[Unknown Target]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet, I've been watching it for quite some time now;



http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/22/state.budgets/index.html?hpt=C1

The protests have spread to Ohio and Indiana, outside of their original home, Wisconsin.


From the article;

"Now, some have questioned why we have to reform collective bargaining to balance the budget," he said Tuesday in what was billed as a televised "conversation" with Wisconsans. "The answer is simple: The system is broken. It costs taxpayers serious money -- particularly at the local level. As a former county official, I know that firsthand.
"For years, I tried to use modest changes in pension and health insurance contributions as a means of balancing our budget without massive layoffs or furloughs. On nearly every occasion, the local unions (empowered by collective bargaining agreements) told me to go ahead and lay off workers. That's not acceptable to me."
Fourteen Democratic state senators have boycotted the legislature and fled to neighboring Illinois to prevent a quorum from passing the bill. The measure's opponents said they won't allow a vote unless Walker negotiates on the plan to eliminate collective-bargaining rights for everything but wages.
Walker called on the Democrats to come back to Madison "and do their job."
One of the Democrats who left the state, Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller, said in a response from Rockford, Illinois, that Walker should "recognize that he got what he wants" in concessions on pension and health insurance contributions and relent on curbing collective bargaining rights.

[Nuclear1]

Democratic legislators have fled both the Wisconsin and Indiana Houses and are rumored to be hiding out in Chicago.

[NGTM-1R]

I have literally no sympathy for government workers unions, as they have run my state into the ground, made a mockery of its prison and school systems, and generally ****ted things up. Learn from California, children: do not contract directly with the unions for anything, be a right-to-work state instead of endorsing union shops.

I will accept that private sector unions have a place, and purpose, but I ultimately have little sympathy with them either as both systems are inherently broken. A union is formed, usually, to secure certain rights or benefits. Once those are secured, however, the union must continue to justify its existence and its leaders must justify their continued paychecks by gaining more benefits for members. There is no natural upper limit or brake on this cycle and without one the system will remain forever flawed.

[Mongoose]

I'm inclined to agree with NGTM-1R for the most part.  Unions as a whole have done fantastic things for workers' rights over the last two centuries, and continue to do so in many parts of the world.  However, in the First World, there are many situations where unions have largely outstayed their practical usefulness, and as NGTM-1R put it, have to keep justifying their existences by putting other people through the wringers.  I know some of our local teachers' unions around this area seem to go on strike every few years for the sake of pushing their median salaries to astronomically-high levels (or at least as far as teachers' salaries go), and they've largely refused concessions like paying more into their pension plans as well.  I do recognize that unions have the right to exist as a whole, but in a situation like many states are facing today, with massive budget deficits, something has to give here.  Workers in all levels of professions have felt a pinch...why should unionized state employees have some magical exception from payment options that the rest of us take for granted?

[Nuke]

eat the poor!

[Unknown Target]

Personally, I'm concerned about this coinciding with the worries about a Federal shutdown.

EDIT: Looks like the Indiana Dems left their offices as well;

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110222/ap_on_re_us/us_indiana_democrats_unions

Democracy can't work if the other side simply walks away from the table. If this becomes widespread, that could pose a problem. Likelihood of that happening, anyone?

[Nuclear1]

Democracy can't work if the other side simply walks away from the table. If this becomes widespread, that could pose a problem. Likelihood of that happening, anyone?

Anything that can be done to shut down a union-killing bill. 

[Klaustrophobia]

so why is it that senators get to up and walk away from their jobs?  two things should happen here.  first, they get fired.  second, the vote goes on in their absence and they don't get to participate. 

[Nuclear1]

1.  Elected officials can't be 'fired'.  Recalled, voted out in an election cycle, or resigned, yes, but not 'fired.'
2.  The vote can't go on if the legislature can't achieve a quorum.

[BloodEagle]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't them all walking away be construed as acting against (halting) the processes of the legislature?  I'm pretty sure that there's a law against that in the books, somewhere....

[Klaustrophobia]

if there isn't, there should be.  and call it whatever, but WALKING OUT on the job you were elected to do should result in no longer being a representative.  and there shouldn't be a lengthy beurocratic process for it. 

[Delta_V]

This whole thing in WI has been going on practically on my doorstep (the Capital is just a few blocks from campus) and shows no sign of letting up, although most area schools have finally reopened after widespread teacher walkouts.  Now, I generally feel the way NGTM-1R does about unions, namely that they once had a genuine purpose, but have now mostly outlived their use.  The teachers' union in particular has been a PITA; IIRC the last time former Gov. Doyle tried to get concessions out of them, he bacically got a "Go to Hell" in return.  My only problem is that this time around, Gov. Walker never even tried to bargain with them first, he just introduced a bill that removed a lot of their bargaining power in the name of balancing the budget.  The unions have since agreed to the other concessions, namely paying more towards their pensions and health care, on the condition that their collective bargaining is not touched.  In other words, they've agreed to the things that will actually save the state money and help balance the budget, so I fail to see how removing their bargaining rights helps with the short term budget problems that this bill is all about.

As far as the Dem. Senators leaving the state, from what I've heard, no one really knows what can be done.  As long as they're outside of the state, there's really nothing that can be done to force them to report in for a vote.  Even if they return to WI, there are conflicting laws about what can be done.  One law states that, if they are in the state, they must report in to vote, but another law states that senators can't be arrested while Congress is in session except for a major offense.  AFAIK, they technically would have to go in to vote, but there's nothing the state can really do to force them to report in if they decide not to.  Regardless, they have so far remained out of state to avoid that issue.

[BloodEagle]

Simple Solution: Make it count as treason if they don't report within a certain amount of time.

[General Battuta]

Simple Solution: Make it count as treason if they don't report within a certain amount of time.

Wow, that's actively a terrible idea. Treason is a big deal, don't water it down.

[SpardaSon21]

This whole thing in WI has been going on practically on my doorstep (the Capital is just a few blocks from campus) and shows no sign of letting up, although most area schools have finally reopened after widespread teacher walkouts.  Now, I generally feel the way NGTM-1R does about unions, namely that they once had a genuine purpose, but have now mostly outlived their use.  The teachers' union in particular has been a PITA; IIRC the last time former Gov. Doyle tried to get concessions out of them, he bacically got a "Go to Hell" in return.  My only problem is that this time around, Gov. Walker never even tried to bargain with them first, he just introduced a bill that removed a lot of their bargaining power in the name of balancing the budget.  The unions have since agreed to the other concessions, namely paying more towards their pensions and health care, on the condition that their collective bargaining is not touched.  In other words, they've agreed to the things that will actually save the state money and help balance the budget, so I fail to see how removing their bargaining rights helps with the short term budget problems that this bill is all about.

As far as the Dem. Senators leaving the state, from what I've heard, no one really knows what can be done.  As long as they're outside of the state, there's really nothing that can be done to force them to report in for a vote.  Even if they return to WI, there are conflicting laws about what can be done.  One law states that, if they are in the state, they must report in to vote, but another law states that senators can't be arrested while Congress is in session except for a major offense.  AFAIK, they technically would have to go in to vote, but there's nothing the state can really do to force them to report in if they decide not to.  Regardless, they have so far remained out of state to avoid that issue.

I think what Walker is doing with the stripping of collective bargaining is to make sure a similar budget mess doesn't happen again.  Pension costs have skyrocketed thanks to unions bargaining for huge pensions in exchange for endorsements and campaign contributions for elected officials, and stripping the collective bargaining for pensions will reduce costs long-term and end some of the usual political quid pro quo that goes on.

[Nuclear1]

Simple Solution: Make it count as treason if they don't report within a certain amount of time.

Treason is giving aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States.

So who's the enemy of the United States in this case...the unions?

I think what Walker is doing with the stripping of collective bargaining is to make sure a similar budget mess doesn't happen again.  Pension costs have skyrocketed thanks to unions bargaining for huge pensions in exchange for endorsements and campaign contributions for elected officials, and stripping the collective bargaining for pensions will reduce costs long-term and end some of the usual political quid pro quo that goes on.

While you do make a good point, political quid pro quo is going to go on whether unions have collective bargaining or not.  I'd rather have unions acting as a special interest group and keeping their collective bargaining than losing the latter to prevent the former.

If unions lose CB, and companies completely backtrack on benefits that the unions fought to earn, they have no way of getting them back.  It's like abolishing all special interest groups because a few of them corrupt the political process. 

The US Chamber of Commerce is a much greater threat anyway, and Walker's bill to abolish collective bargaining is an attempt to cut funding so he can afford a $67 billion tax break for businesses (many of which are associated with the USCC) in Wisconsin.    So the whole point of the bill is to screw the poor and favor the rich.  Much more than just union rights at stake.

[SpardaSon21]

From my understanding it is just government worker's unions for non-safety employees (firefighters and police are not affected) that are at risk of losing collective bargaining for everything except wages.  These bills have nothing to do with private sector unions.

For those of you who don't know how bad things can get:
http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/states-pension-liability-tops-500-billion-stanford-study-finds-1641
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/06/opinion/la-oe-crane6-2010apr06
That was back in April of 2010, and things can't have gotten much better since then.

[Inquisitor]

It couldn't possibly be about anything else...

http://hosted2.ap.org/APDefault/*/Article_2011-02-23-Wisconsin%20Budget%20Unions/id-2a295a090f3d4f169f17e68022867793

[Mustang19]

From my understanding it is just government worker's unions for non-safety employees (firefighters and police are not affected) that are at risk of losing collective bargaining for everything except wages.  These bills have nothing to do with private sector unions.

For those of you who don't know how bad things can get:
http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/states-pension-liability-tops-500-billion-stanford-study-finds-1641
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/06/opinion/la-oe-crane6-2010apr06
That was back in April of 2010, and things can't have gotten much better since then.

Fire and police unions voted for the Republicans in Wisconsin, so they're safe.

It couldn't possibly be about anything else...

http://hosted2.ap.org/APDefault/*/Article_2011-02-23-Wisconsin%20Budget%20Unions/id-2a295a090f3d4f169f17e68022867793

Good find Inquisitor. As if it wasn't already obvious what this was all about.

[Unknown Target]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110223/ap_on_re_us/us_wisconsin_budget_unions

The two talked for at least 20 minutes — a conversation in which the governor described several potential ways to pressure Democrats to return to the Statehouse and revealed that his supporters had considered secretly planting people in pro-union protest crowds to stir up trouble.

Can someone also tell me where my thread on "US labor protests" went?