Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

I don't know why I even try with you.

Can't lose the lame insults and talk about the topic? Try really hard to step out of your normal.

The constitution does not state that collective bargaining is a right.

You're right, there is no mention of the words "collective bargaining rights" in the Constitution.

Yet our legal system, up to and including the Supreme Court, for decades have ruled those very unions, in a variety of forms, legal. Legal = "a constitutional right" in our world. Do you have any compelling evidence at all that there has been no right to form unions? Because if so, you'd better tell the Supreme Court. They've apparently been wrong all these decades according to you.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Can't lose the lame insults and talk about the topic? Try really hard to step out of your normal.



You're right, there is no mention of the words "collective bargaining rights" in the Constitution.

Yet our legal system, up to and including the Supreme Court, for decades have ruled those very unions, in a variety of forms, legal. Legal = "a constitutional right" in our world. Do you have any compelling evidence at all that there has been no right to form unions? Because if so, you'd better tell the Supreme Court. They've apparently been wrong all these decades according to you.

There is nothing wrong with the right to form unions. Unions are legal and you have every right to form a union, however last I checked we live in a country based on freedom of choice and people should have the right to choose whether or not to belong to the union in the public sector. If the unions are so great and provides such huge benefits to the workers why are they scared of giving the employees the choice to belong or not belong? WEAC (the WI teacher's union) which is funded thru tax payer money (thru paying teachers salaries) donated $1.57 million last year to 4 senate democrats because it is all about the kids.

[Riot]

See, Governor Walker, this is why you do not try and secretly rush through legislation that changes things markedly (eliminate collective bargaining rights) without some time, a deep breath and public debate:


Sam Stein reports that Walker bill, if passed, will lose Wisconsin $46 million of the $74 million it gets in federal transportation funding

WASHINGTON -- Budget referees and transportation officials in Wisconsin have informed Gov. Scott Walker (R) that if he were to pass his controversial anti-union legislation into law, he could be forfeiting tens of millions of dollars in federal funds for transportation.

Under an obscure provision of federal labor law, states risk losing federal funds should they eliminate "collective bargaining rights" that existed at the time when federal assistance was first granted. The provision, known as "protective arrangements" or "Section 13C arrangements," is meant as a means of cushioning union (and even some non-union) members who, while working on local projects, are affected by federal grants.

It also could potentially hamstring governors like Walker who want dramatic changes to labor laws in their states. Wisconsin received $74 million in federal transit funds this fiscal year. Of that, $46.6 million would be put at risk should the collective-bargaining bill come to pass -- in the process creating an even more difficult fiscal situation than the one that, ostensibly, compelled Walker to push the legislation in the first place.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_826908.html

Some Dems have an emergency amendment to exclude Transportation union members from Walkers union-busting bill ready, in an attempt to save this money for the state. Walker's office has not yet commented, so it's unknown if Walker knew about this or not (is the federal fund loss deliberate or just a mistake of ignorance?)

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

WEAC (the WI teacher's union) which is funded thru tax payer money (thru paying teachers salaries)

Whoa. Wrong. Once the taxpayers money goes into the paycheck, that money belongs to the employee. Nobody has the right to tell an employee what to spend their hard-earned money on.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Whoa. Wrong. Once the taxpayers money goes into the paycheck, that money belongs to the employee. Nobody has the right to tell an employee what to spend their hard-earned money on.

Your argument would have merit if the employee had a choice to belong or not belong to the union which in the case of the teachers union in WI they do not have that choice.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Your argument would have merit if the employee had a choice to belong or not belong to the union which in the case of the teachers union in WI they do not have that choice.

Nope. Once the money is earned and that paycheck is cut, all that money is the employees. Period.

That money doesn't belong to taxpayers. Taxpayers have zero say in how an employees money is spent. That's beyond absurd - Big Government controlling how you spend your pay!?

Perhaps employees should only be allowed to spend it at one company store?

You are talking about the collective bargaining agreement an employer bargains for themselves. You seem to have a problem with what the state has bargained for themselves. That has nothing to do with what employees spend their money upon. Sounds like you need to get angry at those in your state government that bargained an agreement with teachers that you don't care for.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Nope. Once the money is earned and that paycheck is cut, all that money is the employees. Period.

That money doesn't belong to taxpayers. Taxpayers have zero say in how an employees money is spent. That's beyond absurd - Big Government controlling how you spend your pay!?

Perhaps employees should only be allowed to spend it at one company store?

You are talking about the collective bargaining agreement an employer bargains for themselves. You seem to have a problem with what the state has bargained for themselves. That has nothing to do with what employees spend their money upon. Sounds like you need to get angry at those in your state government that bargained an agreement with teachers that you don't care for.

An employee has the freedom to choose to work in a job where they have to join a union, or not.

I believe what he is saying is that the teachers are paid with taxpayer money AND before they get paid, thier union dues are taken out of thier checks involuntarily because they are forced currently to be in the union.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I believe what he is saying is that the teachers are paid with taxpayer money AND before they get paid, their union dues are taken out of their checks involuntarily because they are forced currently to be in the union.

But that's not true. The employee's pay is determined - and the union dues are taken out of the employees gross pay (just like taxes) before the paycheck is handed to them. No work, no pay, no union dues.

Nobody is making the claim that an employees federal and state tax withholdings are "my taxpayer's money". They can't. That's absurd.

Employees are not forced into anything. They are free to take a teaching job where they don't have to be in a union. That's known up front, before the employee signs their hiring contract.

Look: Wiphan appears not to like (and he can correct me if it's wrong) that unions donate to Democratic candidates. But the argument "that is my taxpayer's money!" is completely and obviously false. It's the employee's money.

The Koch brothers don't like that either - hence the concerted, across the country word was handed out at the Republican Governors Association meeting to bust the unions. And meanwhile, back in Congress, we have Republican congressmen trying to loosen rules governing workplace safety, trying to lowering the minimum wage, etc. Look like unions shouldn't go anywhere soon. Unions don't get a hold in places where workers feel fairly treated by their employers.