Gov. Walker talks with Sean Hannity about the repercussions of teachers and state employees faking their sick leave with fraudulent doctor's notes. He stressed that the teachers are employees of each individual district and the superintendents can determine what action to take. But state employees are under the governor's jurisdiction.
[This message has been edited by avengador1 (edited 02-23-2011).]
IP: Logged
09:46 AM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
You know what I don’t understand? The union busting they are trying to do. The union already had agreed to all the concessions that the state had asked for. It is just this governor who wants to get rid of union bargaining. He doesn’t care about balancing the budget, all he wants to do is bust the unions.
Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
IP: Logged
09:53 AM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by 84fiero123: You know what I don’t understand? The union busting they are trying to do. The union already had agreed to all the concessions that the state had asked for. It is just this governor who wants to get rid of union bargaining. He doesn’t care about balancing the budget, all he wants to do is bust the unions.
Steve
yup why this stinks it is not about the items - it is about spite. which is why noone involved here should be allowed in public office ever again. and that includes the "runaways".
Two-Thirds of Wisconsin Public-School 8th Graders Can’t Read Proficiently—Despite Highest Per Pupil Spending in Midwest Two-thirds of the eighth graders in Wisconsin public schools cannot read proficiently according to the U.S. Department of Education, despite the fact that Wisconsin spends more per pupil in its public schools than any other state in the Midwest.
In the National Assessment of Educational Progress tests administered by the U.S. Department of Education in 2009—the latest year available—only 32 percent of Wisconsin public-school eighth graders earned a “proficient” rating while another 2 percent earned an “advanced” rating. The other 66 percent of Wisconsin public-school eighth graders earned ratings below “proficient,” including 44 percent who earned a rating of “basic” and 22 percent who earned a rating of “below basic.”
The test also showed that the reading abilities of Wisconsin public-school eighth graders had not improved at all between 1998 and 2009 despite a significant inflation-adjusted increase in the amount of money Wisconsin public schools spent per pupil each year.
In 1998, according to the U.S. Department of Education, Wisconsin public school eighth graders scored an average of 266 out of 500 on the NAEP reading test. In 2009, Wisconsin public school eighth graders once again scored an average of 266 out of 500 on the NAEP reading test. Meanwhile, Wisconsin public schools increased their per pupil expenditures from $4,956 per pupil in 1998 to 10,791 per pupil in 2008. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator the $4,956 Wisconsin spent per pupil in 1998 dollars equaled $6,546 in 2008 dollars. That means that from 1998 to 2008, Wisconsin public schools increased their per pupil spending by $4,245 in real terms yet did not add a single point to the reading scores of their eighth graders and still could lift only one-third of their eighth graders to at least a “proficient” level in reading.
The $10,791 that Wisconsin spent per pupil in its public elementary and secondary schools in fiscal year 2008 was more than any other state in the Midwest.
Neighboring Illinois spent $10,353 per student in 2008, Minnesota spent $10,048 per student; Iowa spent $9,520 per student. Among Midwest states, Nebraska was second to Wisconsin in per pupil spending in its public schools, spending $10,565 per student.
Of these nearby states, only Minnesota did slightly better teaching reading to its public school students. In 2009, 39 percent of eighth graders in Minnesota public schools earned a rating of “proficient” or better in reading, and the average eighth grade reading score in the state was 270 out of 500.
In Illinois, only 32 percent of eighth graders earned a rating of “proficient” or better in reading, and the average eighth grade reading score was 265 out of 500. In Iowa, only 32 percent of eighth graders earned a rating of “proficient” or better in reading, and the average reading score was 265 out of 500. In Nebraska, only 35 percent of eighth graders earned a rating of “proficient” or better in their public schools, and the average reading score was 267 out of 500.
Nationwide, only 30 percent of public school eighth graders earned a rating of “proficient” or better in reading, and the average reading score on the NAEP test was 262 out of 500.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress explains its student rating system as follows: “Basic denotes partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade. Proficient represents solid academic performance. Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter. Advanced represents superior performance.”
In other words, despite the $10,791 that taxpayers were paying to educate students in Wisconsin public schools, two-thirds of eighth graders in those schools showed at best only a “partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work” at that grade level.
In fiscal 2008, the federal government provided $669.6 million in subsidies to the public schools in Wisconsin.
So much for throwing more money at it to fix the problem.
IP: Logged
10:18 AM
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35468 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
The crowds mobbing the Wisconsin Capitol in Madison are right: Gov. Scott Walker's budget repair bill is indeed an attack on organized government workers.
And it's about time.
Labor compensation is the largest component of busted local, state and federal budgets, and those costs are the horrific results of government employees' "right" to bargain collectively and, in some cases, to strike. Government employees have had the upper hand for decades thanks to collective bargaining practices, rules and laws. For example, to resolve deadlocked talks, they can require binding arbitration, which takes the decision-making out of the hands of the taxpayers' representatives and gives it to an outside arbitrator who often "splits the difference."
Public employees who regard the taxpayers' munificence as an entitlement have reason to worry. Walker's bill would limit collective bargaining to wage issues alone, cap wage increases at rises in the cost of living (unless approved in a local referendum), limit contracts to one year and freeze any wage increases until a new contract is negotiated. Union members would have to vote every year whether to retain the union as its collective bargaining agent, state agencies would be barred from collecting union dues and individual employees could refuse to pay those dues.
The bill excludes from collective bargaining home health care workers in Medicaid programs, family child-care workers and University of Wisconsin faculty, academic staff, hospital and clinic employees. It empowers the governor to declare a state of emergency and fire workers who take unauthorized absences of three days to participate in "an organized action to stop or slow work."
The bill contains more, much of which should serve as a template for the even more financially crippled state of Illinois. If the bill is an overreaction, it should have been expected.
Ah, but the Wisconsin unions now say, they would graciously contribute more for their pensions and health care benefits. Big of them. Illogically, they insist that this concession, which is too little and too late, is reason enough to call off the dogs.
That government unions would consider this a concession in the face of the depth of our growing federal, state and local financial debacles testifies to their naivete or their contempt of the public. How astonishing that the thousands who abandoned their classrooms and the Democratic senators who have abandoned their sworn duties by exiling themselves to Illinois actually think they are helping their cause. As if this wholesale desertion of their duties would generate public sympathy. If this is a "movement" that labor leaders expect to sweep the country, then it was dwarfed by last November's national elections that revealed a much larger one demanding the restoration of rationality to government.
The throngs in Madison serve only to put on public display the crassness of their motives and torches whatever remains of the rhetoric that they're "doing it for the children." They are living in the antediluvian world of Saul Alinsky and "direct action," thinking that by making enough racket, they'll defeat a fed-up public. Their tactics are as obsolete, self-serving and ineffective as an appearance by the Rev. Jesse Jackson — which, predictably, happened in Madison.
The benefits bubble has burst, folks. Even in Illinois, a state held captive by government labor unions, the absurdity of it all is coming home. House Speaker Michael Madigan, one of labor's staunchest allies, has committed the heresy of talking about cutting back pension benefits of current employees. Rahm Emanuel, the predicted winner of today's Chicago mayoral race, is making noises about restraining union demands. Gov. Pat Quinn is talking about a major consolidation of the state's 869 school districts — a move aimed at cutting duplicative labor costs. But that's only a start of what must happen here.
All the bellyaching by members of government unions about how tough they have it, about how hard they work for so little reward, is falling on the deaf ears of a public that works just as hard for not as much reward. Pouring more protesters crying "poor me" into Madison will only harden a disgusted public against them. As Bob Dylan, an icon of direct action, once sang, "the times, they are a changin'."
IP: Logged
11:02 AM
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35468 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
Obama: I will 'paint the nation purple with SEIU' After viewing the video below we can now say with certainty which side President Obama is on concerning the Wisconsin public union protests. Mr. Obama is not a public union supporter, he is their national leader. This is rapidly becoming a nationwide manufactured "crisis", as orchestrated by SEIU and Obama's Organizing for America. Is this what he meant when he said he would make us a nation of purple states
IP: Logged
11:10 AM
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35468 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
MSNBC cast concludes 'vitriolic' signs in Madison, Wisc. held by pro-union protesters are not being shown as on the news, as they were with tea party rallies.
IP: Logged
11:27 AM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
How does busting the use of collective bargaining balance the budget? That is all he wants to do, bust the unions ability to collectively bargain. ever have 10,000 employees? If you had no union you would be doing nothing but talking to everyone of those “I am so much better than everyone else.” Drips who wanted a raise for everything they ever did. Because they think they disserve it.
This is just republicans trying to again BUST unions so that they can pay everyone minimum wage. As far as the education, blame that on the kids and their parents. If the kids don’t want to learn, are always texting in class, can’t spell because all they do is text. There is a lot more to it than just throwing money at a problem, how about we keep the kids back a grade instead of promoting them to the next because no one wants them. Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
IP: Logged
11:40 AM
82-T/A [At Work] Member
Posts: 25220 From: Florida USA Registered: Aug 2002
Hah... that's funny... my grandfather had a small wooden statue of Don Quixote on his bookshelf that he got when he lived in Uruguay, Argentina, or Paraguay.
I've got it sitting on my book-shelf, but I haven't bothered to read the book yet.
quote
Originally posted by 84fiero123:
How does busting the use of collective bargaining balance the budget? That is all he wants to do, bust the unions ability to collectively bargain. ever have 10,000 employees? If you had no union you would be doing nothing but talking to everyone of those “I am so much better than everyone else.” Drips who wanted a raise for everything they ever did. Because they think they disserve it.
This is just republicans trying to again BUST unions so that they can pay everyone minimum wage. As far as the education, blame that on the kids and their parents. If the kids don’t want to learn, are always texting in class, can’t spell because all they do is text. There is a lot more to it than just throwing money at a problem, how about we keep the kids back a grade instead of promoting them to the next because no one wants them. Steve
I won't sugar coat it... it absolutely is union busting. However, there's a couple of things here:
1 - By making the unionization non-mandatory, they are essentially putting the decision to unionize in the hands of the workers, not the union. The union is afraid because this will cut into their bottom line. Essentially, they will have to spend twice as much money keeping the workers "interested." Since, if the bill passes, it will mean that the workers have to vote once a year to maintain the union. That means that if the workers no longer want a union, they don't have to have one. I can understand the "fear" here... but honestly, do we not want the workers to have the final say? As it stands right now, if they want to work in a particular industry, they are forced to be in a union, whether they want to or not. I guess the question is, if they really DO want to be in a union, then the unions have nothing to fear. But... it appears as though they are worried that maybe the majority don't want a union?
2 - The bill also doesn't make it mandatory for them to pay into the union. If a member decides not to join the union, they aren't required to make member's dues payments. Again, it's a matter of choice, and I think the unions fear that when given the choice, people won't pay. So that begs the question, is it right to make unionization mandatory? If the workers WANT a union, they'll keep a union... but maybe the union corporation feels that perhaps that might not be the case?
If this bill passes, they still have the right to collective bargaining, but it's done through 3rd party unaffiliated arbitration, and not through strong-arm mandates. The mayor wants to eliminate the union controlled collective bargaining because, while the unions have agreed to full concessions at this point, it's only a matter of time before these benefits go right back on.
How does busting the use of collective bargaining balance the budget? That is all he wants to do, bust the unions ability to collectively bargain. ever have 10,000 employees?
This is just republicans trying to again BUST unions so that they can pay everyone minimum wage.
Steve, I have lived in Wisconsin since 1985.
I have already answered the issues you bring up in previous threads, but you understandably may not have taken the time to read the lengthy threads.
The state employees have had THREE YEARS to be willing to pay some of their retirement funding, or to contribute more to their health plans in order to be like the rest of the private citizens and bear some of the pain of this economic downturn. They FLATLY REFUSED. And they COULD because they have a MAJOR ADVANTAGE in power.
They have union representation. They have collective bargaining agreements restricting them from having to take ANY cuts. And they have representation in the form of the liberal state representatives.
The TAXPAYERS of the state have the conservative state representatives. But even with conservative state representatives in power, to TRY to bring back some sort of balance of power, they are prevented from doing so by the collective bargaining agreements.
The playing field is not level. It is FAR shifted in favor of the unions. And the state employee unions have ABUSED it.
So, party is over. Much of your collective bargaining power is going to be GONE. You STILL have your union representation, and you have your liberal representatives going to bat for you. You still have protection. To say they just want to pay minimum wages is incorrect and it is offensive. The conservatives have NEVER treated state employees that way or even ASKED them to. Even in this case, they are being asked to contribute about $125/month for their health care, and to fund some of their retirement. There ISN'T EVEN A WAGE CUT.
To try to portray this as workers being abused and being left without protection from an overbearing government is FALSE.
What is TRUE is that, yes, collective bargaining is going to be GONE. Enough abuse of your fellow citizen taxpayers.
[This message has been edited by frontal lobe (edited 02-23-2011).]
As you’re probably aware, there is some pretty major upheaval happening in Wisconsin, where union workers are organizing large protests (and inspiring some counter-protests) over legislation proposed by the state’s governor, Scott Walker, that they see as union-busting (Walker contends the measures are necessary for budgetary reasons). That’s all we’ll say about the legislation, because what this post is really about is the high-profile support the union workers just received in the form of star Packers cornerback Charles Woodson.
Woodson’s support doesn’t necessarily come as a surprise, but it’s still significant. First, it’s significant from the Wisconsin union workers’ standpoint, because a guy it’s safe to say is pretty popular in the state just gave them their full support. Here’s what Woodson said:
Last week I was proud when many of my current and former teammates announced their support for the working families fighting for their rights in Wisconsin. Today I am honored to join with them.
Thousands of dedicated Wisconsin public workers provide vital services for Wisconsin citizens. They are the teachers, nurses and child care workers who take care of us and our families. These hard working people are under an unprecedented attack to take away their basic rights to have a voice and collectively bargain at work.
It is an honor for me to play for the Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers and be a part of the Green Bay and Wisconsin communities. I am also honored as a member of the NFL Players Association to stand together with working families of Wisconsin and organized labor in their fight against this attempt to hurt them by targeting unions. I hope those leading the attack will sit down with Wisconsin’s public workers and discuss the problems Wisconsin faces, so that together they can truly move Wisconsin forward.
It’s significant from an NFL standpoint, too. Why? Because as CBS’ Mike Freeman put it, it’s “one union backing another.” (The union doing the backing, of course, being the NFL Players Association – Woodson is the Packers’ representative for that union.) It only makes sense that if NFL players were going to come out in support of either side of the Wisconsin fight, they’d back the union workers. After all they’re part of a union themselves…one that’s embroiled in a bit of a battle itself at the moment, as you might have heard.
It’s big for unions to show this kind of solidarity for one another, since one could reasonably assume that the results of one labor negotiation will impact others taking place around the same time – even if the respective pay scales of, say, the NFLPA vs. a teachers union in Wisconsin differ just a tad. Such a show of support from Woodson can only raise the stakes of the NFL’s negotiations – the players’ association is fighting for itself, sure, but his statement makes it appear that they’re also fighting for every union, everywhere.
This is probably a smart PR move for Woodson. He’s taking the position of standing up for this little guy (and, by proxy, standing up for himself and his NFL colleagues). And while he’ll probably ruffle some feathers among those who back the proposed measures in Wisconsin, when he gets back to shutting down receivers (when he gets a chance to do that is, of course, up in the air), we have a feeling all will be forgiven.
But before that happens, some concessions will have to happen on one side or another – and though Woodson’s statement never mentions the NFL’s labor situation, it certainly doesn’t make him sound like someone who believes the concessions should come from the union side. It’s a show of solidarity on one end, a show of willingness to fight on the other – and even if mediation talks are, as the Jets’ Tony Richardson put it, “good,” Woodson’s statement is just another sign that each side is firm enough in its position that we shouldn’t expect an agreement is close at hand.
How does busting the use of collective bargaining balance the budget? That is all he wants to do, bust the unions ability to collectively bargain. ever have 10,000 employees? If you had no union you would be doing nothing but talking to everyone of those “I am so much better than everyone else.” Drips who wanted a raise for everything they ever did. Because they think they disserve it.
Lots of high employee companies deal with that issue just fine without collective bargaining. Halliburton for one, probably has 10K employees in Houston alone-- without collective bargaining or wage problems. Last I heard, Haliburton employs about 50,000 worldwide. Lots of govt entities do as well.
If it weren't for the fact that the same Wisconsin state emplyees would be right back at the table in a year or so trying to claw back those much touted concessions, collective bargaining would be a moot point, but there is little doubt that they will be, and again, the state would find itself in the same hole it is today.
IP: Logged
01:28 PM
frontal lobe Member
Posts: 9042 From: brookfield,wisconsin Registered: Dec 1999
"Last week I was proud when many of my current and former teammates announced their support for the working families fighting for their rights in Wisconsin."
Sounds like such a positive statement, right? I mean, who could be against it?
Wrong on a couple counts, though.
He is ONLY supporting working families of state employees. Who is watching out for all the non-state employee working families who have already faced increased amounts they pay for their insurance, and have had salary CUTS, yet STILL have to pay MORE TAXES to PAY for those state employees who have REFUSED to pay any more for insurance, or to contribute to their own retirement?
Second error. If the state employees won't take any cuts (and without eliminating collective bargaining, as Don said, it will just be a temporary pay cut that they will try to make back AND MORE in a couple of years), there WILL be less state employees.
The state government WILL eliminate positions. THOUSANDS. Doesn't the union care about that? Doesn't Charles Woodson care about that? What about THOSE working families? Because they aren't going to BE working families any more.
Well, the answer is NO. The union DOES NOT CARE. They KNOW that THOUSANDS of jobs will be cut if the state has to keep paying what they have to pay now to the state employees.
IP: Logged
02:05 PM
jaskispyder Member
Posts: 21510 From: Northern MI Registered: Jun 2002
My personal experience with Unions is exactly that.... they don't care. I have talked about this before, as my wife lost her job and the union didn't do squat about it. The union members were only concerned that they were able to keep their jobs. Unions are just as bad as management. I don't believe anyone should be required to join a union as part of a job requirement.
IP: Logged
02:11 PM
D B Cooper Member
Posts: 3141 From: East Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2005
Workers in the private sector have every right to unionize; but not to force others to. If they bleed the company dry and kill the golden goose, oh well. Guess the ownership should have known enough to close the doors and move offshore or something before the union killed it.
With government entities though, there's no way anyone should be allowed to unionize. It is inherently a conflict of interest. Hell, even FDR pointed that out. Public sector unions are nothing but money laundering operations with their demorat co-conspirators.
The great thing is, the public is catching on to their scheme. Time to put an end to this unholy alliance and start cleaning up the humungus mess they've created.
IP: Logged
11:08 PM
Feb 24th, 2011
ktthecarguy Member
Posts: 2076 From: Livonia, MI USA Registered: Jun 2007
Originally posted by JazzMan: Cliff went to the trouble to invest his time (and as a professional programmer his time is, literally, Real Money) to provide that option.
Did you say option ? You couldn't tell a thread about state workers might be political, or turn political ? Maybe Cliff programmed that option because he got tired of the whiners taking more time to complain, with bandwidth, than hit the back button.
IP: Logged
07:51 AM
cliffw Member
Posts: 37753 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by 84fiero123: You know what I don’t understand? The union busting they are trying to do. The union already had agreed to all the concessions that the state had asked for. It is just this governor who wants to get rid of union bargaining. ? He doesn’t care about balancing the budget, all he wants to do is bust the unions.
Steve, I live, and work, in a "right to work" state. There are unions here. Heck, if I looked, I could find where I posted that I would love to start a union in my vocation. I don't know that the unions have agreed to all concessions asked for. There would be no problem then, 'eh ? Busting a union will not balance a budget. However, when government employees make more than private citizens for a comparable job, and get better benefits, all of which private citizens pay for, and government needs to cut costs for said taxpaying citizens, curtailing some union rights is in order. Also, I have heard you rail against jobs going overseas. These unions are causing jobs to leave the states for better work environments in other states.
IP: Logged
08:21 AM
PFF
System Bot
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
The main body of law governing collective bargaining is the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). It explicitly grants employees the right to collectively bargain and join trade unions. The NLRA was originally enacted by Congress in 1935 under its power to regulate interstate commerce. See, U.S. Constitution Art. I, Section 8. It applies to most private non-agricultural employees and employers engaged in some aspect of interstate commerce. Decisions and regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, which was established by the NLRA, greatly supplement and define the provisions of the act.
Did you say option ? You couldn't tell a thread about state workers might be political, or turn political ? Maybe Cliff programmed that option because he got tired of the whiners taking more time to complain, with bandwidth, than hit the back button.
A perfect example of the loss of civility and decorum on this forum.
IP: Logged
10:00 AM
Rallaster Member
Posts: 9105 From: Indy southside, IN Registered: Jul 2009
Amazing that the guy can complain for page after page in a thread he doesn't like, even COUNT how many political posts he objects to in a thread in a thread he doesn't like, but CAN'T simply STOP reading a thread a thread he doesn't like...then has the gall to question your civility and decorum?
[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 02-24-2011).]
Amazing that the guy can complain for page after page in a thread he doesn't like, even COUNT how many political posts he objects to in a thread in a thread he doesn't like, but CAN'T simply STOP reading a thread a thread he doesn't like...then has the gall to question your civility and decorum?
Quoted, well, just because...
What's latin for, "It proves itself?"
Edit to add:
By the way, Phonedawgz could easily change the category of this topic by editing his first post and selecting "politics", thus correcting his original error. Amazingly, were he to do this then through the Magic of Cliff Pennock's programming skillz I would no longer be able to reply in this thread because I would cease to be able to see it. I'd call that a win-win situation, wouldn't you? All it takes is a click. S-o-o-o-o-o easy to do.
What's the line in Vega on that happening? They'll bet on anything out there I hear.
[This message has been edited by JazzMan (edited 02-24-2011).]
IP: Logged
10:44 AM
aceman Member
Posts: 4899 From: Brooklyn Center, MN Registered: Feb 2003
Amazing that the guy can complain for page after page in a thread he doesn't like, even COUNT how many political posts he objects to in a thread in a thread he doesn't like, but CAN'T simply STOP reading a thread a thread he doesn't like...then has the gall to question your civility and decorum?
The main body of law governing collective bargaining is the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). It explicitly grants employees the right to collectively bargain and join trade unions. The NLRA was originally enacted by Congress in 1935 under its power to regulate interstate commerce. See, U.S. Constitution Art. I, Section 8. It applies to most private non-agricultural employees and employers engaged in some aspect of interstate commerce. Decisions and regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, which was established by the NLRA, greatly supplement and define the provisions of the act.
Of course it does, but that law doesn't make CB mandantory for all states, all employers, and/or all non-farm employees. Both sides (employees and employers) have to agree to it. Either side can pull out of CB agreements any time they wish.
IP: Logged
12:34 PM
cliffw Member
Posts: 37753 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by JazzMan: A perfect example of the loss of civility and decorum on this forum.
James, civility and decorum is relative. I regularly take people to task. All of my green bar is from T/OT save for maybe a very few from the Mall. My red bar is totally T/OT.
IP: Logged
01:02 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
Originally posted by JazzMan: By the way, Phonedawgz could easily change the category of this topic by editing his first post and selecting "politics", thus correcting his original error. Amazingly, were he to do this then through the Magic of Cliff Pennock's programming skillz I would no longer be able to reply in this thread because I would cease to be able to see it. I'd call that a win-win situation, wouldn't you? All it takes is a click. S-o-o-o-o-o easy to do.
Not after someone else posted, that is locked as soon as someone else posts in the thread. He can edit his first post but he can not change the title or category.
Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
IP: Logged
01:04 PM
rogergarrison Member
Posts: 49601 From: A Western Caribbean Island/ Columbus, Ohio Registered: Apr 99
So, has school been closed for the whole 2-3 weeks this has been going on in Wi ? If not, whos doing the teaching ? If someone is, then it certainly wont be a strain to fire all the ones on 'strike'. If they are closed, are the kids going to go to school till July to make it up ?
IP: Logged
01:07 PM
PFF
System Bot
partfiero Member
Posts: 6923 From: Tucson, Arizona Registered: Jan 2002
Well, now we know. Walker is all about busting up unions. Period. [URL=http://news.yahoo.com/s/theweek/212417;_ylt=ArlJVmvC3R3kxuymcTH3AkeyFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTJjY3VrNWw3BGFzc2V0A3RoZXdlZWsvMjAxMTAyMjMvMjEyNDIyBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDOQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawN0aGVwcmFua2NhbGw-]http://news.yahoo.com/s/the...awN0aGVwcmFua2NhbGw-[/ URL]
I listened to the whole thing yesterday, BFD. No Gotcha moment here. The caller tried to get him to agree with some outrageous comments, but he didn't really take the bait. Time for the runaway cry babies to come home and do the duty that they were elected to do. How come when the left wins the election they tell the right that they lost, live with it, But when they lose to the right, they stomp their feet and runaway like little spoiled kids?
Not after someone else posted, that is locked as soon as someone else posts in the thread. He can edit his first post but he can not change the title or category.
Steve
That only applies to thread titles. Categories can be changed any time by the original poster. I just went and changed the category of my thread here: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum6/HTML/082576.html from General to Fun Stuff. I then set my filters to only see Fun Stuff and there it was.
So yes, phonedawgz can change the category he marked this topic as from the incorrect general to the correct politics quite easily. If he wants to...
[This message has been edited by JazzMan (edited 02-24-2011).]
In Ohio.. it looks like there might be a ... *GASP* .... Compromise! Not the best deal for either side, but isn't that the meaning of the word?
quote
COLUMBUS, Ohio, Feb. 23 (UPI) -- Republican leaders in the Ohio Legislature said Wednesday they would amend a controversial bill to allow limited public employees collective bargaining.
State Sen. Kevin Bacon, a Republican, said SB5 would also be amended to ban strikes by any state or local public employees, not just those in public safety, The Plain Dealer of Cleveland reported.
He said unions would be able to bargain only on wages.
Bacon heads the committee now dealing with the bill. As originally written, it ended collective bargaining for all state employees and binding arbitration for local government workers.
Senate President Tom Niehaus said Republicans are still working out details. Those include what would happen if public employee unions and government agencies cannot reach agreement.
"We are working on an alternative that would allow them to take their concerns to a third party," Niehaus said. "But it will not be binding arbitration."
More than 5,000 people rallied against the bill Tuesday in Columbus.
Wisconsin Union’s Insurance Scam at Stake in Collective Bargaining Reform by Kyle Olson Much of the current controversy in Wisconsin involves the impending loss of most collective bargaining privileges for state employees, including public school teachers.
The fact is that the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the largest teachers union in the state, has grossly abused that privilege for decades, resulting in the unnecessary siphoning of millions of dollars from Wisconsin public schools.
Under current Wisconsin law, the identity of the insurance company that provides health coverage to school employees is a matter of collective bargaining in each school district.
In the majority of districts around the state, WEAC negotiators have used that law to pressure local school boards into purchasing coverage from WEA Trust, an insurance company established by and closely associated with the union.
WEA Trust offers very comprehensive health coverage, at a very high cost to schools. Most of the districts with the most expensive health premiums in the state are clients of WEA Trust. Most of the districts with the lowest premiums do business with other insurance carriers.
A few dozen districts have managed to dump WEA Trust insurance over the past few years, despite the protests of teachers and their union. Officials from many of those districts say they managed to save at least six figures their first year with a different carrier, and maintained steady rates in subsequent years, while still offering quality health coverage to employees.
Officials from other districts say they’re also eager to dump WEA Trust coverage, but need their employees’ anonymous claim histories from WEA Trust to share with other bidders. Several say they have never requested that information because they were told WEA Trust would punish them by pulling them out of local insurance pools, resulting in skyrocketing premiums.
Today many Wisconsin school boards consider themselves stuck with expensive WEA Trust health coverage, until state law is altered to take the identity of the insurance carrier off the collective bargaining table. Gov. Scott Walker’s current legislative proposal would do just that, giving school boards the opportunity to freely shop for insurance and save millions of tax dollars for instructional purposes.
In fact, Gov. Walker recently cited WEA Trust as the #1 reason for collective bargaining reform.
Last year Education Action Group published a short, easy-to-read report on this topic, titled “A Crucial Challenge for Wisconsin Schools: Escaping the Shackles of WEA Trust Insurance.” A copy of that report can be accessed by clicking here. The governor’s campaign highlighted the report as evidence of the need for reform.
The union is saying this fight is about collective bargaining and the rights of its members. In reality, WEA Trust, under the umbrella of WEAC, stands to lose millions if the reform is passed, as our report points out.
The union’s money and power stream would be hampered and it owes it to taxpayers and teachers to come clean about that.
Cool stuff JazzMan, but I think this thread is just General, it's about Unions, not politics. I don't see a button for Union.
Remember, Unions have said for many years that they are not political.
In any case, apparently you can change the thread type later on, I never knew that.
Brad
Because of the fringe ideologies that infect this board, it's impossible to talk about anything union without it being political. Just as with abortion, or Obama's birth certificate, or the fall of the World Trade Center towers, whatever non-political aspects involved have long since been washed away by the wad of political rhetoric. As such, this thread is not general, it's political; read the posts so far and it's clear. Maybe phonedawgz will come back and change it? Even he acknowledged it was political.
IP: Logged
03:01 PM
cliffw Member
Posts: 37753 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by JazzMan: Because of the fringe ideologies that infect this board, ...
Fringe ideologies, . That would be you, and a few others, who are ?infecting? this board, . This is mostly a conservative board. How ironic. Especially for this thread. You want to abdicate discussion in this thread just as the limp wristed liberal elected representatives did in Wisconsin. As they did in Texas a few years back. As they are now doing in Indiana. I resent your categorization and reject it.
IP: Logged
03:26 PM
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35468 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
It costs political capital that could be spent elsewhere
If you want to know why a campaign to deliver a right-to-work law in Michigan could fail miserably, take a look over in Madison.
There, "WisTeria" has descended on Wisconsin's state capitol. Senate Democrats have bolted the state lest their presence enable a vote that could strip public-sector unions of many collective bargaining rights. Gov. Scott Walker, whatever his support among a silent majority, is a media pinata, and the legacy of this ugly battle — which may or may not go the governor's way — is uncertain.
Not because the dollars and cents of Wisconsin's $3.6 billion deficit are not on Walker's side, because they mostly are (as union negotiators have acknowledged). But because the broader reach of what the governor and his fellow Republicans want to do really is an existential threat to the power and cash-flow of public-sector unions whose leaders depend on the continual flow of taxpayer dollars to fuel their operations and project their power.
Labor's response may be surprising to the vast majority of Americans who don't pay attention to such self-absorbed minutiae unless it graces their flat-screen TVs. It is not at all surprising, however, to the politicians and media hacks who do pay attention — starting with Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder, who insisted throughout his campaign that moving to rescind the collective-bargaining rights of public employees is a non-starter.
Why? Because it would enflame an already contentious budget battle in which the numbers don't lie. Because it would risk derailing a governor's ability to use a legislative majority to bring fiscal sanity and economic competitiveness to a moribund economy. Because it would take a constituency that could help get things done and make it an implacable foe for this year, the next and the one after that.
As much as Wisconsin Republicans may rationalize the need to reach beyond financial give-backs and into fundamental rights of union bargaining — by barring closed shops, dues check-off and multi-year contracts — it's not at all clear they reckoned with this completely predictable response.
A big deal? The word "huge" isn't nearly big enough to cover it.
Uneasy union leaders there and across the Great Lakes states, including Michigan, say this dispute is about the principles underpinning a half-century of collective bargaining. Yes, but among the core principles of protected collective bargaining rights is one that ensures the circular path of public dollars from taxpayers into what is, simply put, a labor monopoly.
That doesn't exist for private-sector unions like the United Auto Workers, the United Steelworkers, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters or the International Association of Machinists. If they don't do their part to help their employers remain competitive, they'll soon be out of work — as Detroit knows better than just about anywhere in the country.
In the public sector peopled by teachers and maintenance workers, police officers and firefighters? Not so much. Competition is a dirty word, as anyone who's tried to push charter schools or stumped for privatizing services can attest.
Here are your taxpayer dollars at work: Average folks pay taxes to politicians. They use the dollars to buy equipment, maintain infrastructure and pay wages and benefits to public employees and local school teachers — after allowing the union leaders to claim a portion of the wages in compulsory dues.
That cash is used, among other things, to fund campaign contributions to local, state and national politicians — most of whom are Democrats and sympathetic to keeping the circular process churning.
Walker's Wisconsin gambit, and others percolating in the state legislatures of Indiana and Ohio, imperils more than the existing wage and benefit structure of public employees. It threatens the political gravy train that labor has used to influence politics to its benefit, up to and including presidential elections.
In other words, Wisconsin's "WisTeria" and the smaller copycats in neighboring states have undeniably national political implications for the re-election of a Democratic president, the chance for this party to retake Congress and a Republican ability to solidify gains won last November and perhaps retake the White House.
Battleground doesn't begin to describe it, which is why there may be less unanimity among Republicans and business types on how to proceed than simple stereotypes allow. As much as the economic metrics of right-to-work states down South appear to make the case for moving in that direction as quickly as possible — higher growth rates, rising incomes, population gains — does the cost amid trying economic times justify spending so much political capital?
Probably not when the ugly numbers of declining revenue, sagging property values and skyrocketing health care and pension liabilities are helping to make the case for shared sacrifice, as is clearly the case here in Michigan.
Taking the next step is to risk looking like piling on — and undermining the support of voters and businesses who crave stability, not more conflict.
Fringe ideologies, . That would be you, and a few others, who are ?infecting? this board, . This is mostly a conservative board. How ironic. Especially for this thread. You want to abdicate discussion in this thread just as the limp wristed liberal elected representatives did in Wisconsin. As they did in Texas a few years back. As they are now doing in Indiana. I resent your categorization and reject it.
I have no idea what you were trying to say, the meanings of the words as arranged produce a disjointed set of concepts.
And I thought this was mostly a Fiero board? PFF stands for Pennock's Fiero Forum last I heard, not Political Fanatics Forum. My ideals still stand: Keep the political shite where it belongs, marked political, so that the software that Cliff spent money creating actually works as intended. Bypassing and ignoring his rules not only disrespects him but also every participant on this forum who chooses to ignore political ranting by unchecking politics. It's like you're pulling your pants down to your knees and taking a great big steaming stinking dump right on his living room floor, stinking it up for everyone else who wants to participate here. What part of respect Cliff are you not comprehending?
. That would be you, and a few others, who are ?infecting? this board, 
