A simple question, actually ...

An answer in kind - it's a common stance of far too many...

It's not the governor's decision to want to restructure benefits that bothers me as much as it appears to be a thinly-veiled attempt at union busting.

 

If it was just about the former and not the latter ... well, I wonder if the uproar from the teachers' union would be as strong.

So what it appears to be is the problem? Wouldn't it be better to wait until we know for sure that it's an attempt at union busting? Isn't this just another example of partisan politics?

Ohio is having the same thing going on now too.

 

If they are successful on this, it's just the beginning, it's a slippery slope just because the elected officials do not want to tick off their constituents. They will then start to take other things away too, as it's sitting there right in front of them.

Someone shared this with me today:

 

"Are you sick of high paid teachers?

 

Teachers’ hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or 10 months a year! It’s time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do - baby sit! We can get that for less than minimum wage.

That’s right. Let’s give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan — that equals 6 1/2 hours).

Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children.

 

Now how many do they teach in day…maybe 30? So that’s $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day. However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations. LET’S SEE…. That’s $585 X 180= $105,300 peryear. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries).

What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master’s degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year. Wait a minute — there’s something wrong here! There sure is! The average teacher’s salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77/per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student–a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!) WHAT A DEAL!!!!"

 

Lot's of mistakes in this but I'll just question one. They would pay them by the hour AND a piece rate?

 

I'm an accountant, i'd love to be paid by every calculation or entry I make AND by the hour. I always wanted to make a million or more a year.

 

Let's face it, there's not a position in existance that this same scenario can't be applied to and make it look like they're grossly underpaid.

The cowardly hiding by the Wisconsin Democratic Senators rather than show up and make an argument needs no further comment. Anyone who defends their actions on here need not converse with me any further.

 

I believe 5 or 6 years ago, a group of Texas lawmakers did the same thing. I can't recall what the issue was or how it played out or even if it was Dems or Republicans that left the state in Texas. But I recall it being a pretty big news story when the Texas lawmakers left the state. I believe they stayed away for a few weeks.

An answer in kind - it's a common stance of far too many...

Actually, my question wasn't answered ...

So what it appears to be is the problem? Wouldn't it be better to wait until we know for sure that it's an attempt at union busting? Isn't this just another example of partisan politics?

 

 

 

The unions have proposed that they will accept the governors proposals for the benefit package, but not the elimination of collective bargaining. That is unacceptable to the governor. His agenda is exposed. The budget issue is an excuse to bust the union.

The unions have proposed that they will accept the governors proposals for the benefit package, but not the elimination of collective bargaining. That is unacceptable to the governor. His agenda is exposed. The budget issue is an excuse to bust the union.

 

Of course they did what do they have to loose. Now they get to make the governor look like busting the union was his agenda all along. The benefits package was going to happen no matter what they did.

Didn't the governor just give big tax breaks to corporations, and then come up with this plan? I can tell you this, I'm a teacher in KY, and the health care options are pretty poor, I opt out because they are so bad, and instead of paying for my benefits the state gives me a flex account for which I can pay co pays, etc., that my wife's health care doesn't cover. I think it's $2,100 a year (which I'm sure is a bargains as opposed to paying part of a health care benefit). As far as retirement goes, our retirement, to me is a great deal, but we also pay about 10% of our salaries into retirement, and pay no soc. security, so we opt out of that benefit. I've never complained about my salary, good or bad, and I've worked most summers, or had to go back to school to get my masters degree. Teaching to me, is a great profession, I give up money I could have probably made in the private sector (with my education level), in return, I get to spend more time with my children, and get a pretty good retirement. I can tell you this, I haven't gotten rich, like a lot of people portray teachers to be "robbing the taxpayers". I've always said this.........if teaching is so lucrative, why don't more people want to go into it? Don't forget, you're entrusting these people to teach your children, there's a lot riding on teachers.

I believe 5 or 6 years ago, a group of Texas lawmakers did the same thing. I can't recall what the issue was or how it played out or even if it was Dems or Republicans that left the state in Texas. But I recall it being a pretty big news story when the Texas lawmakers left the state. I believe they stayed away for a few weeks.

 

It was Democrats who lost their majorities in the state house and tried to keep redistricting of house districts from happening. It didn't work.

I believe 5 or 6 years ago, a group of Texas lawmakers did the same thing. I can't recall what the issue was or how it played out or even if it was Dems or Republicans that left the state in Texas. But I recall it being a pretty big news story when the Texas lawmakers left the state. I believe they stayed away for a few weeks.

2003, Democrats, they left and went to Oklahoma rather than debate a redistricting bill. The bill passed anyway, and the police left and picked up the lawmakers.

I guess I could google it but....

 

What did the Ds accomplish by taking off to Illinois? Is there a requirement for X number of voters for a vote to take place?

I guess I could google it but....

 

What did the Ds accomplish by taking off to Illinois? Is there a requirement for X number of voters for a vote to take place?

 

 

Yes, if there's no quorum, there's no vote.

It was Democrats who lost their majorities in the state house and tried to keep redistricting of house districts from happening. It didn't work.

Isn't that the same instance that Tom DeLay brags about resdistricting Texas to benefit the Republican Party?

2003, Democrats, they left and went to Oklahoma rather than debate a redistricting bill. The bill passed anyway, and the police left and picked up the lawmakers.

 

I don't understand the part about sending police to pick them up. Skipping work is not a crime.