittle and wailing"; we are still here (in Wisconsin).The "end of the world" did not take place...

Originally posted by ohioriver


These are not private sector unions. Would you like to have your taxes raised and pay more for their salaries.??? By all means let the private sector negotiate for outrageous salaries and benefits, but when it comes to public unions it must stop.

And what do you consider 'outrageous' Captain StrawMan? An average middle class wage allowing someone to GASP own a car and MAYBE a home? How does that hurt taxpayers again?

It is tantamount to theft to expect more taxes, fees and levies to hit the poor and middle class to finance 70,000 dollar salaries for teachers, firefighters, etc.

How is that 'theft'? Do you think teachers and firefighters and the Police should work fro free? Following your line of thought, we should privatize ALL public sector jobs because salaries paid with taxes is all 'theft'.

Your logic is full of holes.

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by ohioriver


These are not private sector unions. Would you like to have your taxes raised and pay more for their salaries.??? By all means let the private sector negotiate for outrageous salaries and benefits, but when it comes to public unions it must stop.

And what do you consider 'outrageous' Captain StrawMan? An average middle class wage allowing someone to GASP own a car and MAYBE a home? How does that hurt taxpayers again?

It is tantamount to theft to expect more taxes, fees and levies to hit the poor and middle class to finance 70,000 dollar salaries for teachers, firefighters, etc.

How is that 'theft'? Do you think teachers and firefighters and the Police should work fro free?

Thank you for immediately illustrating my point:

Typical of the flaming extremist rhetoric disabling the political process today: As demonstrated in my O.p.

Affected unions (teachers not fire fighters or cops) retained the right to collectively bargain for wages.Nobody is working for "free!"

Benefits packages and work schedules were "tinkered" with until they fit within the state budget( which means we as a state borrowed less).

If this is going to start a complete rehash of "Wisconsin republicans kill unions "(not my intention) Mods should probably close it and "tack- it" onto one of the old existing (mile long) threads"from the time.(we've done it all already)...

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Following your line of thought, we should privatize ALL public sector jobs because salaries paid with taxes is all 'theft'.

Your logic is full of holes.

edit on 27-7-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by 46ACE

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by ohioriver


These are not private sector unions. Would you like to have your taxes raised and pay more for their salaries.??? By all means let the private sector negotiate for outrageous salaries and benefits, but when it comes to public unions it must stop.

And what do you consider 'outrageous' Captain StrawMan? An average middle class wage allowing someone to GASP own a car and MAYBE a home? How does that hurt taxpayers again?

It is tantamount to theft to expect more taxes, fees and levies to hit the poor and middle class to finance 70,000 dollar salaries for teachers, firefighters, etc.

How is that 'theft'? Do you think teachers and firefighters and the Police should work fro free?

Thank you for immediately illustrating my point:

Typical of the flaming extremist rhetoric disabling political process today: As demonstrated in my O.p. Affected unions (teachers not fire fighters or cops) retained the right to collectively bargain for wages.Nobody is working for "free!"

Benefits packages and work schedules were "tinkered" with until they fit within the state budget( which means we as a state borrowed less).

If this is going to start a complete rehash of "Wisconsin republicans kill unions "(not my intention) Mods should probably close it and "tack- it" onto one of the old existing (mile long) threads"from the time.(we've done it all already)...

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Following your line of thought, we should privatize ALL public sector jobs because salaries paid with taxes is all 'theft'.

Your logic is full of holes.

edit on 27-7-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-7-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

Wow, way to try and attribute something I quoted from the person I was responding to and taking it out of context, trying to make them my words.

And there's still no concern over Mass doing the same thing?

Peculiar.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
And there's still no concern over Mass doing the same thing?

Peculiar.

Do you really think it is accurate to characterize the two issues as the same?

Or are you intentionally obfuscating?

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


MA and WI both limited union bargaining rights. One exploded with protest the other did not.

What am I missing?

Originally posted by ohioriver

Originally posted by spinalremain
You're actually advocating the stoppage of workers organizing to bargain for proper pay and benefits?
You must employ 50 people and hate paying them.
Employees having bargaining power is what made the middle class great. You want to take that away.

edit on 27-7-2011 by spinalremain because: (no reason given)

These are not private sector unions. Would you like to have your taxes raised and pay more for their salaries.??? By all means let the private sector negotiate for outrageous salaries and benefits, but when it comes to public unions it must stop. It is tantamount to theft to expect more taxes, fees and levies to hit the poor and middle class to finance 70,000 dollar salaries for teachers, firefighters, etc.

Well then Why don't we just privatize ALL SCHOOLS???!!!!
Thank us in Twenty years when your Grandkids can't get an education at all....
Yep privatize everything...WTH would anyone want to work in a public school system... If I was a teacher I would not...I'd tell them to kiss my YOU KNOW WHAT I can get better benefits and such in the private sector. Just because they're public school workers doesn't mean they should live a life of poverty. They hardly make "exorbitant wages"...but Congressmen do...hmmmm.

I SAY PRIVATIZE EVERYTHING then all of you winers (who probably don't have children) can stop crying about taxes paying these people at all for them to teach our lowly children you'd probably rather have euthanised from the Earth.

I find it pathetic that the teacher's union was going to allow 27 teachers to lose their jobs and receive zero income rather than work with the state by allowing those teachers pay into their pensions and contribute a $10 copay. Let's use a $50,000 salary, less the 5.8% contribution to their own pension ($2900), less the $10 copay (let's say an average of 3 visits to the doc over a year for $30). $50,000 - $2900 - $30=$47,070.

Or they can be fired and receive no income. The union chose no income. And people still say the unions work for the employee? Wow.

/TOA

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

MA and WI both limited union bargaining rights. One exploded with protest the other did not.

What am I missing?

You're not missing anything, bud. But certain others are missing the fact that Wisconsin was Republican-led and Mass. was Democrat-led. See, the Dems can do that to their own people and it's OK. But if the Repubs do it, oh, dear Lord it's on!

/TOA

reply to post by The Old American


Do you really think the two are comparable in substance and execution? Most people's problems with Wisconsin was not just the substance, but the method uses by Gov Walker.

Im open to being shown I am wrong, and they are the exact same, but at this point, i think you are reaching and conflating.