?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile It's Me Previous Previous Next Next
Wisconsion Senate Republicans and Governor are petty - The Autobiography of Russell — LiveJournal
Life from a different perspective
zimzat
zimzat
Wisconsion Senate Republicans and Governor are petty
18 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
tazwolf From: tazwolf Date: March 4th, 2011 06:46 pm (UTC) (Link)
Having been a union worker, the only thing that unions care about is lining their own pockets, they don't care for the workers. When i tried to file a complaint with my union, they basically told me to suck it.
Unions served their purpose about a 100 or so years ago, now they are just another largess that takes and takes and only gives to the rich politicians who sit across the table from them in the negotiations to get more money for the unions. The teachers and others would be better off telling the unions to shove off, but unfortunately, we've been brainwashed to believe that unions are needed to protect the workers, this is no longer the case.
zimzat From: zimzat Date: March 4th, 2011 10:31 pm (UTC) (Link)
Under practically any other circumstance I would agree with you, but in this case I haven't heard one peep out of the news articles saying that the Governor or Republican Senators have shown these unions are lining their pockets, making outrageous claims, not responding to member claims, etc. Getting details on what the entire issue is is pretty hard, though, as neither side is making it very clear what they expect to get out of this argument.

If what another poster has said, regarding the unions accepting all the cuts that the rest of the bill requests, is true then it sounds like the Governor and Senate Republicans need to back down this time and try again another time, when they can clearly paint the unions as the ones asking too much or pocketing too much, or whatever.
raist_ From: raist_ Date: March 4th, 2011 11:42 pm (UTC) (Link)
You're welcome to verify it. The public worker unions have repeatedly offered to give those concessions, as long as they have the right to collectively bargain in the future when the economy allows it.

There's been another argument: That the dispute over allowing public workers to collectively bargain for wages is just a cover so that people won't read the actual budget repair bill and see what it's hiding.

One of the clauses in the bill that Walker tried to rush through the legislature so quickly, grants him the power to sell off public assets (Namely, state-owned power companies) without requiring a public bidding process. IE, he can sell state owned assets at any price, to anyone he wants, without the public being able to know.

Another part of the bill attempts to tamper with how BadgerCare (what the state calls Medicaid) is run; who is eligible, etc.
vaelynphi From: vaelynphi Date: March 5th, 2011 12:28 am (UTC) (Link)
Wow; I hadn't read about those two bits... this guy's a real asshole.
vaelynphi From: vaelynphi Date: March 4th, 2011 11:31 pm (UTC) (Link)
I have to admit, I wouldn't be surprised if what you've said is true.

However, even if they are corrupt, dismantling them entirely by taking away what allows them to exist is certainly not the answer. This would be somewhat like making it illegal for companies to sell stock (or more specifically, derivatives) because of the recent big bust.
tazwolf From: tazwolf Date: March 7th, 2011 03:14 pm (UTC) (Link)
actually, there are attempts being made in the SEC to not allow companies to sell stocks and derivatives that they KNOW are backed by bad collateral, the same crap that caused the majority of the collapse.
legolastn From: legolastn Date: March 5th, 2011 03:35 pm (UTC) (Link)
I'm not sure how "My union didn't represent me in the way I felt they should" leads to the logical conclusion "All unions everywhere only care about their own existence and are no longer necessary."

I don't think it's particularly controversial to say most workers (both unionized and not) have a common sense understanding that wages and benefits are steadily shrinking and that the power and wealth of corporations and management (especially top management) are steadily growing. To me, this doesn't suggest the declining influence of unions has had a positive effect for workers, and therefore doesn't suggest workers would somehow become better off if unions disappeared entirely. Beyond this, studies document that union workers have higher wages, a broader array of benefits, and better benefit options than non-union workers - this suggests there is at least some utilitarian value to being in a union beyond getting more money for the unions.

Saying that unions have flaws and aren't perfect isn't enough to jump to the conclusion they have no purpose and shouldn't exist. If that were so, we'd have to say all social groups and institutions should be done away with.
tazwolf From: tazwolf Date: March 7th, 2011 03:17 pm (UTC) (Link)
Unions today are not what they were even 50 years ago. Today, they are huge corporations unto themselves.

My beef with my former union has to deal with the fact that I was fired for not coming to work (after calling in sick and having a Dr's note to the fact that I was running a 100+ fever) where my union sided with the management and said I had no case. That is not what the union was for. it was a shit job anyway, and I moved on, but it still gave me a bad taste for the unions of today.
18 comments or Leave a comment