Wisconsin's Democrats to End Union Standoff

[Midwest Lib]

Wisconsin's Democrats to End Union Standoff

"Playing a game of political chicken, Democratic senators who fled Wisconsin to stymie restrictions on public-employee unions said Sunday they planned to come back from exile soon, betting that even though their return will allow the bill to pass, the curbs are so unpopular they'll taint the state's Republican governor and legislators.

The Republicans rejected the idea that the legislation would hurt the GOP. "If you think this is a bad bill for Republicans, why didn't you stand up in the chamber and debate us about it three weeks ago?" said Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald. "People think it's absolutely ridiculous that these 14 senators have not been in Wisconsin for three weeks." "



I think the first two paragraphs sum up both sides hopes pretty well. It's obvious at this point that the bill is going to pass. Time will tell if the bill was a responsible solution, but I think the bigger impact has been the attention drawn to the issue.

I, as many of you know, am against the bill but understand unfortunately that the show must go on.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

It's pretty clear that the bill was an unnecessary solution considering that union members agreed to the other terms so long as their collective bargaining wasn't taken away.

From my perspective, Walker destroyed his career. Not only did the police and fireman who endorsed him and were exempt from his scheme turn on him, he was also caught in an embarrassing phone call where everybody's suspicions were confirmed. Good riddance. Americans fought for unions and now we have to fight to maintain them.

In a way, it's good that this became such a huge issue, maybe in 2012, Democrats won't stay home from the polls to retaliate against Obama and those who belong to unions will realize that Republican Party is not on their side.

 

[Ed Gein]

Keep hope alive, liberals. You have all screwed the pooch and are writhing in fetal positions and screaming in flea ridden pillows in secret places like the syphilitic cowards you are.

Perhaps the citizens' memories will be long enough by the next election to give the running reps their just deserts.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

It's pretty clear that the bill was an unnecessary solution considering that union members agreed to the other terms so long as their collective bargaining wasn't taken away.

From my perspective, Walker destroyed his career. Not only did the police and fireman who endorsed him and were exempt from his scheme turn on him, he was also caught in an embarrassing phone call where everybody's suspicions were confirmed. Good riddance. Americans fought for unions and now we have to fight to maintain them.

In a way, it's good that this became such a huge issue, maybe in 2012, Democrats won't stay home from the polls to retaliate against Obama and those who belong to unions will realize that Republican Party is not on their side.

You mean you fought for the right to ****ty teachers who are kept based on time, not on merit? Awesome.... :thumbs:

 

[Midwest Lib]

Keep hope alive, liberals. You have all screwed the pooch and are writhing in fetal positions and screaming in flea ridden pillows in secret places like the syphilitic cowards you are.

Perhaps the citizens' memories will be long enough by the next election to give the running reps their just deserts.

You realize hyper-partisan babble earns you no respect, right? I find it no surprise that you've been banned on other boards that you've joined. If you care to add anything of value to the conversation, I will be waiting.

 

[Midwest Lib]

You mean you fought for the right to ****ty teachers who are kept based on time, not on merit? Awesome.... :thumbs:

With all due respect, Rev, that wasn't quite the point. I actually agree that seniority over merit is a terrible system (although a merit based system has it's flaws, such as favoritism, as well) but at the end of the day, that wasn't what this argument was about. Sure, if the layoffs went into effect, the youngest, not the worst teachers would be canned, but it's still not the reason for all the fuss.

 

[Ed Gein]

You realize hyper-partisan babble earns you no respect, right? I find it no surprise that you've been banned on other boards that you've joined. If you care to add anything of value to the conversation, I will be waiting.

Don't shoot the messenger, Lib. Your cause is yesterday's news, and my contribution to your thread of fantasy is not only pertinent, but far more measured and respectful than you thugs deserve.

A little dose of reality to put a smile on your smug mug.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

With all due respect, Rev, that wasn't quite the point. I actually agree that seniority over merit is a terrible system (although a merit based system has it's flaws, such as favoritism, as well) but at the end of the day, that wasn't what this argument was about. Sure, if the layoffs went into effect, the youngest, not the worst teachers would be canned, but it's still not the reason for all the fuss.

you are right, the reason for the "fuss" is that the dems left teh state, giving the unions ample time to protest cuts, that the state has to make.


BTW are the teachers back teaching?

 

[Midwest Lib]

Clearly you don't read my posts on a regular basis, or you would not pretend to know what I stand for. I fall on the side of the unions in this position, but in general your style of posting adds nothing to the debate at hand.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Clearly you don't read my posts on a regular basis, or you would not pretend to know what I stand for. I fall on the side of the unions in this position, but in general your style of posting adds nothing to the debate at hand.

I'm talking about the unions, you are talking about the Good Reverend, Cleary, "I" am the problem here, who "adds nothing to the debate at hand". :ssst:

 

[Objective Voice]

You mean you fought for the right to ****ty teachers who are kept based on time, not on merit? Awesome.... :thumbs:

Not every state's pay system is like that. Here in Bama country, our teacher's pay raises are based on a merit system. Unfortunately, they've had to deal with prorations the last 3 yrs and have had both hiring freezes and budgetary reductions since that time. And yet, our GOP held state legislature is still trying to cut even more of their pay, benefits (health care and pensions like every other state) and reduce even more from the education budget.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Not every state's pay system is like that. Here in Bama country, our teacher's pay raises are based on a merit system. Unfortunately, they've had to deal with prorations the last 3 yrs and have had both hiring freezes and budgetary reductions since that time. And yet, our GOP held state legislature is still trying to cut even more of their pay, benefits (health care and pensions like every other state) and reduce even more from the education budget.

They should cut civil workers (police, fire, teachers, dpw, etc) across the board. We are in a budget suck. cuts have to be made.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

You mean you fought for the right to ****ty teachers who are kept based on time, not on merit? Awesome.... :thumbs:

I have a family member who has worked in the Chicago Public School system for 38 years. She works in an inner city neighborhood and her students consistently perform above average and are every year recognized as most improving in grades and in testing. She is respected by every teacher in her school and throughout the public school system, even by the corrupt administrators. But in recent years, CPS has begun to do things that will probably undermine her great work...luckily she'll get to retire soon, even though she wants to stay in in order to keep simple minded people like you from voting for idiots.

The best parts about this: 1. Many of the tests that CPS has decided teachers must give their students have spelling and grammatical errors in them. 2. It seems a bit silly to evaluate teachers on merit (i.e. how well their students do on tests) when their students must take tests with spelling and grammar errors that the students themselves point out in the middle of taking such tests. This is going on throughout the entire CPS system and I'm sure throughout the country.

There are also many many incidents of great teachers whose principles tried to get them fired just because they weren't young and impressionable.

If a few bad teachers have to stay in in order to keep the really good ones, so be it. I would stop believing the story much of the media has pressed in regards to teachers' unions. I believe that certain reforms should be made to make it easy to get bad teachers out; I just think the assault against teachers and their unions is very misguided.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Assault?


Merit vs. seniority?



You choose seniority based on one anecdotal sample?



I dont.

 

[Kulterkampf]

Whoa buddy, I have issue's with the liberal agenda and this how gong show of senators failing to do the job that taxpayers pay them to do. But, let it go the bill will pass and then the people will get an opportunity to elect officials that will either keep the bill in place or remove it.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Assault?


Merit vs. seniority?



You choose seniority based on one anecdotal sample?



I dont.

It's not anecdotal.

An entire school system in one of the largest cities in the country is giving tests to students with spelling and grammar errors, evaluating students based on those ridiculous tests and evaluating teachers based on their performance. Not to mention in many of these schools (usually the poor areas), students are given standardized tests (national, state or district) 100 days out of the year.

That's not an anecdote. That's a widespread reality. Do you want your children being tested instead of taught that many days out of the year? Do you want your children being taught in classrooms with 40 other students? Do you want teachers fired because of a system that let's principals fire based on political bull****?

This is the stuff unions and teachers are fighting against. Instead of believing what some corporate sponsored report on television tells you or some Republican governor wants you to believe, maybe you should try to find out why teachers are fighting this sort of rhetoric so hard for.

Maybe you should pay attention to the people who spend thousands of dollars on their own money on school supplies for poor kids who parents can't afford it, who want their students to be able to learn in smaller classrooms where they can get more attention, etc.

In order to get tenure, you have to go through an evaluation process. After getting it, you have the right to due process before being fired. Maybe we should reform the initial evaluation process and the due process system to make firing drunk teachers easier, but the rest of this Republican fed B.S. is just that B.S..

 

[Barbbtx]

It's not anecdotal.

An entire school system in one of the largest cities in the country is giving tests to students with spelling and grammar errors, evaluating students based on those ridiculous tests and evaluating teachers based on their performance. Not to mention in many of these schools (usually the poor areas), students are given standardized tests (national, state or district) 100 days out of the year.

That's not an anecdote. That's a widespread reality. Do you want your children being tested instead of taught that many days out of the year? Do you want your children being taught in classrooms with 40 other students? Do you want teachers fired because of a system that let's principals fire based on political bull****?

This is the stuff unions and teachers are fighting against. Instead of believing what some corporate sponsored report on television tells you or some Republican governor wants you to believe, maybe you should try to find out why teachers are fighting this sort of rhetoric so hard for.

Maybe you should pay attention to the people who spend thousands of dollars on their own money on school supplies for poor kids who parents can't afford it, who want their students to be able to learn in smaller classrooms where they can get more attention, etc.

In order to get tenure, you have to go through an evaluation process. After getting it, you have the right to due process before being fired. Maybe we should reform the initial evaluation process and the due process system to make firing drunk teachers easier, but the rest of this Republican fed B.S. is just that B.S..

Apparently Unions are of little help when it comes to the things you pointed out that are wrong with the system.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

It's not anecdotal.

as soon as you cackled on about simple minded folks "like me" and your family member, you went "anecdotal"....


"simple minded" people like me, have enough money to live in areas where teachers are kept based on merit, or have the ability to send my son to a private school, etc...

simple minded folk like me, see that when you keep teachers based on senority, you keep the bad apples with the good...


Parents at Brooklyn's PS 65 say last in first out rule for teachers is a failure - NYPOST.com



simply minded folk like me, think union crap like this is a tragedy....

An entire school system in one of the largest cities in the country is giving tests to students with spelling and grammar errors, evaluating students based on those ridiculous tests and evaluating teachers based on their performance. Not to mention in many of these schools (usually the poor areas), students are given standardized tests (national, state or district) 100 days out of the year.

Sounds like a local problem, not a union problem. What's the union doing to fix it other than making sure tenure is kept. :roll:

That's not an anecdote. That's a widespread reality. Do you want your children being tested instead of taught that many days out of the year? Do you want your children being taught in classrooms with 40 other students? Do you want teachers fired because of a system that let's principals fire based on political bull****?

you want teachers to stay based on senority. You are not the solution to any problem. :shrug:

This is the stuff unions and teachers are fighting against. Instead of believing what some corporate sponsored report on television tells you or some Republican governor wants you to believe, maybe you should try to find out why teachers are fighting this sort of rhetoric so hard for.

Maybe you should pay attention to the people who spend thousands of dollars on their own money on school supplies for poor kids who parents can't afford it, who want their students to be able to learn in smaller classrooms where they can get more attention, etc.

Maybe if folks put money back into thier own pensions, then perhaps they can afford more of these things. :shrug:

In order to get tenure, you have to go through an evaluation process. After getting it, you have the right to due process before being fired. Maybe we should reform the initial evaluation process and the due process system to make firing drunk teachers easier, but the rest of this Republican fed B.S. is just that B.S..

You do know I am not a republican, right?


I am a small business owner who has to deal with unions not liking how I run my shop. So lets not go on and on about how altruistic the unions in general are. I see how many operate, and many teachers unions are no different.

 

[Objective Voice]

They should cut civil workers (police, fire, teachers, dpw, etc) across the board. We are in a budget suck. cuts have to be made.

Two things I find wrong with this view:

1) Not every public servant in every municipality are financed at the state level. Most are "city" or "county" employees. So, that tactic won't fly in some, if not most, states.

2) Why is it people that are the hardest hit when budget cuts become so "necessary"? The answer, of course, is simple: Once you take away a job or significantly reduce the salary that was once affixed to the position, bueracrats never have to rehire or reinstate that level of pay. In short, reduce your workforce from 100 down to 75, you never have to rehire those 25 former employees again. Same goes if you reduce salaries and benefits across the board. Take it away now and odds are they never return back to the levels they once were.

Now, here's what I see as large problems where all this union busting, force reductions (especially with teachers) and salary/benefit cuts.

a. Unions have always been a big part of fairness in the workforce. When requests become unreasonable, it's only fair that business owners or state Governors/politicians push back. But is if fair to take away the employee's right to seek fairness using the one collective voice they have to represent them at the bargaining table? In effect, that's what appears to be happening with states across the country. But haven't we always been a country that prides itself on giving voice to the people...free speech and all? And what about this noble idea of empowering people to do better for themselves, to stand up for what they believe in? Clearly, Wisconsin and other states across the country are having budgetary problems, but if all they need are short-term fixes to their fiscal problems, cutting teacher pay and benefits really isn't the answer in the long-term. Yes, states get the needed financial breathing room in the short-term, but it's just a bandaid.

b. The issues with their monitary policies will still remain. The trade-off here is you gain short-term capital, but you lose in turning out a well educated society (not to mention the potential for civil unrest, ineffective public services or none at all, etc., etc.) States that once depended on tourism, for example, will start to see declines in tourism revenue and they'll start wondering why? Well, when your roads, bridges and highways, state parks and other forms of infrastruture are in decay, state officials will look back on these days and wonder, "What have we done?" It's happened before and it will happen again. Problem is by the time the error is realized, it's usually much to late to turn back the clock.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Apparently Unions are of little help when it comes to the things you pointed out that are wrong with the system.

I would disagree. It takes time to fix problems and many these problems have started in the last ten years. Unions/collective bargaining enables teachers to negotiate class sizes so that they aren't overwhelmed with 40 students and students get a fair chance at learning and the attention they need to succeed. Unions also work with teachers to file grievances for poor work conditions that not only affect teachers but kids. There's a lot that they help with, if only in keeping the problems at bay.

I would be delusional to say that there aren't poor teachers out there who are lazy and drunk and don't care, but there are many more who give their lives to teaching children with many more problems than needing to learn math, particular in low-income areas. It's easy to cast unions as villains.

I think people need to stop nailing teacher's unions and teachers so hard and put a lot more focus on the policies like excessive teaching and the deals made with corporations to provide ineffective learning materials. Why isn't anyone outraged about that?

 

[Andalublue]

They should cut civil workers (police, fire, teachers, dpw, etc) across the board. We are in a budget suck. cuts have to be made.

I notice you make no mention of cutting military personnel. Why are they exempt?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Two things I find wrong with this view:

1) Not every public servant in every municipality are financed at the state level. Most are "city" or "county" employees. So, that tactic won't fly in some, if not most, states.

Towns pay into the state, reduce that burden by the same percentage.


I am also for the regionalization of schools and police and fire forces... We don't need 50+ chiefs in my county making 100k+ a year.... (some well over 300)

2) Why is it people that are the hardest hit when budget cuts become so "necessary"? The answer, of course, is simple: Once you take away a job or significantly reduce the salary that was once affixed to the position, bueracrats never have to rehire or reinstate that level of pay. In short, reduce your workforce from 100 down to 75, you have have to rehire those 25 former employees again. Same goes if you reduce salaries and benefits across the board. Take it away now and odds are they never return back to the levels they once were.

I own a company, if i can't afford to pay my employees, either I cut thier pay, or I lay them off... Why should states be allowed to run at such deficits?


We simply can not afford it.

Now, here's what I see as large problems where all this union busting, force reductions (especially with teachers) and salary/benefit cuts.

a. Unions have always been a big part of fairness in the workforce. When requests become unreasonable, it's only fair that business owners or state Governors/politicians push back. But is if fair to take away the employee's right to seek fairness using the one collective voice they have to represent them at the bargaining table? In effect, that's what appears to be happening with states across the country. But haven't we always been a country that prides itself on giving voice to the people...free speech and all? And what about this noble idea of empowering people to do better for themselves, to stand up for what they believe in? Clearly, Wisconsin and other states across the country are having budgetary problems, but if all they need are short-term fixes to their fiscal problems, cutting teacher pay and benefits really isn't the answer in the long-term. Yes, states get the needed financial breathing room in the short-term, but it's just a bandaid.

Wait, everyone should be cut but union workers because they can bargain? I misread this, no?

b. The issues with their monitary policies will still remain. The trade-off here is you gain short-term capital, but you lose in turning out a well educated society (not to mention civil unrest, ineffective public services or none at all, etc., etc.) States that once depended on tourism, for example, will start to see declines in tourism revenue and they'll start wondering why? Well, when your roads, bridges and highways, state parks and other forms of infrastruture are in decay, state officials will look back on these days and wonder, "What have we done?" It's happened before and it will happen again. Problem is by the time the error is realized, it's usually much to late to turn back the clock.

Merit... base it on merit, if the unions were for merit (I think they are in NJ which is why christie is not trying to bust the unions, and I agree here), then I would have more sympathy. But given what they are paid, the amount of time off, to me it seems they want more and more for less and less, in a time when we simply can not afford it.

 

[American]

It's not anecdotal.

An entire school system in one of the largest cities in the country is giving tests to students with spelling and grammar errors, evaluating students based on those ridiculous tests and evaluating teachers based on their performance. Not to mention in many of these schools (usually the poor areas), students are given standardized tests (national, state or district) 100 days out of the year.

That's not an anecdote. That's a widespread reality. Do you want your children being tested instead of taught that many days out of the year? Do you want your children being taught in classrooms with 40 other students? Do you want teachers fired because of a system that let's principals fire based on political bull****?

This is the stuff unions and teachers are fighting against. Instead of believing what some corporate sponsored report on television tells you or some Republican governor wants you to believe, maybe you should try to find out why teachers are fighting this sort of rhetoric so hard for.

Maybe you should pay attention to the people who spend thousands of dollars on their own money on school supplies for poor kids who parents can't afford it, who want their students to be able to learn in smaller classrooms where they can get more attention, etc.

In order to get tenure, you have to go through an evaluation process. After getting it, you have the right to due process before being fired. Maybe we should reform the initial evaluation process and the due process system to make firing drunk teachers easier, but the rest of this Republican fed B.S. is just that B.S..

So teachers shouldn't be evaluated on student performance. What should they be evaluated on?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I notice you make no mention of cutting military personnel. Why are they exempt?

Because the military folk are paid like ****. Well under thier civilian or civil equivelants pay.... plus the military has no collective bargaining rights so I don't see the correlation here.

That said, I am not for increasing pay in the military, poor pay has a purpose in the military, but that's a whole nother thread.


I am for scrapping some military programs, lowering what we spend on the military, etc.... So, I think you pretty much failed here chief.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

as soon as you cackled on about simple minded folks "like me" and your family member, you went "anecdotal"....


"simple minded" people like me, have enough money to live in areas where teachers are kept based on merit, or have the ability to send my son to a private school, etc...

simple minded folk like me, see that when you keep teachers based on senority, you keep the bad apples with the good...


Parents at Brooklyn's PS 65 say last in first out rule for teachers is a failure - NYPOST.com



simply minded folk like me, think union crap like this is a tragedy....







Sounds like a local problem, not a union problem. What's the union doing to fix it other than making sure tenure is kept. :roll:






you want teachers to stay based on senority. You are not the solution to any problem. :shrug:





Maybe if folks put money back into thier own pensions, then perhaps they can afford more of these things. :shrug:






You do know I am not a republican, right?


I am a small business owner who has to deal with unions not liking how I run my shop. So lets not go on and on about how altruistic the unions in general are. I see how many operate, and many teachers unions are no different.

You're missing the point. But it does make sense that you live in a wealthy or at least a wealthy enough area. My parents were able to send me to private schools as well. And to be sure, simple-minded people come in all classes, backgrounds, races, genders and nationalities. I know a lot of rich, academic people who can't see past the convenient story put in front of them. You don't have to see yourself in the image I've painted of you, but you can't help how I see you based on what you've written.

In any case, the good thing about private schools or about public schools in middle class to wealthy neighborhoods is that parents speak up for their children to make sure that they and their teachers have good conditions and are working based on effective policies. In those places, maybe teachers don't need unions because the parents will stick up for them.

But in poorer areas, where parents (in general) are much less attentive, teachers and students need something else. Parents won't protest 100 days of testing or the use of crappy books schools the Board of Ed. got from a corporate friend who needs a favor. Parents aren't going to demand that their children have after school activities, etc.

Teachers can do this to a limited extent by demanding that they get to work in certain conditions that would also benefit students and unions are the ones who help them get those conditions. So you and I can go live in our fantastic private school lives and I can be grateful that my mother never let me go to a school as bad the kids a neighborhood over, but projecting our experiences onto those of poorer people and mocking unions because parts of them are bad doesn't help the problem.