|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: 4896744]
#14122927 - 03/14/11 11:47 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I would agree, except this doesn't work when the unions are negotiating with the government. Perfect example is the Wisconsin teachers. They were averaging 50k+ a year. They also had extremely good benefits. These wants would never be met in the private sector because it is completely unfeasible to run it efficiently with this much labor cost.
They employ the employers in a sense. They have lots of voting power and the politicians often rely on them for re-election.
The starting salary averaged at $25,222 with inflation a starting teacher will retire making less in real dollars then they started, ie less then $25,222. Thats pretty shitty. More over the average salary of $46,000 per year plus the state's share of the benefits is not unreasonable. To get a teaching degree in WI generally means 5+ years in college. Plus the average teacher has a masters degree above that. And that average salary is also for a teacher that has worked for at least a decade.
I attended public schools in Wisconsin, the teachers put in significant amount of time outside of class, and quite frankly were motivated and engaging. They were paid slightly above the national average, coming in 20th out of 50 states.
As for teachers "voting in" the people they negotiate with I think that is largely untrue. First, teachers are a relatively small percentage of the population and their political might isn't as great as is commonly perceived. Second, they did not all vote in lock step with how the union would have liked them too, just as any reasonable person doesn't vote because of one issue. Moreover they negotiate with school boards that have far less discretion over teacher salary in Wisconsin, then the state and federal governments do. As such there are substantial checks and balances in place to prevent conflicts of interest.
-------------------- The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. ~H. L. Mencken~
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
#14124270 - 03/15/11 09:27 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
The Teachers' union in NYC is extremely politically powerful and it wasn't just teacher union in WI. Your other assessments about making less due to inflation are complete crap as well.
--------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
#14124652 - 03/15/11 11:21 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Smackshadow said: Back on topic, the WI law will lower the per student funding from the state. This gives local school boards less money with which to pay teachers amongst other things.
As spending is not related to results, this is a very good thing.
Quote:
Further, it prevents collective bargaining, so instead of negotiating only one contract the school boards will need to negotiate many contracts, and inherently inefficient process.
It will help eliminate ineffective asswipes from the classroom. Only those who deserve a raise should ever get one.
Quote:
It will prevent employers from deducting union fees from pay checks. This will decrease the unions ability to collect fees, and put the an additional administrative cost on the union.
The costs should fall on the union. Why should those not in a union, have to help support them?
Quote:
It caps raises at 1% Since inflation is more then 1% it means that government employees will be paid less in real dollars when they retire then when they start.
Please link to this claim of 1% raises, as everything else I have read tosses around the phrase "rate of inflation". Also, people almost always make less when the retire than when they work
Quote:
It will increase government employee's contribution for their retirement and health care plans significantly.
Boo fucking hoo. They still pay much less than the average private sector worker.
Quote:
Teachers have generally been prevented from striking through either law or contractual obligation so if they strike they risk being fired "for cause".
Another very good thing. They should be fired if they strike.
Quote:
At the end of the day it will do three things. 1) Make it more difficult for unions to organize, 2) Decrease unions ability to give value to their members by creating barriers in negotiating, 3) Cut salary and benefits from government employees automatically.
All very good things for the taxpaying majority.
Quote:
My mother who works as a secretary in a public school (for little more then minimum wage and benefits) stands to lose more then a $100,000 dollars in benefits, salary, and retirement over the next seven years because of this policy.
Wahhh!
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Freedom
Pigment of your imagination



Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
#14124801 - 03/15/11 01:02 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I still don't see any any explanation of exactly what it means to end collective bargaining.
Don't you all see that what the law is exactly doing is more important than your opinion of unions?
For example if the law makes it illegal for more than one person to negotiate with the government, then this would appear to impinge on free assembly and free speech rights. Say I want to work with my friend Joe, and we both tell the employer "You either get both of us or neither of us.", how could you possibly justify making that speech illegal?
On the other hand if the law simply prevents government managers/supervisors from negotiating with Joe and me, then Joe and I can say all we like and that is still legal.
For me, my own personal opinion of unions has little to do with my evaluation of the law, what is more important is the exact nature of the law and whether it can be legally/philosophically justified.
It seems the argument should be less "Unions are a cancer vs. Unions are a boon" and more, "The government has the right to refuse to negotiate with groups vs. the government doesn't have the right to negotiate with groups".
|
johnm214


Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
#14124822 - 03/15/11 01:06 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ChuangTzu said: I don't disagree with that assessment, but that's not at all what you said...
What I meant was led in the sense of advocating and carrying out the various revolutionary causes. The young folks are the ones that make it happen, even if the old leaders are the head of the movement (though sometimes not until later, such as in the February Revolution, which lennin somewhat co opted.)
Quote:
I wonder if the political base of perhaps all revolutionary change is mostly effected by young people, regardless of whether there were atrocities involved, since it seems like young people are the least invested in the current system, are less likely to have connections within the current system, and/or the fact that most people in most countries tend to be young (or have tended to be in the past).
Possibly. It would make sense, then, that the youtthful movements would be more likely to be dramatically different or extreme than the older movements for the same reasons they predominate.
Do you think the youth who supported the Khmer Rouge really knew that much about communism, socialism, and the ways its been attempted? Did they have a reasoned opinion that things needed to change: the cities all but evacuated and the skilled workers killed or made to work in professions they were incompotent at (farming), leading to widespread famine?
All these movements seem to be ran and justified by hatred and dehumanizing a particular class: often the old order. I see the same thing in the justification for the war on drugs, especially in the way people continue to support it once their offered reasons are carefully and completely dismantled: its a bit hard to identify yourself as hating a class of society (druggies- doesn't matter if the class you imagine is coherent with that you are persecuting, of if it really exists: i.e. drugged out people with no morals who are different than the good people and rob to feed their habits, destroying society)
|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#14124879 - 03/15/11 01:19 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Teachers' union in NYC is extremely politically powerful and it wasn't just teacher union in WI. Your other assessments about making less due to inflation are complete crap as well.
We are not talking about unions in NYC, but about ones in WI. Teachers compose one of the largest public service union in WI that is going to be affected by this law. Contrary to your opinion, if raises are capped at either 1% or inflation, then they will not by necessity always compensate for inflation. As a result people who start working will end up making less in real dollars then what they started making.
Quote:
As spending is not related to results, this is a very good thing.
Slashing teacher's salaries does affect quality. Fewer qualified people will be willing to become teachers, teachers with experience and knowledge will quit, and considering only a percentage of those funds go to teachers the other materials that money is being spent on will also be cut to the determent of the students.
Quote:
It will help eliminate ineffective asswipes from the classroom. Only those who deserve a raise should ever get one.
Actually, no one will get a raise in the traditional sense, at most get a standard of living adjustment. I have never met an ineffective asswipe teacher, they probably exist, however I have met plenty ineffective asswipes in private practice and they get raises.
Quote:
Please link to this claim of 1% raises, as everything else I have read tosses around the phrase "rate of inflation". Also, people almost always make less when the retire than when they work
This might be a legitimate point because I can't find the link anymore, and I might have got confused the maximum raise being inflation and the average raise expected this year being 1% If thats the case my bad.
Quote:
Boo fucking hoo. They still pay much less than the average private sector worker.
Of course they pay less in health care then their private sector counter parts, because for 30 years they have negotiated for good health care at the expense of salary and other benefits.
Quote:
Wahhh
Hey if you want to try to strip cash out of my lower middle class family fine, but no one is going to put up with that kind of inequity for long. Besides the real cry babies here are the greedy assholes that believe that, even though tax rates are at the lowest they have been in decades, they still don't want to pay, so instead balance the books on the backs of working class Americans.
-------------------- The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. ~H. L. Mencken~
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
#14125184 - 03/15/11 02:21 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Smackshadow said:
Quote:
The Teachers' union in NYC is extremely politically powerful and it wasn't just teacher union in WI. Your other assessments about making less due to inflation are complete crap as well.
We are not talking about unions in NYC, but about ones in WI. Teachers compose one of the largest public service union in WI that is going to be affected by this law. Contrary to your opinion, if raises are capped at either 1% or inflation, then they will not by necessity always compensate for inflation. As a result people who start working will end up making less in real dollars then what they started making.
They get raises just for putting in years. Stop with the bullshit.Quote:
Quote:
As spending is not related to results, this is a very good thing.
Slashing teacher's salaries does affect quality. Fewer qualified people will be willing to become teachers, teachers with experience and knowledge will quit, and considering only a percentage of those funds go to teachers the other materials that money is being spent on will also be cut to the determent of the students.
Nobody is slashing anything, in spite of the hyperventilating nitwits assertions. By far the greatest expense in education is salaries. Why do you think if money is cut for salaries that will cut other moneys? Seems to me the opposite would occur. And the ugly fact is that teacher salaries rose a great deal in the last thirty years and there has been ZERO improvement in student achievement. What did we get for paying teachers more money? Not a motherfucking thing. Quote:
Quote:
It will help eliminate ineffective asswipes from the classroom. Only those who deserve a raise should ever get one.
Actually, no one will get a raise in the traditional sense, at most get a standard of living adjustment. I have never met an ineffective asswipe teacher, they probably exist, however I have met plenty ineffective asswipes in private practice and they get raises.
I've met lots of ineffective asswipe teachers. Ever heard of "rubber rooms"? And no, they still get years of service raises.Quote:
Quote:
Please link to this claim of 1% raises, as everything else I have read tosses around the phrase "rate of inflation". Also, people almost always make less when the retire than when they work
This might be a legitimate point because I can't find the link anymore, and I might have got confused the maximum raise being inflation and the average raise expected this year being 1% If thats the case my bad.
Quote:
Boo fucking hoo. They still pay much less than the average private sector worker.
Of course they pay less in health care then their private sector counter parts, because for 30 years they have negotiated for good health care at the expense of salary and other benefits.
Unfortunately it has not been "at the expense of" anything. They got both.Quote:
Quote:
Wahhh
Hey if you want to try to strip cash out of my lower middle class family fine, but no one is going to put up with that kind of inequity for long. Besides the real cry babies here are the greedy assholes that believe that, even though tax rates are at the lowest they have been in decades, they still don't want to pay, so instead balance the books on the backs of working class Americans.
The inequity is that your "lower middle class family" doesn't pay fuck all for anything. The bottom 50% of the population pays almost nothing in income taxes and you are all a bunch of freeloaders on the backs of the competent and successful. We have vastly different definitions of greed. Wanting to keep the money you make is far less a sign of greed than wanting to take the money somebody else made. You want more? Work harder, better, faster, smarter. Otherwise, get off my tit.
--------------------
|
HippieChick8
seeker of justice



Registered: 06/25/09
Posts: 869
Loc: Texas
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
#14125459 - 03/15/11 03:16 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
zappaisgod said:Quote:
And the ugly fact is that teacher salaries rose a great deal in the last thirty years and there has been ZERO improvement in student achievement.
I thought you were a huge proponent of personal responsibility. Why isn't it the student's fault they didn't learn or the parent's? I've had some not so inspiring teachers, but I learned anyway by reading the book or doing further research on my own at the library. I've also had some great teachers. Ultimately it's up to the student to learn. You can't force an unwilling student to learn.
|
HippieChick8
seeker of justice



Registered: 06/25/09
Posts: 869
Loc: Texas
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
#14125472 - 03/15/11 03:19 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: You want more? Work harder, better, faster, smarter. Otherwise, get off my tit.
No, I don't want or need more. But thanks for the free advice and entertainment. I like free stuff.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: HippieChick8]
#14125504 - 03/15/11 03:25 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
HippieChick8 said: zappaisgod said:Quote:
And the ugly fact is that teacher salaries rose a great deal in the last thirty years and there has been ZERO improvement in student achievement.
I thought you were a huge proponent of personal responsibility.
And accountability. We're paying them to do a job. We have increased their pay for a few decades now and were promised better performance for our extra money. We aint getting it. Might as well knock their pay back because they are getting effs.Quote:
Why isn't it the student's fault they didn't learn or the parent's?
OK. Let's fire them all. Do you realize you have JUST MADE MY POINT that there is no reason to pay teachers more money and every reason to pay them shit?Quote:
I've had some not so inspiring teachers, but I learned anyway by reading the book or doing further research on my own at the library. I've also had some great teachers.
Frankly I never gave a shit about them either.Quote:
Ultimately it's up to the student to learn. You can't force an unwilling student to learn.
No but you can try to minimize the number of unwilling students. Regardless, as you say, the quality of teachers is essentially irrelevant. Might as well get cheap ones, right?
--------------------
|
HippieChick8
seeker of justice



Registered: 06/25/09
Posts: 869
Loc: Texas
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
#14125590 - 03/15/11 03:45 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
zappaisgod said:Quote:
OK. Let's fire them all. Do you realize you have JUST MADE MY POINT that there is no reason to pay teachers more money and every reason to pay them shit?
Teachers are still needed to monitor and discipline the children with behavior problems while trying to inspire the whole class to learn. It's not an easy job. In my school district, they're not allowed to suspend or remove unruly kids from the classroom unless they are physically violent, and I hear it's a problem nationwide as well. Why not cut administrator's salaries?
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: HippieChick8]
#14125599 - 03/15/11 03:47 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
HippieChick8 said: zappaisgod said:Quote:
OK. Let's fire them all. Do you realize you have JUST MADE MY POINT that there is no reason to pay teachers more money and every reason to pay them shit?
Teachers are still needed to monitor and discipline the children with behavior problems while trying to inspire the whole class to learn. It's not an easy job. In my school district, they're not allowed to suspend or remove unruly kids from the classroom unless they are physically violent, and I hear it's a problem nationwide as well. Why not cut administrator's salaries?
Fuck yeah, I'm with you on that one.
--------------------
|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: HippieChick8]
#14128175 - 03/15/11 11:25 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
HippieChick8 said: I thought you were a huge proponent of personal responsibility. Why isn't it the student's fault they didn't learn or the parent's?
|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
#14128209 - 03/15/11 11:32 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
We have vastly different definitions of greed. Wanting to keep the money you make is far less a sign of greed than wanting to take the money somebody else made. You want more? Work harder, better, faster, smarter.
Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it. The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money.
Actually I want the same, and I want work the same, and I don't think that is unfair.
-------------------- The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. ~H. L. Mencken~
|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
#14128359 - 03/16/11 12:02 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Smackshadow said: Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it. The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money.
Yes it is. Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.
|
ScavengerType


Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
#14128826 - 03/16/11 02:03 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Freedom said: So I've read the news and listened to the news on the radio and heard interviews with people for and against the law but not once have I heard or read exactly what this is all about.
If collective bargaining is simply a group of people working together to negotiate, how can that be made illegal? In other words, how can you make it a crime for people to coordinate themselves to work together to do something which would be legal if they each did it as individuals?
This seems to me to be a completely un-American approach, so it made me think that the law must be more nuanced. Perhaps it forbids the government departments from negotiating with groups, only individuals? Or perhaps it forbids those departments from negotiating at all, just setting pay and benefits and that's the end of it?
Well some different states pushing anti-union legislation have different approaches but there are some that are doing just that removing the employees ability to negotiate compensation and working conditions in a collective manor. As I am not american I can't really say that I think that this is anti-american. It's definitely fascist and corrupt, but I don't see any inconsistencies between this and the image that I see of american business/government.
Were you wondering about some specific anti-union legislation that was being pushed at the moment? -------------
Quote:
iThink said: The biggest flaw here is that these are public unions. Instead of two private entities with the same goal (profit for themselves), it is the teachers fighting for profit, and yet they elect those who they bargain with. Also, the politicians have no immediate financial/personal risk by making poor/horrible business decisions, so they don't hesitate to do what "looks" best or increases their chances of re-election.
This is a ridiculous notion, like all the teachers are voting the nations politicians in and out to get a raise, are you realy making these claims in all seriousness? In reality it is the wealthy private sector who is tipping the scales in elections to secure their pay raises (tax cuts).
Quote:
ChuangTzu said:
Quote:
Smackshadow said: Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it. The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money.
Yes it is. Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.
The same could be said for the private sector.
-------------------- "Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?" "The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything." - Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now. Conquer's Club
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist




Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,660
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 7 hours, 44 minutes
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
#14128993 - 03/16/11 03:04 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Why don't we just fire all the teachers and let computers do it?
-------------------- This space for rent
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
#14129100 - 03/16/11 04:11 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
> Why don't we just fire all the teachers and let computers do it?
Better yet, why don't we stop using tax money to pay for education and let people dumb enough to have kids pay for their kids education.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
#14129770 - 03/16/11 09:42 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Smackshadow said:
Quote:
We have vastly different definitions of greed. Wanting to keep the money you make is far less a sign of greed than wanting to take the money somebody else made. You want more? Work harder, better, faster, smarter.
Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it. The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money.
Yes it is. It came from somebody else's pocket at the point of a gun. THE STATE DOESN'T PAY ANYBODY ANYTHING! It moves other people's money around.Quote:
Actually I want the same, and I want work the same, and I don't think that is unfair.
Fair is for grade school. Maybe you are already overpaid. Maybe somebody unemployed would be willing to do your job for less. Where is his "fairness"?
--------------------
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
#14129776 - 03/16/11 09:44 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ScavengerType said:
Quote:
Yes it is. Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.
The same could be said for the private sector.
I dont think so. Tax money is collected at the point of a gun, under the threat of prison or death. That is very much 'taking'. The private sector generally collects income voluntarily, one chooses to give them money or not for particular goods or services.
|
|