What are the reasons for......Wisconsin’s public-employee union's emotional disorder?

Police try to talk a protester safely off the ledge of the Capitol building in Madison, Wis., on Monday. Protesters are vowing to remain as long as necessary to express their opposition to Gov. Scott Walker's plan to end most collective bargaining rights and demonstrate against his budget.


The reasons are......

Abracadabra wrote:

What are the reasons for......Wisconsin’s public-employee union's emotional disorder?

Police try to talk a protester safely off the ledge of the Capitol building in Madison, Wis., on Monday. Protesters are vowing to remain as long as necessary to express their opposition to Gov. Scott Walker's plan to end most collective bargaining rights and demonstrate against his budget.


The reasons are......

A little confused about the nature of the fight between the public sector unions and Wisconsin Republicans?

After all, the unions are just upset about having to pay for some of their benefits, right?....Wrong. …

…the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the largest teachers union in the state, has grossly abused [collective bargaining] for decades, resulting in the unnecessary siphoning of millions of dollars from Wisconsin public schools. Under current Wisconsin law, the [choice] of the insurance company that provides health coverage to school employees is a matter of collective bargaining in each school district.

It has nothing to do with the kids. The union bosses want to steal more of your money with a crooked and rigged insurance scam........@......

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2011/02/27/wisconsins-largest-teachers-union-is-an-extremely-profitable-insurance-business-that-happens-to-provide-services-to-children-on-the-side/

Please don't take offense at this........but coming from the land that hates unions more than the Devil himself, I don't think the people down here grasp what unions do. Oh sure, you always here of all the corruption, but that is rare. Look what unions did for the coal miners. And how many people were killed trying to organize themselves by the company bigwigs who hired hitmen to quell the talk. I'm sorry, but this right to work garbage just doesn't work for me. If I am not of the same faith as my boss, he can fire me. No questions asked. Of course it will be written up that I did or did not do something because it is illegal to fire anyone for religious beliefs. With a union, there would be a hearing and if I did or did not do something, I would be let go. If it was really because of my religious beliefs, I would have my job back. Here is a little something a friend sent me


The struggle of workers in Wisconsin and other states is essential to protect true democracy. Before unions, workers could be fired and blacklisted for any number of excuses, including complaining about unhealthy and unsafe working conditions. In mining communities, they often actually were forced into serious debt by corporations through low wages and being forced to buy essentials in company stores. Frankly, there is little to distinguish the fight by workers in Wisconsin from the fight by workers and people in Libya. For example, I note that many of the oil companies in that country are based in North America (e.g.: Suncor energy). Workers MUST be reasonable in demands, but we MUST NOT surrender all our rights to fight collectively for safe and healthy working conditions and fair wages and benefits for our work.

jetfan27 wrote:

Workers MUST be reasonable in demands, but we MUST NOT surrender all our rights to fight collectively for safe and healthy working conditions and fair wages and benefits for our work.

I agree with the above but that is not what has & is happening.....

Look at the history of every entity where public employees have unionized, and you will find that not only are government workers paid more, but there are also a lot more of them doing a lot less useful work.

Collective bargaining in the public sector causes a dichotomy....
One....collective bargaining in the public sector is a self-perpetuating process – one that is rigged to continue funneling benefits to workers regardless of whether those benefits are deserved (or whether the work being performed by these employees is even necessary).
Two....the structure of collective bargaining in the public sector is fundamentally out-of-balance – which invariably results in unions being represented on both sides of the negotiating table. Not only are union demands voiced by their immediate representatives, they are echoed by numerous bought and paid for politicians (who are supposed to be negotiating on behalf of the taxpayers). Even politicians who are not in the pocket of unions are subject to the political pressure this uniquely powerful special interest can apply.

Obviously the money extracted during this perverse “bargaining” process must come from somewhere – a reality that even supporters of big government are beginning to acknowledge. An example....
“Collective bargaining in the public sector serves to reduce benefits for citizens and to raise costs for taxpayers,” writes David C. Crane, a Democrat who serves on the California Board of Regents.

This governor is nothing but a union buster. The workers and the unions all agreed to pay cuts and to pay more out of pocket for health insurance and he poo- pooed it. He wants that collective bargaining off the table and if he gets it, that will be the end of unions. Why doesn't the governor and his cronies take a pay cut. That would help get the budget balanced, a little, anyway. If nothing else, it would show a sign of good faith. I am not a gung ho union person, but since this guy started all this crap, I have been on the band wagon and I totally support and defend these unions.

jetfan27 wrote:

This governor is nothing but a union buster. The workers and the unions all agreed to pay cuts and to pay more out of pocket for health insurance and he poo- pooed it. He wants that collective bargaining off the table and if he gets it, that will be the end of unions. Why doesn't the governor and his cronies take a pay cut. That would help get the budget balanced, a little, anyway. If nothing else, it would show a sign of good faith. I am not a gung ho union person, but since this guy started all this crap, I have been on the band wagon and I totally support and defend these unions.

For Immediate Release
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Union Bosses Say One Thing, Do Another




Madison– For several days, government union bosses have said that government workers would be willing to contribute to their pensions and pay a slightly larger portion of their healthcare premiums. At the same time, local bargaining units have been negotiating for and signing contracts that do not accept the modest contributions proposed by Governor Walker.

In Janesville, government workers are proposing a contract that includes 2 percent pay increases this year and for the next two years. The government would pay all of the workers’ pension contributions and workers would only pay 8 percent toward their health insurance premiums.

In La Crosse County, government workers have agreed to a one-year contract with health and dental premiums at the same level as 2010. The agreement has the county covering the full pension payment of most government workers.

Government workers with the Milwaukee Area Technical College agreed to a new contract where the workers contribute nothing toward their pension. The College’s attorney said the agreement means MATC would leave $7.1 million on the table.

In Madison, government workers have proposed a contract that would allow them to continue to receive their current pension and health benefits for the next two years. Many government workers would receive a 3-percent pay raise.

In Racine, government workers have agreed to a contract that includes pay raises.

In Sheboygan, government workers agreed to a contract where nurses pay nothing toward their pensions.

http://www.wisgov.state.wi.us/journal_media_detail.asp?prid=5642&locid=177

For the union leaders the consequences of passage of the Wisconsin legislation could be devastating to their sinecures. Amid all the shouting, placards and banging on pots and pans in the capitol, two elements of the bill have received only passing attention. One would stop state collection of union dues. The other would require the unions to be recertified, by vote of all members, every year.

Currently, the State of Wisconsin automatically deducts union dues from public employee paychecks and it goes to the unions. The unions then use as much of the money as the leaders wish to give to candidates who will look favorably on their demands (almost always Democrats). Thus, the taxpayers are subsidizing partisan election donations.

The legislation would require each public employee union to hold an annual election to see if a majority of the members want to continue to be represented by it. If they do, it continues; if not, it's pffft to the union leaders and their comfy incomes.

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/03/09/what-the-unions-fear

The modern American union gives the left a cut of every unionized business. It forces the employees and indirectly the owners, to put money into the political party coffers, vote for their causes and donate to their candidates. The union is sacrosanct to the left because it shifts power from the owners to them. If unions actually shifted power over to the workers, the left wouldn’t bother with them. Unions that did that would be their worst nightmare. The Democratic party values unions as organizing machines, not out of any romantic notion of workers’ rights but because they refuse to give up power.
Wisconsin gave us a showdown between a state facing a cash crunch and a public sector union. It was not a battle of power.