Collective bargaining "rights"??

[WorldWatcher]

You of course are free to call it "going after unions" all you want, your spin is irrelevant to the facts.

True, the fact remains that he is attempting to bust the general collective bargaining power of non-police and fire fighter unions.

And the fact is he campaigned ran on and was 100% up front about what his plan was and not all (or even a majority) of police and fire unions backed him. Most backed his opponent.

1. I never said he wasn't up-front.

2. I never said "all" police and fire unions backed him, however several did.

3. If you would like to make the claim that a majority of police and fire unions didn't back him feel free to list individual unions and their relative membership as an indication of political influence for their endorsements (and non-endorsement).

4. The fact that at least one major police union regrets the endorsement... MHO is that they think the writing is on the wall, teacher union this time Police & Fire next time. From the Wisconsin Law Enforcement Association...

"The Governor’s proposal for modifying (or complete dismantling, depending on your viewpoint) the collective bargaining language for government employees contains more provisions that are intended to cost employees more in the long run.

When he was Candidate Walker, he never talked publicly about union dismantling during the campaign. As Governor Elect Walker, he brought the subject up publicly during a luncheon at the Milwaukee Press Club on December 7, 2010. It was reported in many papers across the state. His anti-union stance wasn’t a surprise, but the introduction of this radical change caught many people off guard, including people who actually voted for him during the election."

http://www.wlea.org/​

 

[Greenbeard]

And in the HC law the Unions that support Obama are exempted by Obama....

Exempted from what?

 

[WorldWatcher]

So you are saying that he announced an intention to go after unions, with the exception of police and firefighters, BEFORE he got some police and firefighter endorsements.

In other words he got those endorsements AFTER he told those unions they would be exempt.

OK, that makes sense (well if you are a police or firefighter union).


>>>>

You of course are free to call it "going after unions" all you want, your spin is irrelevant to the facts. And the fact is he campaigned ran on and was 100% up front about what his plan was and not all (or even a majority) of police and fire unions backed him. Most backed his opponent.

And now the day of reckoning comes...and we see a flood of fussfits by petulant children.

I think you may have me confused with someone else. Let me just state a couple of things.

1. Yes I work for a school system (in Virginia), however I'm not in a union and Virginia is a right to work state so unions have no bargaining power for teacher wages and benefits.

2. I have no problem with public employees being required to contribute towards their own pensions.

3. I have no problem with public employees being required to contribute towards insurance premiums.

4. I have serious problems with public employees "bumping" compensation in the last few years before retirement for hirer retirement pay - it should be based on base salary not Salary + Overtime.

Hope that helps.


>>>>

 

[Liability]

If you "support" the gutless maneuver of "denying a quorum" then you really aren't interested much in either democracy in general or a representative democracy in particular.

It looks like the Governor may now call for special elections to replace the fucking pussy Democrap Wisconsin "legislators" who have left their posts and fled their state. Screw 'em. Wisconsin Constitution ART. IV, Section 14.

"Filling vacancies. SECTION 14. The governor shall issue
writs of election to fill such vacancies as may occur in either
house of the legislature."

Those seats are pretty fucking VACANT. Boot them the fuck OUT!

Typical Lieability. Lots of cursing. Vaguely bullying tone. And totally missing the point.

You and other petty minded little trolls of your il love to refer to me by an alteration of my username. You imply that I have lied. Of course, you are the one lying since you and the other pussies like you can point to no lie by me.

Moving on. Get your panties out of your heiney crack, ya wuss. I use profanties sometimes. Get over it, pussy.

I haven't bullied anyone. What I did was call bullshit on dopes like you who pretend that the actions of the Democrat Wisconsin Senators is in ANY way a proper form of political behavior in a representative democracy. It isn't.

And not only am I not the one who has missed the "point," you are. You are unable to make a coherent point in fact if you truly wish to be heard to suggest that these cowardly legislators are engaged in valid political activity by fleeing. Gutless.

Your post does underscore one thing though. You have nothing valid to offer on this topic.

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

Does the US Constitution ban collective bargaining?

I thought these corporate water carriers/teabaggers were bigtime Constitution fans, no?

WTF?

 

[The T]

And in the HC law the Unions that support Obama are exempted by Obama....

Exempted from what?

Go read the expemtions.

 

[BenNatuf]

here's the source hhs page - i have it bookmarked. They've changed the numbering scheme; they're grouping "state mandated waivers" and counting them as one waiver per state.

helping americans keep the coverage they have and promoting transparency | hhs.gov

jobs saved!!!!

 

[Liability]

I like the WI DEMS "unique" filibusterer. I think it's hilarious that the best the cons on here can do is call them "pussies".

I also think it's laughable that the governor sent the state police after them.

What can they legally be arrested/detained for? Walker better hope make sure that doesn't happen as it is a clear abuse of power and a violation of the law.

They ARE pussies. Run away, brave Sir Robin. Bravely run away!

You only "like" this so-called variant on a "filibuster" because it's a bunch of pussy libbies doing the running. If the roles were reversed, and a bunch of GOP stalwarts were running away from the legislature to prevent the hypothetical liberal Democrat majority from cramming some other fucking mess down the throats of the people, you'd be expressing outwage! So would all the libbies.

So.

Was it legal for the governor to send the state troopers after them? I thought a person had to break the law in order to be detained.

(A) As to your "so?" question, the answer is obvious. It is that you are being a hypocrite.

(B) It does appear that it was illegal for the Dem. Senators to walk away from their jobs thereby impeding the ability of the State government to proceed. So, possibly it was valid for the Governor to send out troopers to round them up. I dunno. But I also don't know that it was invalid. Do you?

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

What's unConstitutional about unions and their rights to collective bargaining, ya bagged out bozos?

 

[boedicca]

And in the HC law the Unions that support Obama are exempted by Obama....

Exempted from what?

ObamaCare. Many have been granted waivers.

Check out the list at the link for unions:

Helping Americans Keep the Coverage They Have and Promoting Transparency | HHS.gov

 

[Hum Dinger]

Does the US Constitution ban collective bargaining?

I thought these corporate water carriers/teabaggers were bigtime Constitution fans, no?

WTF?

Wingnuts like to ignore what they don't like in the U.S. Constitution, perhaps instead of just keeping a copy in their back pockets and sitting on it, they should actually read it.

By default, the Constitution grants all rights not enumerated:

Article [IX]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

 

[Liability]

What's unConstitutional about unions and their rights to collective bargaining, ya bagged out bozos?

To what post are you attempting to respond?

It's difficult to tell, since I don't recall a whole lot of argument being made by anybody that unions are unConstitutional or that there is (what we now refer to as a "right") any Constitutional prohibition against collective bargaining.

Out of curiosity, are you perhaps posting under the influence?

 

[BenNatuf]

You of course are free to call it "going after unions" all you want, your spin is irrelevant to the facts.

True, the fact remains that he is attempting to bust the general collective bargaining power of non-police and fire fighter unions.

And the fact is he campaigned ran on and was 100% up front about what his plan was and not all (or even a majority) of police and fire unions backed him. Most backed his opponent.

1. I never said he wasn't up-front.

then your complaint is not with what he's doing, its with the fact that your side lost an election with the full knowledge that he was going to do it.

2. I never said "all" police and fire unions backed him, however several did.

Your statement also didn't allow that any hadn't, and it implied his support of his current position was dependant on their support of him... which is ass backwards.

3. If you would like to make the claim that a majority of police and fire unions didn't back him feel free to list individual unions and their relative membership as an indication of political influence for their endorsements (and non-endorsement).

The link is in this thread already, there were a total of five that endorsed him according to the story one being the state poice association and the other being locals. How many police locals do you suppose there are in WI?

4. The fact that at least one major police union regrets the endorsement... MHO is that they think the writing is on the wall, teacher union this time Police & Fire next time. From the Wisconsin Law Enforcement Association...

Once again an unsupportable claim, the "union" did not say they regretted their endorsement, the leader of the union said he did, he claimed to speak for the rest of them, but that claim is unsupported itself.

"The Governor’s proposal for modifying (or complete dismantling, depending on your viewpoint) the collective bargaining language for government employees contains more provisions that are intended to cost employees more in the long run.​

The proposal does not negate their collective bargaining rights, its subjects the agreements to voter approval.

When he was Candidate Walker, he never talked publicly about union dismantling during the campaign. As Governor Elect Walker, he brought the subject up publicly during a luncheon at the Milwaukee Press Club on December 7, 2010. It was reported in many papers across the state. His anti-union stance wasn’t a surprise, but the introduction of this radical change caught many people off guard, including people who actually voted for him during the election."

http://www.wlea.org/

He has put forward no proposals which could or would "dismantle" any unions... the exagerated propoganda of the story is drivel.

 

[BenNatuf]

Does the US Constitution ban collective bargaining?

I thought these corporate water carriers/teabaggers were bigtime Constitution fans, no?

WTF?

You keep trying this silly canard, and it keeps failing miserably. No-one has suggested that it does.

 

[BenNatuf]

And in the HC law the Unions that support Obama are exempted by Obama....

Exempted from what?

Provisions of the law.

Hope that clears it up for you!

 

[Greenbeard]

And in the HC law the Unions that support Obama are exempted by Obama....

Exempted from what?

Provisions of the law.

Hope that clears it up for you!

It does. I was curious to know if you have any idea what you're talking about.

Mystery solved.

 

[TexasDan]

Are people so blind that they cannot see what is happening in other parts of the country. The states that are "Right to Work" states are booming, have jobs available and have the lowest tax rates. States that are "Union" are losing population (heading to the states mentioned earlier), taxes are higher and job growth is DEAD!

The unions have long outlived their usefulness.

When there is a better way of doing things looking you right in the eye you need to pay attention.

CHANGE is not a 4 letter word.

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

You keep trying this silly canard, and it keeps failing miserably. No-one has suggested that it does.

You didn't say earlier there is no 'right' to collectively bargain?

If not, my bad. Must've been another corporate water carrier.

 

[Provocateur]

What's unConstitutional about unions and their rights to collective bargaining, ya bagged out bozos?

You really are slow, aren't you Sack?

 

[BenNatuf]

Does the US Constitution ban collective bargaining?

I thought these corporate water carriers/teabaggers were bigtime Constitution fans, no?

WTF?

Wingnuts like to ignore what they don't like in the U.S. Constitution, perhaps instead of just keeping a copy in their back pockets and sitting on it, they should actually read it.

By default, the Constitution grants all rights not enumerated:

Article [IX]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

perhaps you could enlighten us all with the section that mandates anyone MUST negotiate with a union? Yes you can form one and no-one can stop you. yes you can have as its purpose "collective bargaining", no, you cannot force anyone to bargain with you.