Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker

[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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

Union dues are not taxes. They are taken out of their paychecks, they are involuntary. Saying that they can teach somewhere else is laughable. Techers teach where they can get a job. And since the vast majority of jobs are public school aka union jobs that is where they work. Unions dont want teachers or any other members the right to opt out or not be in the union.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Union dues are not taxes. They are taken out of their paychecks, they are involuntary. Saying that they can teach somewhere else is laughable. Techers teach where they can get a job. And since the vast majority of jobs are public school aka union jobs that is where they work. Unions dont want teachers or any other members the right to opt out or not be in the union.

Teacher works.
Teacher earns money.
Teacher gets paycheck.
That money belongs to the teacher.

Union dues come out of that paycheck.

Taxpayers thinking they have a right to say what union dues money is spent upon is ... beyond absurd. They have zero claim to that. Just like they have zero claim on the employee choosing to send $1 of their tax money to a wildlife fund.

Teachers are free agents. They have every right not to take a job where they have to join a teachers union. Private schools pay about 5% more in pay and benefits than Wisconsin public schools.

Trying to make the argument that union-busting is for the benefit of the employees is touching, but completely unbelievable

Although it is nice to see, now that the union has agreed to all Walkers demands regarding pension contribution, pay cut, etc., yet Walker is going forward with his main concern, being busting the unions (as verified by his unbelievable silliness in sharing his plan for threatening workers with the imaginary "David Koch") - that it's crystal clear the whole point of this has less to do with budget deficits (like maybe caused by Walker giving $140 million in unfunded tax credits to business, oh wow, that's a huge deficit hole that could be filled by ... teacher pensions and pay cuts! But the damn unions are standing in the way ... hummmmm) and everything to do with typical Republican demagogary.

[Riot]

This gets better and better every hour. God, I love politics

I thought the highlight was Walkers tape today, revealing how he planned to trick Democrats under the false ruse of them coming back and "talking to them", so the Republicans could vote for the legislation withhout the Dems.

Or how he's trying to find out if he can charge the Dems with a felony regarding who could be paying for their hotel rooms (as he withholds their paychecks to be picked up personally in Wisconsin to try and get them back to the state) but wait, there's more fun here!

Gov. Walker tried to ram this bill through quickly, with little exam of the 144-page bill, little debate and scrutiny. Now we have a third reason why:

1. Hidden union-busting provisions
2. Hidden proviso allowing state government to sell off their state-owned electrical utilities to any chosen private company with no competitive bidding (like Koch brothers electric)

And number three hidden in the bill (reported today courtesy Amanda Turkel):

3. "The bill would grant the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS) sweeping authority to making changes to the state's Medicaid program -- which covers one in five residents -- with virtually no public scrutiny. According to an analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau, Walker's plan would use "emergency" powers to allow DHS to restrict eligibility, raise premiums and change reimbursements -- all moves traditionally controlled by the legislature."

Walker is all about the power of doing it all himself, isn't he? He doesn't need any steenkin' legislature to enact laws!

Thank you, Wisconsin voters - Sarah Palin may be gone, but now we have this guy for our entertainment pleasure :-)

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Teacher works.
Teacher earns money.
Teacher gets paycheck.
That money belongs to the teacher.

Union dues come out of that paycheck.

Taxpayers thinking they have a right to say what union dues money is spent upon is ... beyond absurd. They have zero claim to that. Just like they have zero claim on the employee choosing to send $1 of their tax money to a wildlife fund.

Teachers are free agents. They have every right not to take a job where they have to join a teachers union. Private schools pay about 5% more in pay and benefits than Wisconsin public schools.

Trying to make the argument that union-busting is for the benefit of the employees is touching, but completely unbelievable

Although it is nice to see, now that the union has agreed to all Walkers demands regarding pension contribution, pay cut, etc., yet Walker is going forward with his main concern, being busting the unions (as verified by his unbelievable silliness in sharing his plan for threatening workers with the imaginary "David Koch") - that it's crystal clear the whole point of this has less to do with budget deficits (like maybe caused by Walker giving $140 million in unfunded tax credits to business, oh wow, that's a huge deficit hole that could be filled by ... teacher pensions and pay cuts! But the damn unions are standing in the way ... hummmmm) and everything to do with typical Republican demagogary.

Can you outline to me the demands that the teachers union has agreed to and please give me specifics?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Can you outline to me the demands that the teachers union has agreed to and please give me specifics?

Just read any detailed news reports, or view any video of the union leaders, from the past week not labeled "Fox". I'm sure you'd rather do your own investigative digging on this story, so you have the true facts, and not rely upon my interpretation relaying it to you :-)

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Just read any detailed news reports, or view any video of the union leaders, from the past week not labeled "Fox". I'm sure you'd rather do your own investigative digging on this story, so you have the true facts, and not rely upon my interpretation relaying it to you :-)

No I want to know from you specifically what demands of Scott Walker have the teachers union specifically agreed to? You seem to know so much about the topic and have so much information I want to know from you since you stated that the teachers union have agreed to his demands other than collective bargaining. What have they agreed to?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

No I want to know from you specifically what demands of Scott Walker have the teachers union specifically agreed to? You seem to know so much about the topic and have so much information I want to know from you since you stated that the teachers union have agreed to his demands other than collective bargaining. What have they agreed to?

Oh, then go read your own post back at the start of this thread, where you outlined them

[SOREHOOF]

Originally Posted by Riot

Teacher works.
Teacher earns money.
Teacher gets paycheck.
That money belongs to the teacher.

Union dues come out of that paycheck.

Taxpayers thinking they have a right to say what union dues money is spent upon is ... beyond absurd. They have zero claim to that. Just like they have zero claim on the employee choosing to send $1 of their tax money to a wildlife fund.

Teachers are free agents. They have every right not to take a job where they have to join a teachers union. Private schools pay about 5% more in pay and benefits than Wisconsin public schools.

Trying to make the argument that union-busting is for the benefit of the employees is touching, but completely unbelievable

Although it is nice to see, now that the union has agreed to all Walkers demands regarding pension contribution, pay cut, etc., yet Walker is going forward with his main concern, being busting the unions (as verified by his unbelievable silliness in sharing his plan for threatening workers with the imaginary "David Koch") - that it's crystal clear the whole point of this has less to do with budget deficits (like maybe caused by Walker giving $140 million in unfunded tax credits to business, oh wow, that's a huge deficit hole that could be filled by ... teacher pensions and pay cuts! But the damn unions are standing in the way ... hummmmm) and everything to do with typical Republican demagogary.

Is it absurd to think that the taxpayers should have some say in how much the teachers are paid in the first place? You mention the public teachers make 5% less than what private schools teachers make. Does that include benefits? That is what this is about. Are the public teachers not free to get a job at a private school?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

Is it absurd to think that the taxpayers should have some say in how much the teachers are paid in the first place?

You do. You always have. It's called collective bargaining.

You mention the public teachers make 5% less than what private schools teachers make. Does that include benefits?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...and_local.html

Consider this analysis the Economic Policy Institute conducted comparing total compensation -- that is to say, wages and health-care benefits and pensions -- among public and private workers in Wisconsin. To get an apples-to-apples comparison, the study's author controlled for experience, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship and disability, and then sorted the results by education. Here's what he got:



If you prefer it in non-graph form: "Wisconsin public-sector workers face an annual compensation penalty of 11%. Adjusting for the slightly fewer hours worked per week on average, these public workers still face a compensation penalty of 5% for choosing to work in the public sector."

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Union dues are not taxes. They are taken out of their paychecks, they are involuntary. Saying that they can teach somewhere else is laughable. Techers teach where they can get a job. And since the vast majority of jobs are public school aka union jobs that is where they work. Unions dont want teachers or any other members the right to opt out or not be in the union.

Taxes are also involuntary...