Anyone following what's going on in Wisconsin?

[jzskins]

Have taught in New England for 38 years, 26 in Massachusetts.

A non-ending war since 2001 has gutted our taxbase and put government spending into the ozone. I respect and admire the active duty people who go above and beyond to carry out their missions. Do we need to bash Unions to bail out the politicians?

My association pays 25% of health care and I do not have a Cadillac plan.

Just a working shlep, looking to fish.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by jzskins

Have taught in New England for 38 years, 26 in Massachusetts.

A non-ending war since 2001 has gutted our taxbase and put government spending into the ozone. I respect and admire the active duty people who go above and beyond to carry out their missions. Do we need to bash Unions to bail out the politicians?

My association pays 25% of health care and I do not have a Cadillac plan.

Just a working shlep, looking to fish.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by 179

What is going on in Wisconsin will soon be brought to RI, these unions are killing the states and must be brought down. The problem is there are few politicians willing to take the incredible media assault that will surely follow. For you bleeding heart liberals who think teachers are underpayed figure out their hourly rate based on a F/T job with more that 3-months off.

If I were Governor I would give these Teachers one more chance to get back to work or they are suspended without pay, don't like that then you are fired! The same could be said for the Union bought and payed for Democrat Representatives.

Probably illegal to fire them as they have a right to job actions, unless they have something like a "No Lay#^&#^&#^&#^& clause.

The problem is not the unions, it is the people who manage and agree to the contracts the union presents. The union bashing really needs to stop. If you had a job at Home depot, and one day the manager comes in and says to you 'John you now have to pay 60 a week for your health insurance instead of 15, would you be ticked? I bet you would, no one wants to take a step back from where they are.What you need to realize is this happens to people who work for companies with no bargaining. They chose that job, or career and they are now stuck with it. These people could band together and organize any time they want to, but they choose not to do it.

If we are in such dire straits in this country, why are millionaires like John Kerry drawing taxpayer paychecks. Let's face it they are not doing the job for the money, it is all the perks and benis. Free healthcare for life, pensions, free air travel, networking, partying etc. How come no one is bashing the politicians for all of their perks and beni's?

[scottw]

it appears that what the majority of Americans find offensive is the behaviour of the teachers...the unions are the problem, most Americans have dealt with teachers and/or unions and union workers in some form and understand the game and are quite tired of it

[striperman36]

Are you sick of high paid teachers? Teachers’ hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or 10 months a year! It’s time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do - baby sit! We can get that for less than minimum wage.

That’s right. Let’s give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:00 PM
with 45 min. off for lunch and plan — that equals 6 1/2 hours).

Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children.

Now how many do they teach in day…maybe 30? So that’s $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day. However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations.

LET’S SEE…. That’s $585 X 180= $105,300 peryear. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries).

What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master’s degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children
X 180 days = $280,800 per year.

Wait a minute — there’s something wrong here! There sure is!

The average teacher’s salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77/per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student–a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your
kids!)

https://www.facebook.com/note.php?no...00&id=13909370

[179]

To bad you failed to add up all the other perks you get along with the near $300.00 a day (for 7 hours of work). Lets see here every and any holiday off, two weeks off for Christmas, another week in Spring and usually a 5 day weekend for Thanksgiving. Lets not forget the long Easter weekend. Don't forget the 10 weeks for summer vacation (are you telling me there is nothing these teachers could be doing at the school for this time, hell they are being payed for it) Now lets look at the Pension, what's the going rate for RI after 25 years 60%-80% of your best years gross, for the rest of your life all on the tax payers dime. Lets talk about medical, maybe not the best plan but a very good plan for little or nothing out of your pocket. How about the workday, starts at 8:00am most wrap up by 3:00 at the latest.

Now lets say we have a bad teacher in the mix, maybe verbally or physically assaults the children, maybe has a drinking or drug problem, maybe preaches her/his political views in the classroom, maybe sexually assaults a student, can we fire that teacher, hell no they have union protection. I know only 3 teachers in RI and each of them have been lifelong drug addicts, do you think the school department would do drug testing, no because the union says we can't.

And with all the above, these folks still feel the need to strike, complain, riot, and hold our kids hostage for more, Well you will never get pity from me, what you would get from me if I could do it would be a kick in the ass right out the front door, then I would hire somebody from the real world who would actually appreciate the job.

[scottw]

that's Obama math....total compensation per teacher..let's use Wisconsin..is between 90-100k, I suspect that it is quite a bit higher in other areas...somehow the benefits etc always get left out of the earnings figures...arguing that teachers don't make enough money or that they shouldn't have to contribute tiny amounts like 12.6% of their healthcare premiums has really lost any merit...

don't mind highly paid teachers as long as they are deserving, the system provided by the union makes it impossible to get rid of bad teachers, a crappy teacher is as highly paid as an exceptional teacher simply because of longevity, you can't move in good new teachers because others have been gumming up the works longer and when they finally decide to go they have to be supported for life....I mentioned before my wife is a teacher(non-union) my parents were teachers and I know a ton of teachers..I get it...I guess private school teachers are really getting screwed by the man using your analogy....if the NJ cost per pupil is 17k+ a year...

I'd be willing to bet that the good, quality teachers are sitting home watching this disgusted and wishing they could get back to their students and have an actual grasp of the reality of the situation...the crappy teachers are the ones holding the misspelled protest signs, the offensive slurs locked arm in arm with union thugs, Jesse Jackson and the various communist, marxist and other radical leftist perpetual protest brigade

oh, my daughter came home for school the other day and told me that for gym the teacher put a Taebow(sp) tape in and that was the class...babysitting at it's best probably has his Masters and everything

[Fly Rod]

I basically agree with the legislators but, it is wrong for them to exclude the firemen, local police and state police. It should be done across the board.

Why are they excluded? They voted for the governor.

[striperman36]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

I basically agree with the legislators but, it is wrong for them to exclude the firemen, local police and state police. It should be done across the board.

Why are they excluded? They voted for the governor.

and paid into the war chest

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

I basically agree with the legislators but, it is wrong for them to exclude the firemen, local police and state police. It should be done across the board.

Why are they excluded? They voted for the governor.

Since ballots are secret, nobody knows who the firemen and policemen voted for. There is, on record, that out of the 314 police and firefighter unions in the State only FOUR endorsed him. The rest supported his opponent.

I think that I recall his rationale for not including the police and fire workers in the cuts is that he knew there would be resistance and possible strikes and blue flue type of reasons not to show up for work, and that their service was too critical to have that happen. May be a lame reason, don't know, but the reason is not because the police and fire workers supported him.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by 179

I know only 3 teachers in RI and each of them have been lifelong drug addicts, do you think the school department would do drug testing, no because the union says we can't.

Wow.
that certainly is indicative as the profession as a whole.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

The problem is not the unions...The union bashing really needs to stop.

Thge last year my wife taught, all the teachers in our town got a letter from the union. The letter instructed all the teachers from serving "hall duty", which means that during the 5 minute break between classes, teachers were asked (by the school) to peer out into the hallway and make sure the kids were OK.

The union told the teachers to stop doing it, because that requirement was not specified in the contract, nor were the teachers getting paid for it.

So the union wasn't willing to let the teachers get off the rear-ends for 5 minutes to make sure the kids weren't killing each other.

Than there was that school in Rhode Island where 99% of the kids were performing below their grade level. The school asked the teacjhers to spend 1 lunch break per week tutoring kids, and the union sain "no, not unless weg get paid extra".

LIKE HELL the unions aren't the problem. Like hell.

Labor unions are following the same path that the civil rights movement, and the women's rights mvement, played in thsi country. These groups all fought some very important battles. When the important battles were won, instead of simply going away, these groups are not part of the problem.

These unions really overplayed their hands in WI. They have forced the governor to go "all in", but fortunately for him, he's got a royal flush, and the unions are holding crap. There might have been political room for the Governor to compromise a week ago...now he has to stand his ground...if he compromises at all, he looks weak.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

The problem is not the unions...The union bashing really needs to stop.

The last year my wife taught, all the teachers in our town got a letter from the union. The letter instructed all the teachers to stop serving "hall duty", which means that during the 5 minute break between classes, teachers were asked (by the school) to peer out into the hallway and make sure the kids were OK.

The union told the teachers to stop doing it, because that requirement was not specified in the contract, nor were the teachers getting paid for it.

So the union wasn't willing to let the teachers get off the rear-ends for 5 minutes to make sure the kids weren't killing each other.

Then there was that school in Rhode Island where 99% of the kids were performing below their grade level. The school asked the teachers to spend 1 lunch break per week tutoring kids, and the union said "no, not unless we get paid extra".

LIKE HELL the unions aren't the problem. Like hell. They won't move a muscle unless they get paid extra for it.

Labor unions are following the same path that the civil rights movement, and the women's rights mvement, played in thsi country. These groups all fought some very important battles. When the important battles were won, instead of simply going away, these groups are now part of the problem.

These unions really overplayed their hands in WI. They have forced the governor to go "all in", but fortunately for him, he's got a royal flush, and the unions are holding crap. There might have been political room for the Governor to compromise a week ago...now he has to stand his ground...if he compromises at all, he looks weak.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Wow.
that certainly is indicative as the profession as a whole.

don't think that's what he said, he simply pointed out one(or three) example(s) of unions/policies protecting members that should not be in the profession

there were just posts stating that " (they)firefighters and police voted for the governor" of Wisconsin and "paid into his war chest"

your comment would be more appropriately directed to those blanket statements "as a whole" than to clearly anecdotal comments about the influence of the union which allows the types of things stated to continue

[Fly Rod]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Since ballots are secret, nobody knows who the firemen and policemen voted for. There is, on record, that out of the 314 police and firefighter unions in the State only FOUR endorsed him. The rest supported his opponent.

I think that I recall his rationale for not including the police and fire workers in the cuts is that he knew there would be resistance and possible strikes and blue flue type of reasons not to show up for work, and that their service was too critical to have that happen. May be a lame reason, don't know, but the reason is not because the police and fire workers supported him.

Anyway, it is wrong to exclude them. "What's good for the goose is good for the gander."

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

Anyway, it is wrong to exclude them. "What's good for the goose is good for the gander."

no argument there, maybe they needed the p&f to deal with the protesters, get this done and then tell the p&f unions that they need to make similar concessions.....after the others have finally accepted reality the pressure on those remaining would/will be tremendous...probably didn't want teachers, police and fire all calling in sick at the same time...

[TheSpecialist]

This makes interesting reading...


Are Wisconsin Public Employees Over-compensated?

Seems they are not making the money some are saying, even with benefits factored in. They pay 6% of their healthcare cost to.


Public workers by the numbers

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

They pay 6% of their healthcare cost to.


Public workers by the numbers

And the taxpayers that pay them pay, on average, 30% of their healthcare premiums, and they don't have pensions...
No reason why the benefits that labor unions negotiate should be that much richer than what's available to everyone else, is there?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

This makes interesting reading...


Are Wisconsin Public Employees Over-compensated?

Seems they are not making the money some are saying, even with benefits factored in. They pay 6% of their healthcare cost to.


Public workers by the numbers

very interesting reading.....

•02/15/11 - Wisconsin public versus private employee costs: Why compare apples to oranges?
•02/10/11 - Are Indiana Public Employees Over-compensated?
•02/10/11 - Are Wisconsin Public Employees Over-compensated?
•02/10/11 - Are Ohio Public Employees Over-compensated?
•02/03/11 - Are Michigan Public Employees Over-compensated?
•09/15/10 - Debunking the Myth of the Over-compensated Public Employee
•07/30/10 - Are New Jersey Public Employees Overpaid?


no theme there

you understand that they are not paying 6% of their healthcare costs...right?...6% of the insurance premium..maybe...but not 6% of healthcare cost...there's a difference that seems to be lost in the fog...it's the entitlement thing...if you'd ever actually had to pay your actual healthcare costs or high deductibles out of pocket you'd recognize the difference immediately

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

The hell it is. The unions are screaming that the proposed cuts (excluding the loss of CB) are too stiff.

Well, the union met the governor on much of the costs...

still seems like this is the sticky wheel is collective bargaining.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Well, the union met the governor on much of the costs...

still seems like this is the sticky wheel is collective bargaining.

You are 100% correct, latest reports say that the unions proposed to agree to all of the financial concessions, if the state would leave collective bargaining in place, and the gov gave them an emphatic "no".

As I said earlier, I htink the unions overplayed their hand terribly, and put the governor in a position where if he backs off anything, he looks weak. 3 months into his term, he won't want to appear weak.

I hope he destroys this union, and that other states follow suit. You should either give your customers (in this case, taxpayers) a non-union alternative, or get rid of the union. Why can't these folks negotiate their pay with their employer just like veeryone else does? I don't get it.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

As I said earlier, I htink the unions overplayed their hand terribly, and put the governor in a position where if he backs off anything, he looks weak. 3 months into his term, he won't want to appear weak.

OR

The gov overplayed his hand and it backfires on him.

they agreed to 100% of the costs. 100% as long as they can keep the right to collective bargining.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

OR

The gov overplayed his hand and it backfires on him.

they agreed to 100% of the costs. 100% as long as they can keep the right to collective bargining.

RIROCKHOUND, you may be right. However, in my opinion, when people stop looking at the "don't hate me because I'm a teacher" signs, and they realize that all the gov is asking for is for teachers to pay LESS THAN HALF of what the taxpayers have to pay, more people will side with the gov.

Again, why is it unfair to ask teachers to pay 13% of the cost of health insurance, if everyone else pays 30%.

As Obama likes to say (or more correctly, he used to like to say), "elections have consequences". The people in WI voted for Republicans.

One last thing? anyone siding with the Dems who fled the state, has forever forfeited the right to call Republicans "obstructionists".

This is a fascinating event, which I think will have repurcussions way beyond WI.

[TheSpecialist]

You know what would be better, if the teachers said screw you and all quit. Then let the parents all stay home from work to watch and home school them.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

RIROCKHOUND, you may be right. However, in my opinion, when people stop looking at the "don't hate me because I'm a teacher" signs, and they realize that all the gov is asking for is for teachers to pay LESS THAN HALF of what the taxpayers have to pay, more people will side with the gov.

They just conceeded to exactly what was asked. Now he is looking like he is trying to kill the union, which may have been his first task and ultimate goal.

Specialist:
my very Right leaning gradfather was on an anti-teachers union rant once, and that stopped him in his tracks. Fine, they all get fired or quit, who teaches them?
and will the kids really fare better?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

You know what would be better, if the teachers said screw you and all quit. Then let the parents all stay home from work to watch and home school them.

No, what would happen is, parents would get their property taxes back and use that money to enroll their kids in private schools, which are better, cheaper, and NOT coincidentally, have no unions!!

And then the teachers would all go to the private sector, and by 10:00 AM on the first day they'd realize how great they had it.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

They just conceeded to exactly what was asked. Now he is looking like he is trying to kill the union, which may have been his first task and ultimate goal.

Specialist:
my very Right leaning gradfather was on an anti-teachers union rant once, and that stopped him in his tracks. Fine, they all get fired or quit, who teaches them?
and will the kids really fare better?

"Now he is looking like he is trying to kill the union, which may have been his first task and ultimate goal."

You may well be right. I wish him luck on this noble quest. He also doesn't want to be seen as someone who can be bullied. If the unions made that offer before all of their histrionics, maybe he would have accepted. But they had to throw a fit like a 3 year-old, so they forced his hand. When I was in the USMC, we had an old saying..."if you're going to pull the trigger, make sure you don't have the gun aimed at your own d**k.". Well, these unions shot themselves in their own you-know-whats.


"they all get fired or quit, who teaches them? "

Do you really believe that NO ONE will want teachers jobs, if teachers are required to pay 13% of their health insurance? People will still kill for those jobs. What part of "13% is half of what everyone else pays" don't you understand?

If these teachers would rather quit than pay 13% of their health insurance costs, then OBVIOUSLY they are only in this for the cushy benefits, and thus they're in the wrong profession to begin with.

They won't quit, because as greedy as they are, they're smart enough to know how much cushier they have it than those in the private scetor.

No one here has mentioned that these parasites all called in sick, shutting down the schools for 3 days. So the parents have to either burn through precious vacation days, or spend $$ on daycare at the last minute.

F**k these teachers and the horses they rode in on. This reminds me of one of my heroes, former Mass Governor Calvin Coolidge. In 1919 I believe, the Massachusetts cops went on strike. Then-governor Coolidge fired them all, with no chance of ever being re-hired. A few years later, he was in the White House.

[RIROCKHOUND]

[QUOTE=Jim in CT;838618]No, what would happen is, parents would get their property taxes back and use that money to enroll their kids in private schools, which are better, cheaper, and NOT coincidentally, have no unions!!QUOTE]

Property taxes in round numbers, for me is $3500/year, what % of that is education? Call it 2K. I have one kid, what if I had 5?

Whats the tuition of the average private school? Hendrican is 11K, so is Prout. Maybe grammar school age is cheaper.


The education majors (I was dabbling in an education double major for a bit) I was enrolled with who ended up in Private schools, were not the cream of the crop and couldn't wait to get out b/c the money sucks. The exception are religious heavy schools, were many educators in those schools have something else invested in it.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No, what would happen is, parents would get their property taxes back and use that money to enroll their kids in private schools, which are better, cheaper, and NOT coincidentally, have no unions!!

And then the teachers would all go to the private sector, and by 10:00 AM on the first day they'd realize how great they had it.

Wrong because they get a bargain now, most could not afford private schools How much in tax dollars would they get back? BC high school cost 15g's a year, same as most of the best private schools

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Now he is looking like he is trying to kill the union, which may have been his first task and ultimate goal."

You may well be right. I wish him luck on this noble quest. He also doesn't want to be seen as someone who can be bullied. If the unions made that offer before all of their histrionics, maybe he would have accepted. But they had to throw a fit like a 3 year-old, so they forced his hand. When I was in the USMC, we had an old saying..."if you're going to pull the trigger, make sure you don't have the gun aimed at your own d**k.". Well, these unions shot themselves in their own you-know-whats.


"they all get fired or quit, who teaches them? "

Do you really believe that NO ONE will want teachers jobs, if teachers are required to pay 13% of their health insurance? People will still kill for those jobs. What part of "13% is half of what everyone else pays" don't you understand? Poor parents have to pay for day care, but they can all afford to send their kids to private school right. Teachers do much more than teach the kids, they act as day care as well right?

If these teachers would rather quit than pay 13% of their health insurance costs, then OBVIOUSLY they are only in this for the cushy benefits, and thus they're in the wrong profession to begin with.

They won't quit, because as greedy as they are, they're smart enough to know how much cushier they have it than those in the private scetor.

No one here has mentioned that these parasites all called in sick, shutting down the schools for 3 days. So the parents have to either burn through precious vacation days, or spend $$ on daycare at the last minute.

F**k these teachers and the horses they rode in on. This reminds me of one of my heroes, former Mass Governor Calvin Coolidge. In 1919 I believe, the Massachusetts cops went on strike. Then-governor Coolidge fired them all, with no chance of ever being re-hired. A few years later, he was in the White House.

It's not a question of anyone wanting a teacher job, it is a question of being able to meet the standards to be hired as a teacher.

As far as them calling in sick, what would happen if they all quit, how long would it take for people to fill their shoes, especially after seeing the crap that the govenor is pulling. No one in their right mind would want that job.