Thousands protest Wisconsin anti-union bill

  • Thread starter Thread starter a_priori
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rich_Olszewski said:
I remember those days, too. That was in the early 1960s for me.

“Man does not live by bread alone,” nor by extension, live for baking the bread alone.
Click to expand...
Yet,

[2 Thess 3:10](http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=53&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=10)*-12 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies.
Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread. *

No extension needed. There is no right or wrong answer. It depends on one’s understanding of sloth.
 
estesbob said:
Interesting. So you think there is a moral equivalent between supporting unrestricted taxpayer funded abortion on demand and asking workers to pay a portion of their health care costs?
Click to expand...
What I think is.
I will not vote for candidates that attack the rights of the working class so viciously.

ATB
 
Mickey_Finn said:
What I think is.
I will not vote for candidates that attack the rights of the working class so viciously.

ATB
Click to expand...
What if their opponent attacked the lives of the workers and wanted to see them in conditions that resulted in their deaths in the millions. Too often that is the choice Catholics face. The lives of babies would be as important as the lives of workers. Still, I am disappointed in Republicans this year. I think they are setting themselves up for failure next election.
 
Mickey_Finn said:
What I think is.
I will not vote for candidates that attack the rights of the working class so viciously.

ATB
Click to expand...
I agree. Why should democrats allow unions be able to suck up so much of the working class tax dollars and provide to little in return?
 
LCMS_No_More said:
They don’t, which is one of the goals of the Republican party.
Click to expand...
Good. I don’t think that public employees should have the right to unionize. They serve at the pleasure of the taxpayers in the state, and there is no reason why a public employee should have better pay, benefits, tenure, and featherbedding benefits that the taxpayer, who is paying his/her salary, doesn’t have. States should be able to fire public employees at will for cause, and make competition for positions within the state mandatory.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
there is no reason why a public employee should have better pay, benefits, tenure, and featherbedding benefits that the taxpayer, who is paying his/her salary, doesn’t have.
Click to expand...
The highest paid public employee should earn less than the lowest private sector employee? Sounds like South Africa during apartheid. No, thanks.
States should be able to fire public employees at will for cause, and make competition for positions within the state mandatory.
Click to expand...
They can here, and there are merit system exams besides. I can’t just hire my BIL.
 
SamH said:
I don’t think anyone made that claim - except you.
Click to expand...
Ahem. “there is no reason why a public employee should have better pay, benefits, tenure, and featherbedding benefits that the taxpayer, who is paying his/her salary, doesn’t have.”

If he can’t have better ,then what follows from that? That he has worse.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
Ahem. “there is no reason why a public employee should have better pay, benefits, tenure, and featherbedding benefits that the taxpayer, who is paying his/her salary, doesn’t have.”

If he can’t have better ,then what follows from that? That he has worse.
Click to expand...
I missed the part about the lowest private sector employee. Could you highlight that for me?
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
Ahem. “there is no reason why a public employee should have better pay, benefits, tenure, and featherbedding benefits that the taxpayer, who is paying his/her salary, doesn’t have.”

If he can’t have better ,then what follows from that? That he has worse.
Click to expand...
I should have been more clear. The AVERAGE taxpayer. I assumed that some things would be understood.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
Good. I don’t think that public employees should have the right to unionize. They serve at the pleasure of the taxpayers in the state, and there is no reason why a public employee should have better pay, benefits, tenure, and featherbedding benefits that the taxpayer, who is paying his/her salary, doesn’t have.
Click to expand...
Yes there is. Public sector jobs need to be more attractive than private sector jobs so that they attract qualified individuals. If a company cannot attract qualified individuals, that is a problem for the company. If the government cannot attract qualified individuals, it is a problem for the community.
Scott_Lafrance said:
States should be able to fire public employees at will for cause, and make competition for positions within the state mandatory.
Click to expand...
I agree insofar as any employer should be able to fire a worker for good cause, but that is something which can be negotiated with a union. In the absence of a union, what protection would public sector workers have against wrongful termination? Lawyers for this sort of case can charge on the order of hundreds of dollars per hour.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
Good. I don’t think that public employees should have the right to unionize. They serve at the pleasure of the taxpayers in the state, and there is no reason why a public employee should have better pay, benefits, tenure, and featherbedding benefits that the taxpayer, who is paying his/her salary, doesn’t have.
Click to expand...
So, you believe that each and every state employee should be paid one cent less than minimum wage and have no benefits?

Did you know that if every single attorney who works in my building (I’m a California state worker and proud of it!) walked out, took a left, walked up the hill and applied in any one of the high rises up there, they’d easily TRIPLE their entire compensation package. Doctors in California state service can do the same at any hospital around the state. They choose not to because they believe in the job they are doing and want to serve the people of California.

That used to be a noble thing.

As to health benefits (pretty good but mediocre) and deferred compensation (aka pension), those are part of our compensation package. I pay into my health benefits (and have for most of my time as a state employee) and deferred compensation (in fact, I pay more now than I did a year ago).

What does it mean “featherbedding benefits?”

And why do you insist on dividing yourself from other working folk? I got up this morning and went to work, even though I didn’t want to. I’ve been busy at work all day. Our paychecks came today. Hmm…seems I have done everything everyone else who works for a living does except for one thing…I have to listen to, read and see, every single day, a burning hatred for people like me. People like you…don’t. Instead, you get to communicate your anger towards people who get up, go to work, do a job and except to GASP! :eek: get paid a reasonable wage for doing that job.
States should be able to fire public employees at will for cause, and make competition for positions within the state mandatory.
Click to expand...
You do realize that at-will for-cause is an oxymoron, right? At will means they can fire you for any reason. For cause means they have to have a reason to fire you, thus “for cause.”

Now, I could agree there needs to be some REFORMS of civil service rules to make terminating a problem employee easier.
 
SamH said:
I didn’t see where anyone advocated that, is that your personal position?
Click to expand...
40.png
Scott_Lafrance:
there is no reason why a public employee should have better pay, benefits, tenure, and featherbedding benefits that the taxpayer, who is paying his/her salary, doesn’t have.
Click to expand...
I’m a pubclic employee and I make more than a minimum wage worker. I also have more benefits than a minimum wage worker.

It’s so unFAIR! ::crying::crying::crying: Their taxes are going to pay my pay, benefits, tenure and featherbedding benefits (which I’d like to see explained). How unFAIR!! :crying::crying:

To make it FAIR, I have to make less than the minimum wage worker.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top