# Public Employee Unions



## jwoodie (Jun 12, 2013)

are like Communism:  Great in theory but terrible in practice.  They now represent a new aristocracy which holds a knife to the throat of our democracy.  If we don't give them what they demand, we will be punished...


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.



They have the right to find other work or be public servants. They dont have the right to hold taxpayers hostage for services if more money isn't given. That's extortion and thats the real problem.

And just as many guilty officers are protected from prosecution or even a loss of work for misconduct due to public union "respresentation".

Private sector unions are fine by me, public sector unions should be outlawed completely.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.
> ...




Union's job is to defend it's membership, just as a lawyer may have a guilty client and defend that client so must a union, and public employees have the same rights as any other employee and I still dont understand why the right wing targets working folks while giving big money interests a pass.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



When defending its membership involves backroom deals with politicans to garner votes in exchange for sweetheart benefits deals that wont come to the cash register in 20 years, then we have a serious problem.

When a union and a private company negotiate, the union realizes it can only go so far, or it will put the company out of business. Public Unions know no such thing, as they see the taxpayer as an unlimted piggy bank, and the politicans they help get into office go right along with it.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

martybegan said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



Public employees, outside upper management, make similar wages and benefits to other good working class jobs, I do not envy or have a problem with the wages and benefits these workers make thanks to union negotiations.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



As a taxpayer, I do. Stealing money from me to give these folks who are economically non-productive more and more money each year is extortion. you may be fine with that, but im not and neither is a large portion of taxpayers.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jun 12, 2013)

It's public service, it's not suppose to pay as if the government is making record profit every year. Thats the entire difference. What the government has to give to these employees through negotiation is only as big as the supply of revenue stolen from private sector workers. The government has nothign of its own, it must confiscate its revenue through force.

"One of those good government jobs" is an awful saying in this country. If people want to serve in government, they should eb satisfied with small salaries and be doing it "for the greater good" as they tell taxpayers that is why we must pay. Not that these are some of the best jjobs you can get in the country. Public unions are a moral hazard, are economically non-productive and should be completely outlawed.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...




So law enforcement should be a voluntary position? As a tax payer I want the people working for me to make a decent living.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



Where did i indicate it should be voluntary? 

And as a taxpayer, im not ok with it. So you see this is where the problem occurs. I shouldn't be held responsible to give increases to govt. workers while Im battling inflation caused by the govt adn a host of waste that comes with bureaucracy. You're not making a valid case for public unoins by simply saying you want them to have more money. in that case, fork it over and stop electing me to also fork it over. Go ahead and write a big fat check from your own account and send it in. I'll keep my money thanks.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



its not about envy, its about paying for promised retirement benefits that will not be coverable by the funds created. At that point the governments that made the promises (between the politicans elected with the help of the unions and the unions themselves) will either have to default or raise taxes/slash services.

Another issue with public unions is that unlike a buisiness, governments cannot go out of buisness (although we will be testing that soon) So the politicans can agree to all sorts of inane work rules that would never float in the private sector. So you need more people to do the same work.


----------



## jwoodie (Jun 12, 2013)

1.  Public employees' total compensation is 50% higher than their private sector counterparts, not counting much greater job security.

2.  Public employees do not need union protection because they are already covered by civil service regulations.

3.  Making contributions to their employers (politicians) is an obvious conflict of interest that would constitute a felony in the private sector.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



I will stop asking you to fork it over when you stop using government provided services.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  Public employees' total compensation is 50% higher than their private sector counterparts, not counting much greater job security.
> 
> 2.  Public employees do not need union protection because they are already covered by civil service regulations.
> 
> 3.  Making contributions to their employers (politicians) is an obvious conflict of interest that would constitute a felony in the private sector.



You can not compare a civil service job like Law Enforcement to a job at Walmart, funny how conservative dis trust government until it comes to government regulations regarding workers and the workplace and then it becomes unions are not needed we have government to protect these workers.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



I have never used welfare, so i should stop paying for it.
I have never used the public defenders office, so I should stop paying for it
I have never had to call the police, so I guess I dont need to pay for them
I have never called the fire department, yay! I can stop maying
I have never called an ambulance, good! more deductions!
I have never used unemployment insurance, have that deduction taken out of my paystub please.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

martybegan said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



You use paved roads, you have police protection whether you have had to call them or not and since you havent had to call them they must be doing a very good job.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



Fine, still, reimburse me for the rest of them please.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



Nor should there be an opt out, taxes keep a civilized society going, I do not have a car and take public transportation but know it is a good thing to have paved highways, I have no children but know it is a good thing to educate young people, I have never had to call the cops but I know having laws enforced and criminals arrested is a good thing.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



And there is a tax at the pump for this when you buy gas. it's always the same arguments with your type and they are all failures. The second portion of your statement is what we call a logical fallacy.


Alright, this isnt going anywhere so im going to leave you to it.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

martybegan said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



No


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



Those who want to live in a land of no taxation and no government programs or services are free to go to countries like Somalia that have such going on, a civilized society has such programs and taxation, which is very low here, covers those services a civilized society has.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



And right to argumentum ad absurdum. Its not a question of no taxes, its a question of taxes for serivces that should not be done by the government, and that includes overpaying employees and giving them generous benefits without worrying about how to pay for it 30 years from now.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

martybegan said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



Employees should be paid a decent wage and that is what they receive, they are not getting rich working for the government but whatever conservative decided to make the working class the whipping boy for the nations ills sure did a good job on some people.


----------



## Flopper (Jun 12, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> It's public service, it's not suppose to pay as if the government is making record profit every year. Thats the entire difference. What the government has to give to these employees through negotiation is only as big as the supply of revenue stolen from private sector workers. The government has nothign of its own, it must confiscate its revenue through force.
> 
> "One of those good government jobs" is an awful saying in this country. If people want to serve in government, they should eb satisfied with small salaries and be doing it "for the greater good" as they tell taxpayers that is why we must pay. Not that these are some of the best jjobs you can get in the country. Public unions are a moral hazard, are economically non-productive and should be completely outlawed.


The problem is basic to the way the public sector works versus the private sector.  In the public sector, opportunities for advance, incentive pay, and recognition are limited.  In order to attract good employees, the government must offer something to compete with the private sector in getting good employees. That of course is job stability, retirement, and other benefits.  Public sector unions help guarantee those benefits.  Without those benefits, the quality of public sector employees will deteriorate because government can't offer the incentives that private sector offers.

We tend to think that the quality of government is synonymous with our elected officials.  It's career employees that run the government, not the politicians.  The real job of the politician is get re-elected, not run the government.  If you want better government, you hire better people to run it.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



Still ignoring the fact that sooner or later all these bills for the benefits we promised are going to come due, and the funds in question do not have the $$ to cover it. 

Keep ignoring the problem. Like those who gave away said benefits, you are hoping you are dead long before the bill comes due.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

Flopper said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > It's public service, it's not suppose to pay as if the government is making record profit every year. Thats the entire difference. What the government has to give to these employees through negotiation is only as big as the supply of revenue stolen from private sector workers. The government has nothign of its own, it must confiscate its revenue through force.
> ...



There are plenty of ways to advance in the public sector, except for top elected positions high level civil servants can rake in $175k plus in New York City.

And it is not the job of the public sector to match the private sector, it is the public sectors job to be the action arm of the government level they work for.

And if we are attracting "top" talent using the current system, I wonder what your definition of "top" is. I work as a consultant for a municipal agency, and maybe 30% of the employees are actually good at what they do. The rest are useless cogs that are covered by the working 30%.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 12, 2013)

martybegan said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



There are many other fiscal problems outside of what a worker is paid and the benefits they receive that government can deal with before going after working people.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jun 12, 2013)

Flopper said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > It's public service, it's not suppose to pay as if the government is making record profit every year. Thats the entire difference. What the government has to give to these employees through negotiation is only as big as the supply of revenue stolen from private sector workers. The government has nothign of its own, it must confiscate its revenue through force.
> ...



Then the government shouldnt be providing that service if they can not compete. it isn't the responsibility of the taxpayer to fork over more and more revenue simply because the government wants to maintain a competitive edge (when in reality, they arent competitive at all. The exact opposite) in a market where they aren't even economically productive. 

Public unions extort taxpayers for better standards of living than the people they steal from to obtain such standards. there are no two ways around that. It's extortion and it's theft. Plain and simple.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



Unfunded pension liabilities are becoming a larger and larger part of state/local budgets each and every year. It is the MAIN problem that will be happening in location after location as more boomers retire and live longer than the actuaries predicted. 

Pensions should be funded by an annuity, just like trade unions do it. Instead unions got lower contributions from the workers and the politicans at the time punted the funding down the road.

The math is about to come to roost on this scam, and you just want to ignore it.


----------



## Amelia (Jun 12, 2013)

Police officers and firefighters need protection from politicians and upper-level management who would throw them under a bus to save their jobs if a split-second life-or-death decision went wrong.

The public needs protection from politicians who make too many monetary promises in an effort to keep everyone happy.  And from supposed public servants who use the politics and negative media to extract unsustainable monetary promises from the politicians.


----------



## Mr Natural (Jun 12, 2013)

martybegan said:


> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



Correct!

You people just put it on the credit card like the Iraq fiasco.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

Mr Clean said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Mr Clean said:
> ...



and yet liberal credit card purchases are in perpetuity. 

Wars end, evidently liberal social welfare programs never do, even if we run out of money to pay for them.


----------



## Intense (Jun 12, 2013)

*This is the CDZ. No Flames. No insulting other posters. No Neg Reps here. Thanks.*


----------



## FA_Q2 (Jun 12, 2013)

Flopper said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > It's public service, it's not suppose to pay as if the government is making record profit every year. Thats the entire difference. What the government has to give to these employees through negotiation is only as big as the supply of revenue stolen from private sector workers. The government has nothign of its own, it must confiscate its revenue through force.
> ...



Except that you and noose are missing the one MAJOR problem that all public sector unions deal with: there is no advocate for the tax payers at the table.

In essence, unions exist as a counter balance to the power of the company that the workers are employed at.  When your company is not treating their employees correctly then they band together and make demands of that company.  Then leadership is faces with several decisions all focusing on balancing the profit motive, good employee retention and keeping productivity.  That company negotiates with the union to achieve a good balance between those interests and the workers interests.

When dealing with public sector jobs though there is no profit.  There is no possibility of the higher compensation putting the company out of business.  There is not even a need to keep up productivity or retain valuable employees because there is no difference whether or not the government manages to accomplish that.  Instead, what you have is the interests of the union on one side along with a politician who is NOT paying for the negotiated contract and likely even takes money from the union and no one at all on the other side.

In that relationship, there is nothing at all counterbalancing the unions demands.  This is a rather simple issue.  There is no need of a public sector union and the standard balance of power that unions and the companies that employ there members is completely non-existent.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 12, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



The way the system is supposed to work is the elected officals are supposed to represent the tax payer. However our current crop of politicans see taxpayers as the ever-full piggy bank, merely as a source of revenue, which is a source of power. 

So in order to keep thier jobs they make deals with public unions (which are a large voting block that benefits from more government spending) to get the votes to stay in office.


----------



## Mr Natural (Jun 12, 2013)

martybegan said:


> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



At least welfare money stays here.  Unlike military escapade money which disappears in some foreign shithole.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Jun 12, 2013)

Cops and firefighters are underpaid and their benefits suck!
If a cop dies on duty his wife and kids get practically nothing. If he lives to retirement and dies his wife gets "survivor benefits" which are only half of his retirement.


----------



## FA_Q2 (Jun 12, 2013)

Mr Clean said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Mr Clean said:
> ...



Really?  Because welfare money that is used to purchase the avocado that was picked in Peru somehow stays in our system more that the dollar that is sent to the troop in Minnesota?  Or perhaps spent on the next aircraft that is assembled in Washington or maintained in California?  

BTW, that bomb is also no more expendable than the avocado.  Both end up with nothing at the end but the Avocado is picked by another nations laborer whereas much of our military assets are actually built here in America.  The rest (the majority of the military spending) is on the troops themselves and that money is not much different than the welfare.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 12, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  Public employees' total compensation is 50% higher than their private sector counterparts, not counting much greater job security.
> 
> 2.  Public employees do not need union protection because they are already covered by civil service regulations.
> 
> 3.  Making contributions to their employers (politicians) is an obvious conflict of interest that would constitute a felony in the private sector.


*
1.  Public employees' total compensation is 50% higher than their private sector counterparts, not counting much greater job security.*

the UPS guy made $5.00 an hour more than me,USPS Carrier,and they had some pretty good benefits....
*

2.  Public employees do not need union protection because they are already covered by civil service regulations.*

which mean Jack Shit when you work there.....one Govt agency telling another what to do?.....yea right.....i have seen how that works.....especially with OHSA.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 12, 2013)

noose4 said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  Public employees' total compensation is 50% higher than their private sector counterparts, not counting much greater job security.
> ...



and they dont do a very good job until someone,usually the Union,starts making a lot of noise and gets people involved that the higher up's in the agency are....scared of.....


----------



## Flopper (Jun 12, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...


Compared to the private sector opportunities for advancement are limited in government.  In the federal government the number of federal employees has increased by only 4% between 2000 and 2011.  That averages out to only 4 new job positions/1000 employees a year.  To get a promotion in the federal government you will probably have to wait till someone retires, dies are quits.  I would say half the jobs in government are dead end jobs.  There is essential no growth.  In fact, there are 10% less federal worker than when Reagan left office with the responsibility of spending 3 times as much money.

http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-over...ables/total-government-employment-since-1962/


----------



## jwoodie (Jun 17, 2013)

Why don't you compare similar jobs in the public and private sectors?
Public school teachers are paid more than twice as much as private school teachers with the same credentials.  In california, health & safety (fire & police) retire at 90% of their highest salary after 30 years, and their spouses can continue to to receive these benefits for a miniscule (5%-10%) reduction.  Even worse, they are considered disabled if they get any type of cancer or heart problems, which makes their retirement tax free.  This then makes them eligible for low income tax credits.  Wake up!!!!!


----------



## Polk (Jun 17, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



Except it's not "stealing money" from you any more than funding any other program is/


----------



## Polk (Jun 17, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  Public employees' total compensation is 50% higher than their private sector counterparts, not counting much greater job security.
> 
> 2.  Public employees do not need union protection because they are already covered by civil service regulations.
> 
> 3.  Making contributions to their employers (politicians) is an obvious conflict of interest that would constitute a felony in the private sector.



All three of those points are weak.
1. Public employees are paid less than their private sector counterparts, after you count for age, education, and experience (the only segment this isn't true for are those with only a high school diploma).
2. That argument doesn't really hold up, because when you get rid of the union, those regulations will be the next thing out the window.
3. Unions are no different than an other interest group, which we don't restrict from donating money to campaigns.


----------



## Polk (Jun 17, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> Why don't you compare similar jobs in the public and private sectors?
> Public school teachers are paid more than twice as much as private school teachers with the same credentials.  In california, health & safety (fire & police) retire at 90% of their highest salary after 30 years, and their spouses can continue to to receive these benefits for a miniscule (5%-10%) reduction.  Even worse, they are considered disabled if they get any type of cancer or heart problems, which makes their retirement tax free.  This then makes them eligible for low income tax credits.  Wake up!!!!!



Private school teachers get paid less than public school teachers in aggregate because they're also less educated and less experienced.


----------



## Amelia (Jun 17, 2013)

Polk said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  Public employees' total compensation is 50% higher than their private sector counterparts, not counting much greater job security.
> ...





In answer to #3, yes, unions are different from other interest groups.   That is, public unions are different from other interest groups.


----------



## Polk (Jun 17, 2013)

Amelia said:


> Polk said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



How so? Saying "because they're paid from public funds" doesn't work, because there are a lot of businesses that function in the same way.


----------



## Amelia (Jun 17, 2013)

Probably need to back up.  Perhaps there are some other interest groups which public unions are essentially the same as.  

But in general, they're vastly different from private sector unions, and the source of their funding is a large part of that.


----------



## Polk (Jun 17, 2013)

Public and private sector unions are funded by the same source: their members.


----------



## Amelia (Jun 17, 2013)

Polk said:


> Public and private sector unions are funded by the same source: their members.





Public sector unions are PAID by people who are supposed to be representing the taxpayers, and it's naive to expect them to do that well when their campaigns are being paid for by unions.

That's just one of the issues.  Another problem is the nature of their job.  They have a monopoly on the services they perform.  If they choose to do a sick out or go on a "no extras at all until we get the contract we want" virtual strike and, for an example which happened here in Wisconsin, refuse to write references for students who are filling out college applications until they get their way, there's no place for those kids to turn.

The problems are not theoretical.  They are on the record for everyone to see.  Too many unsustainable promises made to the public unions without the natural checks and balances which exist for public sector unions.


----------



## Polk (Jun 17, 2013)

Amelia said:


> Polk said:
> 
> 
> > Public and private sector unions are funded by the same source: their members.
> ...



And how, exactly, is that different than the myriad of industries that largely exist because of government contracts?



> That's just one of the issues.  Another problem is the nature of their job.  They have a monopoly on the services they perform.  If they choose to do a sick out or go on a "no extras at all until we get the contract we want" virtual strike and, for an example which happened here in Wisconsin, refuse to write references for students who are filling out college applications until they get their way, there's no place for those kids to turn.
> 
> The problems are not theoretical.  They are on the record for everyone to see.  Too many unsustainable promises made to the public unions without the natural checks and balances which exist for public sector unions.



Tons of unsustainable promises were made to private sector unions as well. It's interesting that conservatives are very much about "responsibility", unless responsibility requires people in positions of power, be they CEOs or politicians, actually following through. Then outright theft becomes okay, because, hey, those rubes in the union shouldn't really have expected the rules to apply to people in positions of power.


----------



## Flopper (Jun 17, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> Why don't you compare similar jobs in the public and private sectors?
> Public school teachers are paid more than twice as much as private school teachers with the same credentials.  In california, health & safety (fire & police) retire at 90% of their highest salary after 30 years, and their spouses can continue to to receive these benefits for a miniscule (5%-10%) reduction.  Even worse, they are considered disabled if they get any type of cancer or heart problems, which makes their retirement tax free.  This then makes them eligible for low income tax credits.  Wake up!!!!!


In California, EC Section 48222 specifies only that private school teachers be "persons capable of teaching".  There is no certification requirement nor educational requirement.  Sorry, but you're comparing apples and oranges.  There are many private schools that require that their teachers be certified, but there're also many that don't, particular in private elementary schools.  Some of these teachers are just one step up from day care workers and are paid accordingly.

In the state I live in, over 60% of the public school teachers have advanced degrees.  They have more education and more experience than private school teachers and of course they make more money.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Jun 18, 2013)

Why then do private schools out-perform public schools by such a wide margin?

Maybe we should pay less to teachers and more to the things that actually teach our kids.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 18, 2013)

Flopper said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > Why don't you compare similar jobs in the public and private sectors?
> ...



Advanced degrees, more education and experience, and crap results.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Jun 18, 2013)

In the public sector teachers are paid for 1. level of education and 2. time in grade.

In the private sector teachers are paid for their ability to teach - not based on the BS, MS, or PhD. that they have at the end of their name.

I have known a lot of PhD.s that couldn't teach anything to a student that wanted to learn simply because they didn't know how to communicate.

I taught for 20 years in the occupational safety field. I am a certified safety trainer and operator certification instructor. I can make between $100 and $300 per hour for certification of operators of industrial trucks. Twice that for cranes and almost tripple that amount for mining equipment.

I couldn't teach a third grader basic grammar in spite of my MS degree.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 18, 2013)

Public employee unions should only exist if they are barred from makiing campaign conributions of any kind.

Unlike any ther sort of union, these unions can hold their employers - elected officials - hostage by threatening to make effery effort to defeat them in the next election of they do net get what they want.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 18, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> Public employee unions should only exist if they are barred from makiing campaign conributions of any kind.
> 
> Unlike any ther sort of union, these unions can hold their employers - elected officials - hostage by threatening to make effery effort to defeat them in the next election of they do net get what they want.



The problem is they still form a large voting block that can influence elections, and get people into government that are agreeable to thier goals. So basically its one side negotiating itself every time a contract comes up.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 18, 2013)

martybegan said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Public employee unions should only exist if they are barred from makiing campaign conributions of any kind.
> ...


Exactly my point.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 18, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> Why then do private schools out-perform public schools by such a wide margin?
> 
> Maybe we should pay less to teachers and more to the things that actually teach our kids.



Because they can kick out unruly and failing students.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 18, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> Public employee unions should only exist if they are barred from makiing campaign conributions of any kind.
> 
> Unlike any ther sort of union, these unions can hold their employers - elected officials - hostage by threatening to make effery effort to defeat them in the next election of they do net get what they want.



Should same standard apply to defense contractors and other businesses that do business with the government?


----------



## martybegan (Jun 18, 2013)

noose4 said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Public employee unions should only exist if they are barred from makiing campaign conributions of any kind.
> ...



The issue is more at the local level, where the public unions can provide a voting block that can sway elections in thier favor, and thus vote themselves more benefits.

Defense contractors dont have enough votes at the federal level to do the same thing. 

The argument over lobbying in general is a seperate topic.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 18, 2013)

noose4 said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Public employee unions should only exist if they are barred from makiing campaign conributions of any kind.
> ...


Why would it?
These people work for Boeing (et al), not the mayor.
As such they cannot contribute to an election that will oust Boeing as their boss.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 18, 2013)

martybegan said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...


Like... oh...   teacher's unions and the school board.
Give us a raise and better benefits or we'll vote in people who will.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 18, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



So corporations that are given money for a service can donate money to politicians that have influence over the contracts they get from the government but you would deny that same function to working people?


----------



## martybegan (Jun 18, 2013)

noose4 said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



Find me a public union that has competitiors bidding on the same project/work and then we can find the comparison.


----------



## FA_Q2 (Jun 18, 2013)

Polk said:


> Amelia said:
> 
> 
> > Polk said:
> ...



The MASSIVE difference is that the people that receive that service are LEGALLY bound to purchase it.  Lets take schools as a good example.  If the teachers want to strike, their customers (the people) have no options.  The money that they pay the school cannot be taken back and used somewhere else.  They cant take their business to another company.  They cannot put that school out of business.  In that regard, the customers are beholden to the service provider.  There is no balancing power against that strike.  If the teachers push to far, who cares?  They will get their pay anyway and they are going to get a better contract.  As I already pointed out, the politician who is representing the people never actually has to pay for that.  The people dont even see the results until it is too late and the politician is likely sipping margaritas at his retirement home.  OTOH, the fact that children are not able to go to school AND the people are still paying for that is VERY visible.  

Now, compare that to a company.  If the workers push to far, the company goes out of business or they replace the workers.  That is simply not an option that is generally afforded to governmental agencies that use union employees.  Companies have to balance this also with the real costs of doing business as a bad union deal can put them under where a bad deal with the government does well nothing at all to the parties involved.

So you ask how they are different.  The easier question would be how are they the same?  One does not resemble the other in any shape or form.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 18, 2013)

noose4 said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...


People in the private sector do not vote in their employers; people in the public sector do.
You are appraretly unable or unwilling to see the difference.


----------



## jasonnfree (Jun 18, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> Polk said:
> 
> 
> > Amelia said:
> ...



I've worked union  and I'm pro union but I have to agree with a lot of what you say.  In California we had a governor that pushed for bigger pensions for cops and firemen, to have them in his corner come election time. Their retirement is 90% of their base pay  after 30 years service.   In some places working for the state and county, you can not take overtime in pay and put it in a comp fund.  This can build up to some serious money over the years.  Every time there's a pay raise, your comp fund gets that pay raise.  Fair treatment is one thing, but pay and  benefits should be more in line with reality.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jun 18, 2013)

noose4 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...




That accounts for about 5% of what I pay in taxes.  Please refund the other 95%.


----------



## jwoodie (Jun 18, 2013)

Flopper said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > Why don't you compare similar jobs in the public and private sectors?
> ...



Thanks for the misinformation.  (Why am I not surprised?)  EC 48222 refers to "private day schools" which include home schooling.  The appropriate comparison would be with "nonpublic schools" (EC36000 et seq), which require equal or greater teacher credentials than do public schools.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jun 18, 2013)

noose4 said:


> Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.



Interesting..... the first type of public union worker you would like bring up is cops or fireman..... thats how the left trys diffuse the topic instead of a Union Teacher or a Union Dmv worker......Why didnt you praise those folks at what a fine job they do?


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jun 18, 2013)

noose4 said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



What dont you get? Public unions is using our tax dollars to take our money against us... Corperations are not giving money people BUY their Products.. Btw Boeing is also in RTW South Carolina. I will never get why the poor left supports and votes against their own self intrest.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 18, 2013)

bripat9643 said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



Military uses much more than 5%


----------



## noose4 (Jun 18, 2013)

bear513 said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



The general public does not buy missiles and tanks.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 18, 2013)

bear513 said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.
> ...



They are public workers too bad cons want to screw them over.


----------



## Polk (Jun 18, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> Why then do private schools out-perform public schools by such a wide margin?
> 
> Maybe we should pay less to teachers and more to the things that actually teach our kids.



The margin is pretty entirely made up of skimming cream. Private school kids are the children of wealthier parents who are more involved.


----------



## Polk (Jun 18, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



He's referring to management and the firms at a corporate level. And their spending absolutely influences who does and does not get government contracts.


----------



## Polk (Jun 18, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> Polk said:
> 
> 
> > Amelia said:
> ...



Ultimately, the public has the option of abolishing public schools if they find the process so outrageous. The fact that they don't means they don't place as high of a value on the question as you do.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 18, 2013)

noose4 said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...


People in the private sector do not vote in their employers; people in the public sector do.
You are appraretly unable or unwilling to see the difference.


----------



## Polk (Jun 18, 2013)

Many private sectors firms do as well. As Noose very sharply put it, the general public isn't buying missiles and tanks.


----------



## Amelia (Jun 18, 2013)

Polk said:


> FA_Q2 said:
> 
> 
> > Polk said:
> ...





Thank you for providing the symbol of the absurdity of your claim that public unions are not in a special class.  

Public schools cannot be abolished.  To suggest they could is the the height of disingenuity.


----------



## Polk (Jun 18, 2013)

Of course they could. That the public doesn't choose to exercise that option is that they do not agree with your position. There is nothing absurd about that.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jun 18, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.
> ...



I am for public sector unions as was FDR, also like FDR, I am against collective bargaining for public sector unions.


----------



## Amelia (Jun 18, 2013)

Polk said:


> Of course they could. That the public doesn't choose to exercise that option is that they do not agree with your position. There is nothing absurd about that.







The public is over a barrel because they have few viable options when it comes to dealing with public schools.

Disbanding the schools is not an option.

Schools must stay.  It's "for the children".  And the workers can have sickouts and other illegal work stoppages with no negative consequences, all the while working the media and the politicians.  

But I'm done with this now because you have doubled down on the disingenuous claim about the possibility of disbanding schools.


Public unions are a special class.  FDR knew it.    You don't have to admit it, but the consequences of the imbalance are being seen across the nation as municipal budgets are busted.



Ta.


----------



## Polk (Jun 18, 2013)

Of course it's an option. It's just an option people don't like. You're mad that you can't convince other people to agree with you. You're "done with this" because you don't really have an argument other than wanting to whine because you're not getting your way.


----------



## Flopper (Jun 18, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> Why then do private schools out-perform public schools by such a wide margin?
> 
> Maybe we should pay less to teachers and more to the things that actually teach our kids.


There is no proof and little evidence to support your claim. "Contrary to popular belief, we can find no evidence that private schools actually increase student performance,"

Read more: Are Private Schools Really Better? - TIME


----------



## Flopper (Jun 18, 2013)

martybegan said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...


So you think teachers with less educated and experienced are the answer.  Well that would sure be a novel approach.


----------



## auditor0007 (Jun 18, 2013)

TakeAStepBack said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.
> ...



So who should determine how much they are paid and what benefits they receive?  Be specific.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 18, 2013)

Amelia said:


> Polk said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



how are they different when they do the same thing?....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 19, 2013)

Amelia said:


> Probably need to back up.  Perhaps there are some other interest groups which public unions are essentially the same as.
> 
> But in general, they're vastly different from private sector unions, and the source of their funding is a large part of that.


no they are not.....they do the same thing.....and the NALC, my Union gets its funding the same way the Teamsters do....Membership...


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 19, 2013)

Amelia said:


> Polk said:
> 
> 
> > Public and private sector unions are funded by the same source: their members.
> ...


i cant speak for any other agency.....but the PO is not allowed to strike....or do a slow down.....lose your job if you do....you sign a paper in the beginning saying you wont....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 19, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



really?.....in 33 years in the PO..... i never had a say who was going to be my boss....


----------



## FA_Q2 (Jun 19, 2013)

Polk said:


> FA_Q2 said:
> 
> 
> > Polk said:
> ...



You completely missed the point of the post.  It has nothing to do with the schools themselves.  Public education is not going anywhere because there is a need to ensure that people have a basic education.  The difference is between public and private unions which, by the way, ARE under fire and the people are starting to try and abolish them.  You r entire point is moot.

Now, try and go back and actually address what I claimed rather than setting up the abolish public schools straw man.


----------



## editec (Jun 19, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> are like Communism:  Great in theory but terrible in practice.  They now represent a new aristocracy which holds a knife to the throat of our democracy.  If we don't give them what they demand, we will be punished...



​


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 19, 2013)

Harry Dresden said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...


You voted for mayor/sheriff/city council, yes?
Then you had a say.


----------



## Polk (Jun 19, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> Polk said:
> 
> 
> > FA_Q2 said:
> ...



1. There is no requirement that public education be provided by teachers employed directly by the government.
2. "People" aren't trying to abolish labor unions. Companies are pushing for laws which de facto outlaw labor unions.
3. I did address your point. You claim the public has no choice, but that's not true. The public just doesn't want to exercise the choice.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 19, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



you said people you work for.....not who works for me.....your quote....

People in the private sector do not *vote in their employers*; people in the public sector do.....


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 19, 2013)

Harry Dresden said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...


Yep.
You know.. the mayor, the sheriff, the city council...  whoever.
All elected.


----------



## krych3k (Jun 19, 2013)

Harry Dresden said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



Yes you do, you vote in your politicians that fund your employer.  As a public employee, the director of your department or organisation isn't the top of the food chain, the public is.  Therefore, you have an impact on your management in a way that those in the private sector typically do not.  This is a crucial difference.


----------



## FA_Q2 (Jun 19, 2013)

Polk said:


> 1. There is no requirement that public education be provided by teachers employed directly by the government.


And?  Whats your point?  This has NOTHING to do with what we were discussing.


Polk said:


> 2. "People" aren't trying to abolish labor unions. Companies are pushing for laws which de facto outlaw labor unions.


Yes they are.  The left is continually screaming about the right attempting just that.  Are you now saying that is all bullshit?  Have you not read some of the comments in this very thread with people that want to see an end to public sector unions?


Polk said:


> 3. I did agree your point. You claim the public has no choice, but that's not true. The public just doesn't want to exercise the choice.


No they dont.  When the teachers go on strike, they cannot take that money back and redirect it to another school.  They cannot do anything at all about the situation.  They can vote people in AFTER the fact and they are likely to do nothing about it anyway but the reality is that there are ZERO repercussions to the business or the employee in these cases.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 19, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



right....but they are not my employers.....unless i work for them.....i dont and never have.....so i ....and millions of others have NEVER voted our Employers into their jobs....


----------



## Polk (Jun 19, 2013)

1. It absolutely has to do with what we're talking about, since you claimed "[p]ublic education is not going anywhere because there is a need to ensure that people have a basic education". Even if we accept that as true, what we're really talking about is public provision of the service. There is nothing that requires that service to be provided in state-owned building by state employees.

2. The point is that those drives to outlaw labor unions are not reflecting public opinion. They're reflecting the desires of the donor class.

3. There is nothing that requires public schools to exist. It's a choice society makes. It's a choice you don't agree with, but that doesn't change it.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 19, 2013)

krych3k said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



learn about the PO dude.....politicians dont fund the PO not since the early 70's...and the  PMG is the top of the food chain in the PO....and NO ONE at the bottom has ANY effect on the guys at the top.....actually as a matter of fact....Congress and the Board of Governors are the actual top of the food chain since they have to approve anything the PMG wants to do........


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 19, 2013)

krych3k said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



so the Sheriff and Mayor are my Employers?.....so you are saying i am working for them ...right?...because i was under the impression they worked on our behalf.....


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 19, 2013)

Harry Dresden said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...


As a city cop, you work for the city government.  It is elelcted.
As a toenship cop, you wort for the trustees.  They are elected.
As a deputy, you work for the Sheriff.   He is elected.
Et cetera.

Being in a public sector union that is allowed to make campaign contributions allows you to...pressure... these people into giving you what they want in a way that no person with a private sector job can do -- give is what we want or we will force you out of your job.

The example of the teacher's union against the school board is perfect and applies just aswll to police, fire, etc, employees.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 19, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...


you said......
People in the private sector do not vote in their employers;* people in the public sector do.*

i worked in the Public Sector,the PO....i did not vote in my Employers....Striking was against the law so we could not force anyone to do anything .....maybe you should have said SOME Public Sector People....not all.....


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 19, 2013)

Harry Dresden said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...


As a city cop, you work for the city government.  It is elelcted.
As a toenship cop, you wort for the trustees.  They are elected.
As a deputy, you work for the Sheriff.   He is elected.
So, yes, you did.



> Striking was against the law so we could not force anyone to do anything


You could, however, credibly threaten to have your union conribute to the relevant political opponents, thus working to removing those that employed you from office.


----------



## Sactowndog (Jun 19, 2013)

martybegan said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



I share your concern but not your conclusion.  The issue isn't Unionism as much as the ability for politicians to promise benefits for which they will never have to pay.  This problem is especially true with pensions.  It is bad for the government and bad for workers who believe they will enjoy benefits future governments can never afford.  Even without unions, some politicians will attempt to curry favor with government employees by promising unsustainable benefits.

Let public employees unionize but prevent them from receiving deferred benefits.  If they can get 100% match in their 401k more power to them. But that 100% will come from today's budget.


----------



## martybegan (Jun 19, 2013)

Sactowndog said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



It takes two to tango, so pushing all the blame onto the politicians isnt exactly fair. And good luck trying to get public unions to agree to defined contribution plans like a 401k. They know thier power is based on pension style benefits. 

The other solution would be to transfer the retirement funds to the unions themselves, much as construction unions work it. then the fund can't go raiding the taxpayer kitty every time it runs short in a fiscal year.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 19, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



i am not a Cop.....i am not a Deputy......so no i did not.....i was a lowly Letter Carrier.....and we do not pick the Post Master General.....The Board Of Governors do that.....my Union was no different than any other Union in their support of Politicians.....except they cannot give money to them....


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 20, 2013)

Harry Dresden said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...


I'm sorry -- I confused PO - post office with PO - police officer
You do not pick the PMG - but the President does.  You vote for him.


----------



## FA_Q2 (Jun 20, 2013)

martybegan said:


> Sactowndog said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



You dont actually have to get the unions to agree though  just make that portion law.  I have to admit though; it is not a bad idea.  Not sure that it is enough but it is a start.


----------



## FA_Q2 (Jun 20, 2013)

Polk said:


> 1. It absolutely has to do with what we're talking about, since you claimed "[p]ublic education is not going anywhere because there is a need to ensure that people have a basic education". Even if we accept that as true, what we're really talking about is public provision of the service. There is nothing that requires that service to be provided in state-owned building by state employees.
> 
> 2. The point is that those drives to outlaw labor unions are not reflecting public opinion. They're reflecting the desires of the donor class.
> 
> 3. There is nothing that requires public schools to exist. It's a choice society makes. It's a choice you don't agree with, but that doesn't change it.



So now you are placing words into my mouth that I never stated as well as derailing the topic and ignoring my points.  I am done with you on this polk.  I never expressed your point 3, that is a lie, and you are continuing to ignore everything that I post.  In retrospect, that is likely why you seem to have no clue as to what my positions and arguments actually are.


----------



## Sactowndog (Jun 20, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Sactowndog said:
> ...



Quite frankly all it will take are a couple more big municiple bankruptcies like Stockton and the public employees will agree also.  If they had 401k's their benefits would not be affected by a bankruptcy.


----------



## jwoodie (Jun 20, 2013)

We keep talking around the main point:  Public employee unions are able to bribe their employers through political donations.  Case in point:  California Governor Gray Davis increased pensions 50% overnight as soon as he was elected with the help of massive public employee union donations to his campaign.  

Not only was this retroactive, it instantly became a vested right which could not be subsequently withdrawn (even after his recall).  One of the results of this is that California prison guard costs per inmate are 50% higher than the next highest State!  

Try comparing the efficiency of unionized and non-unionized government workers.  Wait a minute, there is no comparison.


----------



## longknife (Jun 20, 2013)

Outlaw every single one of them!!!!!


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 20, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



no the President does not.....since 1971 the Postmaster is selected by the the 9 member  Board of Governors of the United States Postal Service.....if one of these guys leaves then his replacement is picked by whoever is President at the time,they have 7 year terms....The governors are chosen to represent the public interest generally and cannot be representatives of special interests. Not more than five of the nine may belong to the same political party..........the PM becomes the 10th member.....then these 10 select the Deputy PM who becomes the 11th member of the board.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jun 20, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> We keep talking around the main point:  Public employee unions are able to bribe their employers through political donations.  Case in point:  California Governor Gray Davis increased pensions 50% overnight as soon as he was elected with the help of massive public employee union donations to his campaign.
> 
> Not only was this retroactive, it instantly became a vested right which could not be subsequently withdrawn (even after his recall).  One of the results of this is that California prison guard costs per inmate are 50% higher than the next highest State!
> *
> Try comparing the efficiency of unionized and non-unionized government workers.*  Wait a minute, there is no comparison.



we have both in the PO .....both have great workers and both have some shitty ones....


----------



## Polk (Jun 20, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> Polk said:
> 
> 
> > 1. It absolutely has to do with what we're talking about, since you claimed "[p]ublic education is not going anywhere because there is a need to ensure that people have a basic education". Even if we accept that as true, what we're really talking about is public provision of the service. There is nothing that requires that service to be provided in state-owned building by state employees.
> ...



I'm not ignoring your points. You've stated repeated that society has no choice to have schools operated by the government directly. That's simply not true. 

Point 3 was stated a bit more strongly than necessary, but it wasn't a lie. You don't agree with society's choice about how to arrange the school system.


----------



## Flopper (Jun 20, 2013)

martybegan said:


> Sactowndog said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Transferring retirement money to government employee unions does not make sense because the retirement plans cover both union and non-union employees.   In some states, only about half the teachers are members of a union.  In fact, membership can vary widely between districts.  Within a large school district or city government, there can be many unions with varying percentages of participation, however all employees will probably be covered by the same pension plan.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jun 20, 2013)

I so love these public union theads now a little girl working at Walmart making $8 bucks an hour, knows 10 bucks or her pay check goes to UNiON PUBLIC WORKERS  that get $75 grand a year,,,,,That poor little girl  trying to feed her 2 yearr old son and supporting that old 59 year old IRS worker making 75 grand a year.....


----------



## noose4 (Jun 21, 2013)

bear513 said:


> I so love these public union theads now a little girl working at Walmart making $8 bucks an hour, knows 10 bucks or her pay check goes to UNiON PUBLIC WORKERS  that get $75 grand a year,,,,,That poor little girl  trying to feed her 2 yearr old son and supporting that old 59 year old IRS worker making 75 grand a year.....



I agree Walmart should pay workers more so they dont have to rely on welfare programs to subsidize the pay they get working for a multi billion dollar corporation.


----------



## jwoodie (Jun 21, 2013)

M14 Shooter said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Your union contributed to their campaigns, yes?
Then you bribed them.


----------



## FA_Q2 (Jun 22, 2013)

Sactowndog said:


> FA_Q2 said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


This is a real possibility as all over the place these bankruptcies are going to start occurring.  There are very real financial problems for those entities that cannot simply wave a hand and create themselves a few more trillion.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Jun 25, 2013)

401-K is a savings account but not a very good retirement benefit. The average person would need a 401-K with $1,000,000 in it to equal the same as 50% of their wage for the retirement term. (65 - 85 including inflation at 3%)

My union retirement for the 6 years I was in the union is $200 a month. If I had been in a union job for 20 years it would have been 10 times that. Luckily that pension is not what I have to live on.


----------



## snowdenisahero (Jun 25, 2013)

noose4 said:


> Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.



So do you think Unions are a good thing?


----------



## MikeK (Jun 26, 2013)

noose4 said:


> Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.


Not only police officers are well served by public employee unions.  But the police unions are by far the most powerful and politically influential.


----------



## MikeK (Jun 26, 2013)

snowdenisahero said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.
> ...


If you belong to the middle class, whether or not you or your parents are union members you owe your relatively comfortable lifestyle to the union movement, without which there would be no concept of the _living wage,_ no forty hour work week, no eight hour work day, no overtime pay, no paid vacations, no benefits or employee protections of any kind.  

Too many contemporary Americans take these things for granted and are anti-union because of their ignorance of the sacrifices, the suffering, and the bloodshed it took to impart dignity to the American worker.  


Here are some good books about unions:  

Rebuilding Labor
Why Unions Matter
Unions At The Crossroads
The Transformation of U.S. Unions
Look For The Union Label
*What Do We Need A Union For*
The CIO
Infighting In The UAW


And union movies:

How Green Was My Valley
The Grapes Of Wrath
Native Land
On The Waterfront
The Pajama Game
Harlan County USA
The Organizer
Norma Rae
Matewan
The Molly Maguires
Hoffa

It's true that some unions have become corrupted and all unions have their flaws, but we are far better off with them than we'd be without them.


----------



## midcan5 (Jun 26, 2013)

Yep, America can now become China, Walmart would be happy. Fair wages you say, balderdash corporatists say. Americans need to work like Third world slaves - come on people get with it - Apple stock needs you.  And Americans are strong they won't kill themselves!

"...Chinese bloggers began referring to the Shenzhen plant as the "Foxconn Suicide Express." In its investigation of conditions at Longhua and other plants making Apple products, SACOM concluded that many of those who committed suicide were exhausted, overworked, verbally and physically abused by supervisors, or publicly humiliated when they failed to meet their production quotas. SACOM reports tell the story of some of these young victims: 

 Hou, a nineteen-year-old woman from Hunan province, hanged herself in the toilet of her dorm room on June 18, 2007, shortly a&er she had assured her parents that she would soon be coming home. 

 Sun, a twenty-five-year-old college graduate from Yunnan province, jumped to his death from his twelfth-floor room on July 16, 2009, after he was allegedly blamed for losing a prototype for a new iPhone. According to SACOM, Sun was detained by security officers, placed in "solitary confinement," subjected to "psychological pressures," and allegedly beaten. In a final chat with friends shortly before he killed himself, he described the relief he felt in planning to take his own life: "Thinking that I won't be bullied tomorrow, won't have to be the scapegoat, I feel much better." 

 After Feng, a twenty-three-year-old college graduate, jumped to his death from his fourteenth-floor room on January 16, 2009, police found a suicide note: "Too much work pressure; unstable emotions." 

 Ma, a nineteen-year-old native of Henan province, was found dead near a stairway of his dormitory on January 23, 2010. An autopsy concluded that he had fallen to his death. His sisters later insisted that their brother died from a beating he had suffered after he accidentally damaged equipment at work. 

*After a rash of suicides at the Foxconn plant in early 2010, Foxconn took action: it strung nets around the dorms to catch any workers who might try to kill themselves by jumping. It also sealed balcony doors and barred access to roofs. Workers were reportedly urged to sign a statement promising not to kill themselves *and to "treasure their lives." Apple said later in a public report on "supplier responsibility') issued to shareholders that it was "disturbed and deeply saddened to learn that factory workers were taking their own lives" and pledged to take steps "to help prevent further tragedies."" from p 93-94 'The Betrayal of the American Dream' Donald L. Barlett, James B. Steele 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/t...use-forced-student-labor-to-make-iphones.html

"Roosevelt did not bother with economic arguments when it came to hours and wages. He offered a simple framework, both moral and patriotic. A self-supporting and self-respecting democracy, he proclaimed, can plead no justification for the existence of child labor, no economic reason for chiseling workers wages or stretching workers hours. That is as true today as it was then." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/opinion/the-future-of-fair-labor.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-conservatives-in-lansing-14.html#post6481896
'Right to Work' for Less


*"With all their faults, trade unions have done more for humanity than any other organization of men that ever existed." * Clarence Darrow

"Corporate propaganda directed outwards, that is, to the public at large, has two main objectives: to identify the free enterprise system in popular consciousness with every cherished value, and to identify interventionist governments and strong unions (the only agencies capable of checking a complete domination of society by corporations) with tyranny, oppression and even subversion.  The techniques used to achieve these results are variously called 'public relations', 'corporate communications' and 'economic education'."  Alex Carey 'Taking the Risk out of Democracy' [see also Home | MIT Video ] 
.


----------



## noose4 (Jun 26, 2013)

snowdenisahero said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.
> ...



I think unions are the last line of defense for the working middle class so yes.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jun 26, 2013)

I don't mind unions in both the public and private sector. I do not like public unions to have collective bargaining, it gives to much power to a union over the taxpayer. That is why federal employees that belong to federal unions do not have that power.

On this I agree with FDR.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 28, 2019)

jwoodie said:


> are like Communism:  Great in theory but terrible in practice.  They now represent a new aristocracy which holds a knife to the throat of our democracy.  If we don't give them what they demand, we will be punished...


Tell sayit


----------



## initforme (Apr 28, 2019)

Unions are slowly going away....worker progress will follow.....down the tubes.


----------



## candycorn (Apr 29, 2019)

noose4 said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



They trust businesses to regulate themselves, pay good wages, do the right thing, etc... Some do, most do not. 
This is why industrial plants routinely blow up in Texas.


----------



## candycorn (Apr 29, 2019)

MikeK said:


> snowdenisahero said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



When I graduated HS way back when, I must have gotten 2-3 dozen letters from organizations on campus, the military, colleges, etc...   When I graduated from College and got my multiple occupational certifications--all accredited by national governing bodies...I got zero from unions. 

Unions have themselves to blame for their decline in some cases.   

You'd figure that there would be someone at the union doing some recruiting


----------



## Wyatt earp (Apr 29, 2019)

candycorn said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > snowdenisahero said:
> ...



But then again the Unions are the good ol' boy network, I remember my cousin being on the list to hire when he was five years old and got the job when he was 28


----------



## jwoodie (May 9, 2019)

midcan5 said:


> Yep, America can now become China, Walmart would be happy. Fair wages you say, balderdash corporatists say. Americans need to work like Third world slaves - come on people get with it - Apple stock needs you.  And Americans are strong they won't kill themselves!
> 
> "...Chinese bloggers began referring to the Shenzhen plant as the "Foxconn Suicide Express." In its investigation of conditions at Longhua and other plants making Apple products, SACOM concluded that many of those who committed suicide were exhausted, overworked, verbally and physically abused by supervisors, or publicly humiliated when they failed to meet their production quotas. SACOM reports tell the story of some of these young victims:
> 
> ...



Ideological diatribes have no place in the CDZ.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

TakeAStepBack said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.
> ...



Are you even remotely aware that compensation for federal government positions is not subject to collective bargaining?

Of course you did not know that.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

martybegan said:


> noose4 said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



Change your state and local laws because none of that applies to the federal government.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  Public employees' total compensation is 50% higher than their private sector counterparts, not counting much greater job security.
> 
> 2.  Public employees do not need union protection because they are already covered by civil service regulations.
> 
> 3.  Making contributions to their employers (politicians) is an obvious conflict of interest that would constitute a felony in the private sector.



You just posted three false statements.  Why?


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

Mr Clean said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Mr Clean said:
> ...



Where do you get that idea?  The funds for war stay right here at home in most cases.  Aid to foreign countries and contractor services overseas are about the only expenses in the military that does not stay here.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

jwoodie said:


> Why don't you compare similar jobs in the public and private sectors?
> *Public school teachers are paid more than twice as much as private school teachers with the same credentials.*  In california, health & safety (fire & police) retire at 90% of their highest salary after 30 years, and their spouses can continue to to receive these benefits for a miniscule (5%-10%) reduction.  Even worse, they are considered disabled if they get any type of cancer or heart problems, which makes their retirement tax free.  This then makes them eligible for low income tax credits.  Wake up!!!!!




Another false statement!  They do NOT have the same credentials.  

You are on a roll!  Run for governor or state office if your state is screwed up.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

PaulS1950 said:


> Why then do private schools out-perform public schools by such a wide margin?
> 
> Maybe we should pay less to teachers and more to the things that actually teach our kids.



They select their students and kick out those who do not perform.  Did you really not know this already?


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

PaulS1950 said:


> In the public sector teachers are paid for 1. level of education and 2. time in grade.
> 
> In the private sector teachers are paid for their ability to teach - not based on the BS, MS, or PhD. that they have at the end of their name.
> 
> ...



Yet you would be perfectly qualified to teach in just about every private school, yet not one public school.  See the difference?


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> Public employee unions should only exist if they are barred from makiing campaign conributions of any kind.
> 
> Unlike any ther sort of union, these unions can hold their employers - elected officials - hostage by threatening to make effery effort to defeat them in the next election of they do net get what they want.



The Constitution says otherwise.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

FA_Q2 said:


> Polk said:
> 
> 
> > Amelia said:
> ...



Teachers unions are banned by law from striking in about 95% of school districts nationwide.  Your example just fell flat.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 26, 2019)

bear513 said:


> I so love these public union theads now a little girl working at Walmart making $8 bucks an hour, knows 10 bucks or her pay check goes to UNiON PUBLIC WORKERS  that get $75 grand a year,,,,,That poor little girl  trying to feed her 2 yearr old son and supporting that old 59 year old IRS worker making 75 grand a year.....



Maybe that little girl should have stayed in school, kept her legs closed, and gotten one of those higher paying jobs!


----------



## longknife (May 27, 2019)

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  Public employees' total compensation is 50% higher than their private sector counterparts, not counting much greater job security.
> ...



Do you really need to ask?


----------



## Polishprince (May 27, 2019)

jwoodie said:


> are like Communism:  Great in theory but terrible in practice.  They now represent a new aristocracy which holds a knife to the throat of our democracy.  If we don't give them what they demand, we will be punished...




I think you are looking at this wrong.

Public employee unions are in cahoots with left leaning politicians, and are involved in a money laundering scheme.

It gives the politicians access to pay of the pay of the public employees, so the taxpayers are funding liberalism through the dues money.

Fortunately, with the Janus decision, mandatory dues for public employees have been found unconstitutional.


----------



## initforme (May 28, 2019)

If the unions were in favor of the gop there'd be no issue.  People who cry about unions simply don't like to see workers do well.  Gotta keep your thumb on them.  Have to make sure they have no voice.  Some teacher making 40 grand is an awful thing.  I'm calling it what it is.....hogwash.  feel free to ask your boss for less pay.


----------



## martybegan (May 28, 2019)

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > noose4 said:
> ...



Why not? Why can't the fed kick the can down 20 years or so?


----------



## Moonglow (May 28, 2019)

jwoodie said:


> are like Communism:  Great in theory but terrible in practice.  They now represent a new aristocracy which holds a knife to the throat of our democracy.  If we don't give them what they demand, we will be punished...


Yeah anybody but wealthy folks making good money is wrong to a republican, poverty for all they say at the RNC.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (May 28, 2019)

martybegan said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



Federal employment pay and benefits are not subject to collective bargaining.  

The federal employees unions cannot argue for a pay raise or increase in benefits because their pay is set for all employees.   A GS-8 working for the military gets the same pay and benefits as a GS-8 working for the National Parks Service and the GS-8 working for the Treasury Department, (with the exception of locality pay for high cost areas) even though they may belong to three different unions.


----------



## Butch_Coolidge (May 28, 2019)

noose4 said:


> Many a police officer wrongly accused of misconduct have been saved thanks to the representation of their public employee union, government workers are  not slaves they have the right to union representation just like any other working person.



They are not going away. Law enforcement officers have careers that can span 40 years. Most officers don’t have the right to strike, and wouldn’t consider it if they did. They are entitled to some assistance, when targeted to have benefits removed every couple years during contact negotiations. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Polishprince (May 28, 2019)

initforme said:


> If the unions were in favor of the gop there'd be no issue.  People who cry about unions simply don't like to see workers do well.  Gotta keep your thumb on them.  Have to make sure they have no voice.  Some teacher making 40 grand is an awful thing.  I'm calling it what it is.....hogwash.  feel free to ask your boss for less pay.




Actually, you have it half assed backwards, init.

Big Labor is interested in keeping the workers down, so they can skim their paychecks for dues and be devoted to Big Labor's plan for big government.  Where did you get the idea that union bosses like Jimmy Hoffa, Paul Castellano and Johnny Friendly are all altruistic?

If you look at the 1920's in US History, vs. the 1930's, you'll see how much Big Labor cares.

In the 1920's, unions were at their nadir.   And there were 3 words to describe how the average working man was doing. Fab You Less.
The average working Joe bought their first electronics, their first automobile in the 1920's, American car culture and suburbia began to take off.

In the 1930's, unions rose to a zenith.  The Wagner Act was passed,union shops became the norm.   The average working stiff?   Not so well, poverty was the norm.  Read "Grapes of Wrath" to get an idea about how life was during the heyday of the Union Goons.


----------



## SeaGal (Jun 1, 2019)

Here's something I find curious.  Public Sector Unions - why do we need them?

Why do government employees need protection from a big powerful government from whom all blessings flow and we trust to manage our healthcare?


----------



## initforme (Jun 1, 2019)

The corporatists want a cheap work force.   It's so blatant.  Hey, 20 dollars per hour is a good wage....NOT.  it's really pathetic.  Disgusting.  Anti....fill in the blank.


----------



## jwoodie (Jun 9, 2019)

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > Why don't you compare similar jobs in the public and private sectors?
> ...



I did NOT say that public and private schools have the same credential requirements.  I said that public school teachers are paid much more than private school teachers with the same credentials.


----------

