Wisconsin State Employee Unions take money out of Wisconsin's economy
By ParaTed2k
@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
February 18, 2011 7:38am CST
Wisconsin state employee unions do all they can to get increases in taxes and special referendums passed here. It's to the point that Wisconsin State workers don't even have to pay into their own pensions (which often end up being 100% or more of their working pay).
Then, when the workers retire, they help the retirees relocate to states with lower taxes and better retirement environments, to help them stretch their pensions even further.
In other words, the retirees don't even have to live under the tax burden they inflict on the rest of us!
1 person likes this
4 responses
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
18 Feb 11
If you ask me, the taxpayers of Wisconsin ought to start protesting in the streets. They pay for the teachers, but the teachers go out to protest and schools are closed. The schools the taxpayers pay for. They pay the salaries of state legislators but they run off and leave the state to avoid doing their job, holing up at a resort in Illinois. All the while, they are collecting the salary the taxpayers are funding. Forget the unions, it's the regular taxpaying citizens of Wisconsin that out to take to the streets and demand change. And they should remember in 2012 which side of this debate Obama supported.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
18 Feb 11
Counter demonstrations have started all over the state.. including at the Capital where the state employee demonstration is.
Yesterday a Conservative holding up a sign that simply said, "I support Gov. Walker" was slapped by a teacher, as the teacher told her kids, "This is the kind of person who will cause mommy to lose her job".. which is a patent lie, since there is no provision to fire teachers in this bill.
@dragon54u (31634)
• United States
18 Feb 11
You expressed it so much better than I could! The taxpayers should be outraged!!
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
18 Feb 11
Just a question as I could find the answer is this Bill some how negating a contract that the State entered into? As the Unions seem to be outraged about there right to a Collective Bargaining Agreement which they have a right to under United States law. As far as Unions go with states varying if they are Closed Shops or not. I know my state isn't a Closed shop state but is in the middle as some of the places here are closed shop.
If this is a move by the state to get rid of an agreement that they entered into then I have to say I am with the Union that is illegal. The State signed the Contract and well they got to make good on it until they get to renegotiate for a new contract in which case the State could make this sort of stand on the benefits side of things.
As right now what is getting done in Wisconsin I mean the schools are closed right? So basically the State Employee Union (I searched for what the Union Name was but seems no news site names them. unless it is Wisconsin Union) has done a walk out which is completely in their rights to do. Now personally I think they need to realize that the state is trying to avoid firing teachers and just go okay we will eat this this time but when the economy gets better try to regain the benefits that they lost. I mean really State Unions seem to need to start to act like their Private Sector Union Counterparts.
I am all for Employees having the Power to Unionize and I am also for Employees having the right to not join the union and still work in a Union Shop. I mean in most cases however Union Shops even if they are Open get a ton of members because people feel protected when they have Union backing. So mostly as I have experienced it employees of a place should have the right to Unionize if they so choose or not it should depend on them and how they feel about the employer respecting them as a whole or whatever seems to be the issue. Unions like everything else have pluses and minuses to them.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
18 Feb 11
Budgets in Wisconsin are for two years. The current contracts would have to be honored for current employees until the next budget cycle.
@edb225112 (124)
• United States
18 Feb 11
What you are talking about is "right to work." At this point, few states have 'Right to work' legislation. So most shops are 'closed' shops. If you don't join the union, you can not work at that location. I have no problem with people joining a union, I do have a problem with being forced to join one. This really has nothing to do with sensible solutions to financil issues but has to do with power and who has it.
Right now, the most union membership is in the public sector not in private industry. From my own experience, people who start working at a union shop and don't have to join the union, don't. Hence the reason union membership is down in the private sector.
Unions began as part of the Workers of the World movement in the 1920s. If you want to understand just what that movement was about, a little historical research would give you pause.
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
18 Feb 11
Well I know mine does as we have posters at work telling us that we don't have to be members of the Union to work there also when we where hired we where given the choice to join the Union or not. From my own experience which is so far only one union job everyone who has been hired elected for being a member of the Union. Which is the Teamsters.
As for the History of the Movement I know quite a bit about it. The Mafia was in on parts of it and a lot of dirt was done in the early days of Labor Unions where Shop Stewards where more like gangsters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_States
from the link above found out why most people I know who work at Union shops are in unions I live in Oregon.
@Para so the state isn't trying to back out of the current contract just state that they won't cover as much of the benefits as they once did. Sounds pretty good to me not to mention they can still bargain for Higher pay. Sounds good they could just go okay we will take that if you give us this higher wages.
@Adoniah (7512)
• United States
18 Feb 11
I think we are on the verge of a new kind of civil war....
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
20 Feb 11
True, but on Saturday, 10s of thousands of Americans proved that you can have a massive, emotionally charged protest, without any rioting or arrests.
@Adoniah (7512)
• United States
21 Feb 11
Saturday was OK, but there were other incidents where they were not so well behaved. One woman slapped someone and told her child that this person was costing her her job, which of course is not the case. She is just not getting the extra bennys that she wants.
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
18 Feb 11
Yay... Greece getting here sooner than expected.
On one hand, I realize why some would be upset.
But that's kinda weak.
This is the time when everyone is expected to make sacrifices, I thought.
So it should work like this: Taxpayers, pay more, accept a heavier burden, accept potential financial ruin in the future, so that public union workers won't have to pay in any of their salary for insurance and pensions. Public union workers, just keep doing what you do.
Brilliant.
I've seen video of these protests. We're supposed to fear the Tea Party but side with these guys?
No offense to public workers who are ticked off that they might have to actually pay for something, but who do you expect to do it for you?
You mean to tell me that teachers couldn't figure this sht out?
Brilliant.
I've seen video of these protests. We're supposed to fear the Tea Party but side with these guys?
No offense to public workers who are ticked off that they might have to actually pay for something, but who do you expect to do it for you?
You mean to tell me that teachers couldn't figure this sht out?
