Here is a list of some of the nefarious demands of the public unions in Wisconsin. This what gives them a bad name.
union excesses
Showing posts with label public sector unions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public sector unions. Show all posts
Friday, March 11, 2011
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott Smears Arizona Governor Jan Brewer and the Republican Party – Again!
We have previously commented on the excesses of some unions that have caused several states to be on the brink of insolvency. One of the biggest drains on state budgets in addition to the sweetheart contracts with public sector workers is Medicaid. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, like other governors faced with major budget deficits, is following their lead by proposing to drop Medicaid coverage for 250,000 people who have middle class incomes. Dee Perez-Scott claims that Brewer has extended tax cuts to “Rich Big Business” but she neither provides any details about those tax cuts nor bothers to mention their legitimate purpose of stimulating the local economy to create jobs. As I mentioned in a previous blog, it will be interesting to see what Dee has to say when Obama does the same thing, granting tax breaks to businesses so they can create more jobs. She will, of course, see that as a horse of a different color. She has never been able to see any point of view except her own. That is a serious and debilitating shortcoming.
Had the Administration backed SB1070 instead of opposing it, perhaps the attrition of illegals would have achieved the same level of Medicaid reductions the Governor proposes. So who is really at fault here? I suspect those like Dee Perez-Scott who are in favor of every form of welfare, like most bleeding-heart liberals, and who support the illegal aliens in our country who drain off countless millions from programs like Medicaid. She sees nothing wrong with a productivity- robbing, cradle to the grave welfare state. Some of us have to be more sensible and reflect on what made our country great: industriousness, personal responsibility, and self-reliance. Dee would drain the states’ treasuries and then lay on more taxes in the tax-and-spend mode typical of the democrats. Others have to deal with the real world and begin to cut back on the things that were never part of our beginnings as a nation.
Dee Perez-Scott, of course, never indicates how much more she would be willing to pay to in taxes to fund Medicaid for the medically indigent and the illegal aliens who pop into Parkland Hospital in Dallas in large numbers to drop their instant citizen babies at taxpayer expense. Since Dee Perez-Scott doesn't understand the Republican agenda, I have repeated it here:
The Republican Agenda is:
. Reduce spending to save our country from financial ruin.
. Rein in the Unions that have brought states to the brink of bankruptcy.
. Restore the concept of personal responsibility to everyone.
.Enable businesses to create new jobs by reducing their taxes and making them more competitive.
. Combat the creeping socialism of President Obama and defeat his Alinskyite blueprint for America
Had the Administration backed SB1070 instead of opposing it, perhaps the attrition of illegals would have achieved the same level of Medicaid reductions the Governor proposes. So who is really at fault here? I suspect those like Dee Perez-Scott who are in favor of every form of welfare, like most bleeding-heart liberals, and who support the illegal aliens in our country who drain off countless millions from programs like Medicaid. She sees nothing wrong with a productivity- robbing, cradle to the grave welfare state. Some of us have to be more sensible and reflect on what made our country great: industriousness, personal responsibility, and self-reliance. Dee would drain the states’ treasuries and then lay on more taxes in the tax-and-spend mode typical of the democrats. Others have to deal with the real world and begin to cut back on the things that were never part of our beginnings as a nation.
Dee Perez-Scott, of course, never indicates how much more she would be willing to pay to in taxes to fund Medicaid for the medically indigent and the illegal aliens who pop into Parkland Hospital in Dallas in large numbers to drop their instant citizen babies at taxpayer expense. Since Dee Perez-Scott doesn't understand the Republican agenda, I have repeated it here:
The Republican Agenda is:
. Reduce spending to save our country from financial ruin.
. Rein in the Unions that have brought states to the brink of bankruptcy.
. Restore the concept of personal responsibility to everyone.
.Enable businesses to create new jobs by reducing their taxes and making them more competitive.
. Combat the creeping socialism of President Obama and defeat his Alinskyite blueprint for America
Monday, February 28, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott: A Wisconsin Prof speaks out
Marc Seals, a former English teacher in Georgia and now a professor of literature at the University of Wisconsin-Baraboo wrote a long and impassioned plea regarding Governor Walker’s budget balancing efforts.
He says he has become a Democrat because the Republican Party has abandoned him. Although he is strongly opposed the idea of teachers being unionized, he apparently supports the fundamental right of [public employee] unions to exist.
He complains that every year that he lived in Wisconsin [since 2004], he has not received even a cost of living increase. He said, “We accepted this because we were told that it was the only way that we could keep our benefits package.” To make matters worse, state workers were required to take furlough days that amounted to a 3% cut in pay for each of the last two years. Professor Seals adds, “The so-called Budget Repair Bill will represent a reduction in my take-home pay of somewhere between 8 and 13 percent.”
While one can be sympathetic to Professor Seals, especially since his students appear to give him high marks, we have to be careful to put his situation in context. He failed to mention what the situation is in other states vis a vis public employee compensation. When both those actively seeking employment and those who have suspended their job-seeking efforts are counted, the total unemployment rate in the U.S. is still around 17%. Contrast that with the tenure teachers enjoy and the job stability generally enjoyed by public employees.
FDR and George Meany held that unions had no place in the public sector.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions
Wisconsin started that foolishness and now Wisconsin appears to be leading the way out. The problem is that government isn't management so negotiations are similar to a conspiracy where both sides decide how much to soak the taxpayer who isn't at the table. Secondly, in business the negotiation is how to split the profits. In the public sector there are no profits so guess what gets split. Yep, that's right, the taxpayer.
Union negotiations aren't usually give and take; they are how much management is willing to give. In public sector negotiations, it isn't how much management is willing to give but how much the legislature is willing to soak the taxpayer. The unions’ have a cozy arrangement with the Democrats; the unions work and donate to get them elected and the Democrats in turn give the unions a sweetheart contract. The Wisconsin legislature heretofore has been largely in the hands of the Democrats who traditionally support union demands.
The comparative statistics on compensation is another element of context that is lacking Professor Seals’ plea. I don’t have all of the facts either so I will just cite those that I recall from the various news articles on the situation in Wisconsin. The national average for teachers’ contributions to health insurance is 29%. Governor Walker’s proposal would raise the rate in Wisconsin to about 12%, well short of the national average. In Colorado, public employees contribute 31% of their health care costs. I also believe that a figure of 45% was mentioned as the differential compensation public employees enjoy over that received by private workers.
Finally, as Seals suggests, the efforts of the courageous Republicans to curb union excesses may be short-lived. That is the reason for curbing union collective bargaining rights now. Otherwise, Wisconsin will be right back in the fiscal soup as incoming Democrats give the unions everything they want. Before Wisconsin citizens vote for the Democrats again, they should insist on an understanding of the price tag on any new union demands. They also should insist on a full disclosure of Wisconsin compensation vs. the national average for comparable jobs and vs. compensation in the private sector. This must include a full valuation of tenure, job security, relative unemployment rates, retirement plans, vacation and sick leave, health care contributions, and any other benefits. I wonder if Professor Seals would be supportive of such an approach?
He says he has become a Democrat because the Republican Party has abandoned him. Although he is strongly opposed the idea of teachers being unionized, he apparently supports the fundamental right of [public employee] unions to exist.
He complains that every year that he lived in Wisconsin [since 2004], he has not received even a cost of living increase. He said, “We accepted this because we were told that it was the only way that we could keep our benefits package.” To make matters worse, state workers were required to take furlough days that amounted to a 3% cut in pay for each of the last two years. Professor Seals adds, “The so-called Budget Repair Bill will represent a reduction in my take-home pay of somewhere between 8 and 13 percent.”
While one can be sympathetic to Professor Seals, especially since his students appear to give him high marks, we have to be careful to put his situation in context. He failed to mention what the situation is in other states vis a vis public employee compensation. When both those actively seeking employment and those who have suspended their job-seeking efforts are counted, the total unemployment rate in the U.S. is still around 17%. Contrast that with the tenure teachers enjoy and the job stability generally enjoyed by public employees.
FDR and George Meany held that unions had no place in the public sector.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions
Wisconsin started that foolishness and now Wisconsin appears to be leading the way out. The problem is that government isn't management so negotiations are similar to a conspiracy where both sides decide how much to soak the taxpayer who isn't at the table. Secondly, in business the negotiation is how to split the profits. In the public sector there are no profits so guess what gets split. Yep, that's right, the taxpayer.
Union negotiations aren't usually give and take; they are how much management is willing to give. In public sector negotiations, it isn't how much management is willing to give but how much the legislature is willing to soak the taxpayer. The unions’ have a cozy arrangement with the Democrats; the unions work and donate to get them elected and the Democrats in turn give the unions a sweetheart contract. The Wisconsin legislature heretofore has been largely in the hands of the Democrats who traditionally support union demands.
The comparative statistics on compensation is another element of context that is lacking Professor Seals’ plea. I don’t have all of the facts either so I will just cite those that I recall from the various news articles on the situation in Wisconsin. The national average for teachers’ contributions to health insurance is 29%. Governor Walker’s proposal would raise the rate in Wisconsin to about 12%, well short of the national average. In Colorado, public employees contribute 31% of their health care costs. I also believe that a figure of 45% was mentioned as the differential compensation public employees enjoy over that received by private workers.
Finally, as Seals suggests, the efforts of the courageous Republicans to curb union excesses may be short-lived. That is the reason for curbing union collective bargaining rights now. Otherwise, Wisconsin will be right back in the fiscal soup as incoming Democrats give the unions everything they want. Before Wisconsin citizens vote for the Democrats again, they should insist on an understanding of the price tag on any new union demands. They also should insist on a full disclosure of Wisconsin compensation vs. the national average for comparable jobs and vs. compensation in the private sector. This must include a full valuation of tenure, job security, relative unemployment rates, retirement plans, vacation and sick leave, health care contributions, and any other benefits. I wonder if Professor Seals would be supportive of such an approach?
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott: FDR warned us about public sector unions
If you aren't aware, FDR and George Meany held that unions had no place in the public sector. Wisconsin started that foolishness and now Wisconsin appears to be leading the way out. The problem is that government isn't management so negotiations are similar to a conspiracy where both sides decide how much to soak the taxpayer who isn't at the table. Secondly, in business the negotiation is how to split the profits. In the public sector there are no profits so guess what gets split. Yep, that's right, the taxpayer. It's strange why Democrat taxpayers don't see this reality.
My friend has been on both sides of the negotiating table. Union negotiations aren't give and take, they are how much is management willing to give. In public sector negotiations it isn't how much management is willing to give but how much the legislature is willing to soak the taxpayer. The unions cozy incestuous arrangement with the democrats, where the unions will work and donate to get them elected and they in turn give the unions a sweetheart contract is over and the unions haven't caught on to the new reality. I wonder why democrat voters haven't caught on yet? Those legislators are not working for the non-public-union democrat taxpayers, they are working for themselves and for the unions.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions
My friend has been on both sides of the negotiating table. Union negotiations aren't give and take, they are how much is management willing to give. In public sector negotiations it isn't how much management is willing to give but how much the legislature is willing to soak the taxpayer. The unions cozy incestuous arrangement with the democrats, where the unions will work and donate to get them elected and they in turn give the unions a sweetheart contract is over and the unions haven't caught on to the new reality. I wonder why democrat voters haven't caught on yet? Those legislators are not working for the non-public-union democrat taxpayers, they are working for themselves and for the unions.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)