| |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
| |
| Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
02-20-2011, 08:45 AM
|
#1
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Gloucester Massachusetts
Posts: 2,678
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2011, 09:14 AM
|
#2
|
|
Old Guy
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Mansfield, MA
Posts: 8,760
|
Quote:
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2011, 10:11 AM
|
#3
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
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.
Last edited by detbuch; 02-20-2011 at 12:16 PM..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2011, 12:58 PM
|
#4
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Gloucester Massachusetts
Posts: 2,678
|
Quote:
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." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2011, 01:46 PM
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
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... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2011, 07:58 PM
|
#7
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpecialist
|
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? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-21-2011, 06:12 AM
|
#8
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpecialist
|
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
Last edited by scottw; 02-21-2011 at 06:29 AM..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:54 AM.
|
| |
Hybrid Mode