Republicans losing PR battle on collective bargaining:

[BDKJMU]

Are unions popular? Sort of. According to a new NYT/CBS poll, a third of Americans view them favorably, a quarter of Americans view them unfavorably, and the rest are undecided. But are efforts to attack unions popular? Not at all. The same poll showed Americans opposed weakening the bargaining rights of union members by an almost two-to-one margin.

Nor does the public like the idea of cutting the pay or benefits of union employees to balance budgets: 56 percent opposed that strategy, while 37 percent supported it. You can find the reason for that in another question: Only 26 percent of Americans think public employees are overpaid. Another 37 percent think their pay is about right, and a further 25 percent think their pay is too low.

And that's not an isolated survey. A Pew poll released yesterday found the unions winning over the public in Wisconsin -- they led Walker by 11 points.

I've actually been surprised at how well unions have held up in the polling. My gut instinct was that Scott Walker's campaign would be popular, and resistance to it would be a minority sentiment. My gut was very, very wrong. I wonder whether Scott Walker is beginning to get the creeping suspicion that his gut was wrong, too? A new PPP poll of Wisconsin shows that if the Badger State's voters could do it over again, they'd elect Walker's opponent as governor. The change in sentiment is almost entirely attributable to self-identified Republicans who are also union members. They voted for Walker in November, and now wish they hadn't. According to the PPP poll, if the election was run again, 10 percent of Republicans would defect from Walker, up from only 3 percent who voted Democratic in November.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-k ... _walk.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And what if the quesiton was asked, "Should your taxes be raised so members of public employee unions can continue to pay little to nothing for their health care and pension benefits?" I bet you would get an overwhelming no.

or

Should public employees have to pay for 25% of their health care premiums (the national avg, and what fed employees pay) (notice that Walker's proposal only increases them paying from little to nothing to 12.6%) and should public employees have to contribute enough to cover 1/2 of their pension costs. (Walker's proposal). Bet you would get an overwhelming yes.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Come on DUDE, this is America!

Why should anyone have to pay for anything?






They owe us man!

[BDKJMU]

Actually, I'm more interested in the actual question asked of the respondents. Was the question should public employee unions have the right to collective bargain? or should unions in general have the right to collective bargain? Should unions have the right to walk off the job in a general strike? Or do teachers / police / public employees have the right to walk off the job in a general strike? I didn't read the article, so I'll stand corrected if they did...either way, I don't give a **** as NC public employees are not allowed to collective bargain as a union...so it doesn't affect me. I will say collective bargaining should be allowed for all aspects of private industry unions, but should be allowed, if at all, only to bargain for actual wages and not benefits with regard to public employee unions....and quite frankly, I find it offensive that public employees are allowed to unionize at all....

There is certainly an argument for a "conflict of interest."

Agreed and agreed.

As far as public employee unions with collective bargaining there is a major conflict of interest as Appaholic already mention. Public sector unions and private sector unions are 2 different animals:
-Private sector unions push against the interests of shareholders and management. Public sector unions push against the interests of taxpayers.

-Private sector union members know that their employers could go out of business, so they have an incentive to mitigate their demands. Public sector union members work for local or state monopolies and have no such interest.

-Private sector unions confront managers who have an incentive to push back against their demands. Public sector unions face managers who have an incentive to give into them for the sake of their own survival.

-Public sector unions help choose those they negotiate with. Through gigantic campaign contributions and overall clout, they have enormous influence over who gets elected to bargain with them, especially in state and local races. For a teachers union, collective bargaining means that suppliers of teacher services to all public school systems in a states, or even across states, when negoiating with those they have helped elect, can collude with regard to acceptable wages, benefits and working conditions. An analogy for business would be for the airlines to get together to fix ticket prices, capacity and so on. From this perspective, public employee collective bargaining on a broad scale is more similar to an antitrust violation than to a civil liberty.

This imbalanced incentive structure contributes to states with public sector unions running into fiscal crises. They tend to have workplaces where personnel decisions are made on the basis of seniority, not merit. There is little relationship between excellence and reward, which leads to resentment among taxpayers who don’t have that luxury.

[BDKJMU]

Another thing is you bascially have taxpayers being forced to contribute to the democrat part. Most public employee union political contributions go to the democrat party. Where do the unions get their $ from? The complusory dues of their members. Where does the $ for the members' dues come from? The taxpayers.

[kalm]

. Where does the $ for the members' dues come from? The taxpayers.

Where do the tax payer services like education, fire and police protection, roads etc come from? The decently paid state employees.

Glad you've figured out our system. When are we going to break free from the horrible repressive yoke of this evil 10% of our workforce?

Dude, states are broke because of the financial crisis. Evidently Wisconsin was so broke Walkder had to cut $100's of millions in corporate taxes just last month.

There are some valid points being made about the union related abuses of the system, but let's not get hysterical about this.

[kalm]

Americans are split on the motivations of those seeking to reduce public employee benefits. Forty-five percent - including 59 percent of Republicans - say that those trying to reduce the benefits are mostly motivated by reducing budget deficits. But 41 percent - including nearly half of Democrats and independents and a majority of union households - said the goal was actually primarily to weaken the power of unions.

Asked what they would be willing to do to reduce their state's budget deficit, 40 percent said they would increase taxes. Only 22 percent chose decreasing public employee benefits. Another 20 percent chose decreasing funding for roads, and 3 percent chose decreasing funding for education.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, they appear to be losing the battle.

[BDKJMU]

. Where does the $ for the members' dues come from? The taxpayers.

Where do the tax payer services like education, fire and police protection, roads etc come from? The decently paid state employees.

Glad you've figured out our system. When are we going to break free from the horrible repressive yoke of this evil 10% of our workforce?

Dude, states are broke because of the financial crisis. Evidently Wisconsin was so broke Walkder had to cut $100's of millions in corporate taxes just last month.

There are some valid points being made about the union related abuses of the system, but let's not get hysterical about this.

In 2010, about 12% of the overall workforce, and 36% of public sector.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I keep hearing people say 10% when its 12%. Just want to set the record straight...

My biggets problem is with public sector unions. I don't have any problem with private sector unions PROVIDED as in the case in right to work states, no one is forced to join or pay union dues in order to gain employment in a certain job field.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Don't forget the union sheep listening to their union masters......

So who will voters be more sympathetic to, union sheeple or the Koch brothers?

In this example isn't the Union looking to get more from the "Corporation of Society" which the voters are shareholders in and the money is coming from?

Maybe they won't see it as much as about the Koch brothers as they do themselves unless I'm off track and you are talking about normal unions and not gov. unions.


but it's not the first time.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Holy shit! I have really got to start remembering to read all following posts before I just quote one.

[BDKJMU]

Americans are split on the motivations of those seeking to reduce public employee benefits. Forty-five percent - including 59 percent of Republicans - say that those trying to reduce the benefits are mostly motivated by reducing budget deficits. But 41 percent - including nearly half of Democrats and independents and a majority of union households - said the goal was actually primarily to weaken the power of unions.

Asked what they would be willing to do to reduce their state's budget deficit, 40 percent said they would increase taxes. Only 22 percent chose decreasing public employee benefits. Another 20 percent chose decreasing funding for roads, and 3 percent chose decreasing funding for education.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, they appear to be losing the battle.

The opinions of people who don't vote doesn't matter.
-Was this poll one of registered, likely voters? No
-Was this poll even simply one of registered voters? No.

"This poll was conducted among a random sample of 984 adults nationwide, interviewed by telephone February 24-27, 2011. Phone numbers were dialed from RDD samples of both standard land-lines and cell phones. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher."

Also look at the way the CBS poll was worded. Instead of "Cutting Pay or Benefits of Public Employees to Reduce State Budget Deficits" of course will get a different response than say if the question had been worded "Public Employees taking a pay freeze and/or paying an increased amount of their health care and pension costs to Reduce State Budget Deficits." Or "In order to decrease state budget deficits which of the following would you vote for: Increasing YOUR taxes or Public Employees taking a pay freeze and paying an increased amount of their health care and pension costs?

So I'll take the slanted CBS poll results with a grain of salt, and we'll see who ends up winning this battle.

[kalm]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, they appear to be losing the battle.

The opinions of people who don't vote doesn't matter.
-Was this poll one of registered, likely voters? No
-Was this poll even simply one of registered voters? No.

"This poll was conducted among a random sample of 984 adults nationwide, interviewed by telephone February 24-27, 2011. Phone numbers were dialed from RDD samples of both standard land-lines and cell phones. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher."

Also look at the way the CBS poll was worded. Instead of "Cutting Pay or Benefits of Public Employees to Reduce State Budget Deficits" of course will get a different response than say if the question had been worded "Public Employees taking a pay freeze and/or paying an increased amount of their health care and pension costs to Reduce State Budget Deficits." Or "In order to decrease state budget deficits which of the following would you vote for: Increasing YOUR taxes or Public Employees taking a pay freeze and paying an increased amount of their health care and pension costs?

So I'll take the slanted CBS poll results with a grain of salt, and we'll see who ends up winning this battle.

Like I said before, I really don't have a dog in this fight and I think it's very wise of you to take this poll with a grain of salt. Hell I think it's wise to take everything with a grain of salt.

[kalm]

So who will voters be more sympathetic to, union sheeple or the Koch brothers?

In this example isn't the Union looking to get more from the "Corporation of Society" which the voters are shareholders in and the money is coming from?

Maybe they won't see it as much as about the Koch brothers as they do themselves unless I'm off track and you are talking about normal unions and not gov. unions.


but it's not the first time.

Sure everyone is looking out for themselves. And for the record, I don't think either for-profit corporations or labor unions should be able to spend money on campaigns. But at least the "Corporation of Society" is non profit, and everyone benefits from it. The Koch brothers benefit a much more narrow group of people. I'm not one of their shareholders so I could give a fuck what benefits them. (at least I think I'm not, my wife might be though, and if that's the case: "go Koch Brothers" disregard everything else I've said )

[TheDancinMonarch]

in truth - nobody gives a real **** what the whole of the population thinks about an issue - what matters, is what VOTERS think...

You mean like the election in November 2010 that gave the Republicans the majority in the Wisconsin legislature? And the Governors office? Chief?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

in truth - nobody gives a real **** what the whole of the population thinks about an issue - what matters, is what VOTERS think...

You mean like the election in November 2010 that gave the Republicans the majority in the Wisconsin legislature? And the Governors office? Chief?

eh... like i've said elsewhere - nov 2012 will be the referendum on this - and the numbers that have wafted to me out of wisconsin suggest that the voters are going to side with the dems on this. as it stands now, walker is starting to float trial balloons of compromise finally (after realizing compromise is the only way to end this intractable standoff)... mostly because, if his polling matches the stuff I've had slipped to me by friends working over there... this isn't going well for him.

[native]

Where do the tax payer services like education, fire and police protection, roads etc come from? The decently paid state employees.

Glad you've figured out our system. When are we going to break free from the horrible repressive yoke of this evil 10% of our workforce?

Dude, states are broke because of the financial crisis. Evidently Wisconsin was so broke Walkder had to cut $100's of millions in corporate taxes just last month.

There are some valid points being made about the union related abuses of the system, but let's not get hysterical about this.

In 2010, about 12% of the overall workforce, and 36% of public sector.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I keep hearing people say 10% when its 12%. Just want to set the record straight...

My biggets problem is with public sector unions. I don't have any problem with private sector unions PROVIDED as in the case in right to work states, no one is forced to join or pay union dues in order to gain employment in a certain job field.

[native]

You mean like the election in November 2010 that gave the Republicans the majority in the Wisconsin legislature? And the Governors office? Chief?

eh... like i've said elsewhere - nov 2012 will be the referendum on this - and the numbers that have wafted to me out of wisconsin suggest that the voters are going to side with the dems on this. as it stands now, walker is starting to float trial balloons of compromise finally (after realizing compromise is the only way to end this intractable standoff)... mostly because, if his polling matches the stuff I've had slipped to me by friends working over there... this isn't going well for him.

Let Wisconsin slide back to stupidity and fail. Other states will succeed. Public sector unions are an inherently corrupt conflict of interest.

[Grizalltheway]

eh... like i've said elsewhere - nov 2012 will be the referendum on this - and the numbers that have wafted to me out of wisconsin suggest that the voters are going to side with the dems on this. as it stands now, walker is starting to float trial balloons of compromise finally (after realizing compromise is the only way to end this intractable standoff)... mostly because, if his polling matches the stuff I've had slipped to me by friends working over there... this isn't going well for him.

Let Wisconsin slide back to stupidity and fail. Other states will succeed. Public sector unions are an inherently corrupt conflict of interest.

In case you hadn't noticed, our system is chock full of conflicts of interest. Former oil execs as Secretary of Defense, Wall Street fat cats regulating finance, the list goes on..

[BDKJMU]

eh... like i've said elsewhere - nov 2012 will be the referendum on this - and the numbers that have wafted to me out of wisconsin suggest that the voters are going to side with the dems on this. as it stands now, walker is starting to float trial balloons of compromise finally (after realizing compromise is the only way to end this intractable standoff)... mostly because, if his polling matches the stuff I've had slipped to me by friends working over there... this isn't going well for him.

Let Wisconsin slide back to stupidity and fail. Other states will succeed. Public sector unions are an inherently corrupt conflict of interest.

[houndawg]

Starting to get tight around the collar for Walker. Same thing happened to Gingrich when he played chicken with Clinton.

I don't see why governors and legislators need to be paid at all; let them live on what they steal instead of putting it in the bank.

[BDKJMU]

Starting to get tight around the collar for Walker. Same thing happened to Gingrich when he played chicken with Clinton.

I don't see why UNION BOSSES need to be paid at all; let them live on what they steal instead of putting it in the bank.

FIFY

[houndawg]

How much does Walker contribute to his own pension and health care? And why does he need a car and housing allowance when he can live in the Governor's mansion? Dude makes 135K plus graft, let him by his own damn car.

[BDKJMU]

How much does Walker contribute to his own pension and health care? And why does he need a car and housing allowance when he can live in the Governor's mansion? Dude makes 135K plus graft, let him by his own damn car.

So, the union bosses, whose salaries are also paid by the taxpayers, make FAR more, making hundreds of thousands + graft.

-Taxpayers pay the salaries of the public sector union employees.
-Public sector union employees have a good chunk of their salary confiscated to pay bloated union dues.
-Bloated union dues go to pay the bloated salaries of union bosses and political contributions to mostly donk politicians.

So houndog, you complain about the salaries of bankers, wall street people, and republican pols, yet how come you never complain about the salaries of union bosses?

"...Salaries for the 10 largest unions’ bosses range from $173,000 for the United Auto Workers’ Bob King to $618,000 for Terence O’Sullivan, the president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America. AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka makes about $283,000 per year. Gerald McEntee, the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), makes $480,000. The AFSCME stands to lose the most from any of the governors’ budget victories, as it’s currently the nation’s powerhouse public sector union, with around 1.5 million members nationwide....."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailycaller/201 ... ortshows_1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[kalm]

How much does Walker contribute to his own pension and health care? And why does he need a car and housing allowance when he can live in the Governor's mansion? Dude makes 135K plus graft, let him by his own damn car.

So, the union bosses, whose salaries are also paid by the taxpayers, make FAR more, making hundreds of thousands + graft.

-Taxpayers pay the salaries of the public sector union employees.
-Public sector union employees have a good chunk of their salary confiscated to pay bloated union dues.
-Bloated union dues go to pay the bloated salaries of union bosses and political contributions to mostly donk politicians.

So houndog, you complain about the salaries of bankers, wall street people, and republican pols, yet how come you never complain about the salaries of union bosses?

"...Salaries for the 10 largest unions’ bosses range from $173,000 for the United Auto Workers’ Bob King to $618,000 for Terence O’Sullivan, the president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America. AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka makes about $283,000 per year. Gerald McEntee, the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), makes $480,000. The AFSCME stands to lose the most from any of the governors’ budget victories, as it’s currently the nation’s powerhouse public sector union, with around 1.5 million members nationwide....."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailycaller/201 ... ortshows_1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

True, but the union leaders and their bailouts were small by comparison, and they didn't turn around and recieve billions in bonuses the following two years. Oh, and the taxpayers and the taxpayers children, and the tax payers grandchildren will also be paying the bankers salaries for years to come. Union bosses graft is a pittance by comparison.

[TheDancinMonarch]

... but the legislative battle has been won.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 9-19-45-22" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[YoUDeeMan]

... but the legislative battle has been won.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 9-19-45-22" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;