Some of the crazy statements going around about collective bargaining reform in Ohio:
They want to take away our healthcare and retirement.
This one is laughable. Perhaps union members might end up paying the same percentage of their health insurance and retirements as we in the private sector do. Oh the horror! But completely take away your health insurance, or retirement? Please.
It's an outright assault on the middle class of Ohio and puts Ohio behind. It will hurt our children and communities!
The fact is, communities are being hurt by the laws that currently give power to the public unions. Poor teachers can't be fired. Good teachers that are younger get laid off when there have to be cuts, because they don't have seniority. School districts are forced to reduce the numbers of teachers, instead of giving everyone a small cut when they don't have the revenues. Reducing teachers and not judging them by merit...THAT'S what hurts our children.
Foisting compensation packages on local governments that can't afford them...THAT'S what hurts communities.
This is Republicans waging a class war against the middle class.
So the entire middle class is public-sector union members? And having them be back on an equal footing with their private-sector neighbors is "waging war"?
If I don't like my raises or my benefits, I can accept what my employer offers me, or I can choose to seek work elsewhere in the market. Why is that fair for me (and it is fair), but not for government workers?
Of course, asking these kinds of common sense questions must mean that I hate police officers and firefighters, right?
Bytor on Twitter
It's for the children. Now, where's my money?
ReplyDeleteYou mean we have to pay for our own health insurance? That's is for little people!
ReplyDeleteThe Dems are scared of losing the money laundering scheme that funds their political campaigns.
ReplyDeleteIt's political retribution disguised as balancing the budget. Collective bargaining with state workers saved Ohio $250 million toward the last budget. The deputy mayor of Toledo testified this week in the Statehouse that collective bargaining with his city's police saved Toledo $3 million.
ReplyDeleteSB5 doesn't offer savings of nearly that amount. In fact, it can't offer any info on what it will save.
Collective bargaining saves money! Nonsense! So the public employees and their unions collectively bargain for LOWER pay and FEWER benefits I guess? I guess I did not know that Mike.
ReplyDeleteThe point is the SB5 will require these public workers figure out how to pay more of their own health insurance and pay more into their own retirement plans -- like the rest of use do. Why is the tax payer's job to fund these plans?
The union bosses are more of a problem than the public service employees --IMO. As well, ending mandatory dues would help these employees also -- probably would not help democratic fund raising though. That is the real interest of the democrats in this issue.
The public service employees unions exist as mechanism to raise money for union boss salaries. As pointed out by the Buckeye Institute -- 2 to 3 times as of the money forced out of the union members goes for exec. & staff salaries compared to union member benefits.
Here is a union protester hanging around the capital in Columbus -- don't watch it if you do not want to see some rank language! But he is a left-wing union guy so his confrontation rhetoric is, by definition, not inflammatory.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5YsE77vxGo&feature=player_embedded
Yes, we get it unions are bad. Now I should get back to my 90 hof work week with no overtime while getting paid 95 cents an hour...
ReplyDeleteMatt said: Yes, we get it unions are bad. Now I should get back to my 90 hof work week with no overtime while getting paid 95 cents an hour...
ReplyDeleteWhy is it that people in the private sector can function w/o unions and those in the public sector cannot?
How many of those people "functioning in the private sector are constantly getting hosed by their employer? Be it no benefits, lousy wages, lousy hours? Unions are a necessary tool...
ReplyDeleteMatt says: "How many of those people "functioning in the private sector are constantly getting hosed by their employer?"
ReplyDeleteBy getting "hosed" Matt means having you and I pay for HIS retirement program and paying for HIS health insurance -- so that he can do his 9 month-a-year job.
Oh and with the appropriate sabbaticals thrown in of course! Intellectuals don't want to get stale and bored working.
If it is so bad there in LaLa fantasy land then resign!
Likewise if it is so good in the private sector go get a job there! Who is stopping you Matt?
Come on jump in to this big easy street life in the private sector employment world -- find out what it means to actually have a real performance appraisal and have a real chance of being fired for poor performance.
No one is stopping you Matt, so come on over an join us on easy street!
Oh and by the way Matt, what public service job in Ohio has a 90 hour work week, no overtime, no benefits and pays $0.95 an hour?
ReplyDeleteI Love the nine month a year job argument. I work a job where three teachers work AFTER they work the school day. When teachers need a second job to pay the bills, they are grossly underpaid. Over the past ten years, my job has gradually reduced how much they pay into my insurance. They have gone from paying 50% of it to paying 25% of it. So don't give me this private sector crap. The private sector has reduced costs at the expense of its workers...
ReplyDeleteDoes the teachers union need reigned in a bit? Absofrigginloutely but legislating union busting tactics is not the route to go...
Also, the latest Qunnipiac poll shows that 51% of Ohioans are against this bill and tactic, while only 34% are for it. So really who are they governing for, the people or their own will?
ReplyDeleteMake up your mind Matt. First you say teachers are "grossly" underpaid because they have to work night jobs then you say the "teachers need to be reigned in a bit". Which is it?
ReplyDeleteBusting these public sector unions is EXACTLY the way to go. You should be glad because then the union will not be able to take you money every month. (except that you are union aren't you? -- pretending to be a teacher perhaps?)
Even FDR was wise enough to state that unions have no place in government. Throw the bums out I say.
As to your Quinnipiac poll (assume that is what you meant)their web site shows no Ohio State wide polling since Jan.20th and that one did not deal with the SB5.
This measure will pass and Kasich will sign it -- the tax payers want it.
Nope, I am a humble bartender. I don't live in Vegas, so I am not union at all. I said the union needs reigned in, not teachers... I also voted for Kasich, I just don't like using legislative power to break unions, there are more important things that need to be done.
ReplyDeleteHere is the thing, I am an unmarried person with no kids, this issue has ZERO effect on me. I just think that the breaking of a union without any form of negotiating is a bad idea. You paint it about teachers (as do I) but this will also screw over the cops and firefighters in one fell swoop. Hope you like having lousy teachers, cops and firefighters, cause the ones who are worth a damn will take a job in the private sector in a heartbeat... Why would they take a job where the people they work for lack the simple respect to even negotiate with them...
You're an idiot.
ReplyDeleteI always love the "you could just go out and get a new job routine" If you don't like what we pay.
Yeah....when you decide to leave your job you can take your employer funded 401k with you. If a firefighter or police officer quits they forfeit their pension contributions. Oh yeah & they are not allowed to get a different police and fire job once they reach the age of 36.
Why don't you give all your retirement money back & go find a new job, as long as it's not what your currently doing.
Wake up - you got brainwashed!
Matt: I also voted for Kasich, I just don't like using legislative power to break unions, there are more important things that need to be done.
ReplyDeleteSo I agree with your vote but not your premise.
More important things? Kasich DOES HAVE many other reforms in addition to SB5 on the table right now so I do not see that objection.
Besides, IMO, breaking these unions is EXACTLY what needs to be done.
Then Ohio can join the other 24 right to work states where -- SURPRISE -- life goes on and where the jobs have all gone to.
Ohio ranks from 40th - 49th on nearly every national survey on being business friendly.
A list of those surveys are on this site and that is why Strickland lost 400,000 jobs.
No businesses no jobs -- simple.
School teachers jobs and rights are protected under civil service law. That has nothing to do with blood sucking unions or SB5.
SB5 "screws over" only one group - the union bosses -- and it is way past time to rid ourselves of them.
Unions are not necessary for good teachers other states have well proven that point. In fact in Ohio unions keep us from having good teachers.
BTW where is the Quinnipiac poll you cited?
Yeah....when you decide to leave your job you can take your employer funded 401k with you.
ReplyDeleteEmployer-funded? The average private sector 401k participant gets a maximum company match of 3% of their salary. And they have to contribute 6% of their own money to get that. So by definition, the average private sector employee pays at LEAST 2/3 of their retirement plan.
Do public employees pay anywhere CLOSE to that percentage? No way. The WI teachers currently pay 0.2% of the money put in their pensions. Yes, that's 0.2%. They are freaking out over having to pay 5% in the new budget. Cry me a river.
Why shouldn't public employees have portable 401k type plans like their private sector neighbors?
Sorry, I was busy for the past couple days...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1322.xml?ReleaseID=1550
Scroll down to question 25 its pretty straight forward
25. Governor Kasich and Republican legislative leaders have talked about eliminating or restricting the ability of state and local government employees to collectively bargain. Do you think that is a good idea or a bad idea?
Good idea was 34%
Bad Idea was 51%
DK/NA was 18%
So here is my question. The American military has a large portion, if not all of their insurance covered because they put their lives on the line every day. Why don't police and firefighters get the same benifit?
The others are doing a fine job with their arguments for #5. I will not hijack their efforts but I will address your use of human shields – adding fire, military and police.
ReplyDeleteYou said,”The American military has a large portion, if not all of their insurance covered because they put their lives on the line every day. Why don't police and firefighters get the same benifit?”
First, the answer your question is these groups are apples-to-oranges comparison. Your only assumption of what is binding them is ‘putting their life on the line’ statement. This is not inherently a wrong statement. It is only the fuzzy ultra-political correctness that allows this statement to be anything but weak. Here are some BLS stats to put what I mean into perspective:
Deaths per 100,000 workers (worker defined by 40hr weeks 50weeks yr)
Fire 7
Police 19.8
Fishing 109.5
Logging 89.1
Aircraft pilots 70.6
Overall death rate 816.5
Resident military 5.5
Militarily deaths per 100,000 persons
Active duty 60-117
As you see your arguments of needing to compensate based on risk becomes moot. Using the logic of risk an alternative statement would be “why don’t we compensate police and fire the same as plumbers and carpenters?” I write this only to null and void the use of human shields. I believe these to be noble occupations if chosen by the individual(s), not for his or her own benefits but for the benefit of the service to the population- IMHO. When/if we have an issue with quality, we will raise the asking price at that time – demanding more credential as with non-government employees.