Wis. GOP strips public workers' bargaining rights

@H2O MAN,

H2O MAN wrote:

RABEL222 wrote:

I dont think there is a lot of lemmings on this foram. But a lot of people unable to open their minds to new or different ideas.

Democrats.

I wonder if it could be possible for you to get your head any further up your asshole...

I get it that you think people are the problem, and that labels some how help that situation... But I don't agree with you... It is our forms that are putting us into conflict, and it is simply easier for you to blame people than to address the form, fix it or trash it... Not doing so only means you deserve to be trashed... We are all victims here, and even the victimizers have to suffer their own actions... Until people learn what they are dealing with they are all equally guilty, which usually means not guilty at all, democrat or republican... If they understood how much the failed form of our society is ruining us and our environment, and still they did nothing, they would deserve all possible abuse...

0 Replies

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

You don't seem to get it. Wages and benefits are just as good and working conditions are BETTER in many RTW states.

Oh, please. I know you mentioned Georgia earlier, but which other non-public employee union states have better wages and benefits for teachers? Do you actually have examples, or are you just talking out your ass?

Your account makes no sense as well. If employees in states without unions are getting HIGHER PAY and BETTER BENEFITS with BETTER WORKING CONDITIONS - then why are you Conservatives so against the unions!?!?! Why the constant claims that they are bankrupting states and that their pay and benefits need to be cut?

What you are saying here is 100% the opposite of the narrative that your political party is pushing.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

Fido is as much an ignoranus as POM, could they the same person?

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cyclo, I think you've got it wrong. GOP is not opposed to collective bargaining. they're opposed to unioins collectively lobbying and collectively donating to Democratic candidates. Only corporations should get to do that, silly.

BTW, a judge in Wisconsin has temporarily blocked the enacting of the law: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/19/us/19wisconsin.html?hp

2 Replies

@H2O MAN,

H2O MAN wrote:

Fido is as much an ignoranus as POM, could they the same person?

I only wish you could understand that when an ignoramus calls some one an ignoranus it is not quite the insult they think they may be delivering... A bullet will never be more effective than the gun that shoots it, or the gunpowder that powers it, and yours are rusty and wet, respectively...

0 Replies

@Swimpy,

Swimpy wrote:

Cyclo, I think you've got it wrong. GOP is not opposed to collective bargaining. they're opposed to unioins collectively lobbying and collectively donating to Democratic candidates. Only corporations should get to do that, silly.

BTW, a judge in Wisconsin has temporarily blocked the enacting of the law: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/19/us/19wisconsin.html?hp

It should be the job of government to protect workers rights, and to deliver justice to all; and when it gets to the point where workers must organize to turn the heads of representatives with small sums from the larger sums given by business to have things their own way; then the unions are organized for the wrong purpose, and they need to organize for revolution...

When the unions ask for justice and do not get it they should raise the red flag of revolution and settle for nothing less...It is because there is nothing less than justice, but injustice, which the unions to have labor peace have too often accepted...

The little problem they have is that, to be accepted they cleansed every communist out of their unions, and now with the defeat of communism, when the capitalist can have it all their way, then it is the labor unions themselves, the allies of the capitalists against the communists that now seem too far left and themselves communistic because they dare ask for justice...

0 Replies

@Lash,

Does this sound familiar??

http://www.pe.com/localnews/opinion/localviews/stories/PE_OpEd_Opinion_D_op_teacherunions_loc_13.1abb648.html

Quote:

Help! I'm a teacher held hostage by my union!

Download story podcast

10:00 PM PST on Saturday, March 12, 2011

By MARK PRATHER
When you hear that "The Unions" are fighting mad and rallying for this cause or that, you should know that a huge percentage of the membership is being coerced.

Do you really believe that every union police officer, firefighter, nurse and teacher is happily singing from the same progressive hymnal? That they are all liberal Democrats, right down the line?

That's what the unions want you to believe. Actually, to work in any of these professions in California and many other states, you are forced to join the union. And the unions give all their support to one party -- the Democrats. And they don't ask for input or approval from the substantial numbers of independents and Republicans in their ranks.

I don't feel solidarity with the mobs that occupied the beautiful, historic capital building in Madison, Wisc., and did more than $6 million in damage to it. I don't admire those teachers who abandoned their students, calling in "sick" using bogus doctor's excuses.

You wouldn't catch me marching shoulder-to-shoulder with groups like Freedom Road Socialist Organization and the communists of the Workers World Party, screaming obscenities and carrying posters depicting the governor with a Hitler mustache.

I'm not proud of my own state's union, either. It takes my dues against my will and gives them to Democrat politicians who vote for legislation to which I am strongly opposed....

2 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

Does this sound familiar??

http://www.pe.com/localnews/opinion/localviews/stories/PE_OpEd_Opinion_D_op_teacherunions_loc_13.1abb648.html

Quote:

Help! I'm a teacher held hostage by my union!

Download story podcast

10:00 PM PST on Saturday, March 12, 2011

By MARK PRATHER
When you hear that "The Unions" are fighting mad and rallying for this cause or that, you should know that a huge percentage of the membership is being coerced.

Do you really believe that every union police officer, firefighter, nurse and teacher is happily singing from the same progressive hymnal? That they are all liberal Democrats, right down the line?

That's what the unions want you to believe. Actually, to work in any of these professions in California and many other states, you are forced to join the union. And the unions give all their support to one party -- the Democrats. And they don't ask for input or approval from the substantial numbers of independents and Republicans in their ranks.

I don't feel solidarity with the mobs that occupied the beautiful, historic capital building in Madison, Wisc., and did more than $6 million in damage to it. I don't admire those teachers who abandoned their students, calling in "sick" using bogus doctor's excuses.

You wouldn't catch me marching shoulder-to-shoulder with groups like Freedom Road Socialist Organization and the communists of the Workers World Party, screaming obscenities and carrying posters depicting the governor with a Hitler mustache.

I'm not proud of my own state's union, either. It takes my dues against my will and gives them to Democrat politicians who vote for legislation to which I am strongly opposed....

Here is a translation: Hi! I am the gungsnake, and I am a prisoner of my lack of sympathy and imagination... Where ever I go, and no matter how far; I can never escape my prison... Please help me... Signed: Gungsnake...

1 Reply

@Fido,

Quote:

Here is a translation: Hi! I am the gungsnake, and I am a prisoner of my lack of sympathy and imagination... Where ever I go, and no matter how far; I can never escape my prison... Please help me... Signed: Gungsnake...

In other words, I'm supposed to have sympathy with these public unions which are demanding recognition as an aristocratic social class, entitled to pay and benefits substantially beyond those of the ordinary taxpayers who foot the bill for it, and without any regard to the education product they produce or the fact that they're still using the old Prussian model of education a hundred years beyond any point at which there was a rational excuse for it?

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

Quote:
Here is a translation: Hi! I am the gungsnake, and I am a prisoner of my lack of sympathy and imagination... Where ever I go, and no matter how far; I can never escape my prison... Please help me... Signed: Gungsnake...

In other words, I'm supposed to have sympathy with these public unions which are demanding recognition as an aristocratic social class, entitled to pay and benefits substantially beyond those of the ordinary taxpayers who foot the bill for it, and without any regard to the education product they produce or the fact that they're still using the old Prussian model of education a hundred years beyond any point at which there was a rational excuse for it?

The first time I actually built an automobile motor, the author of the book I followed pointed out with a touch of sarcasm that manufacturers do not put parts on motors because they do not cost money or work as intended... The first thing a lot of back yard mechanics would once do was to take off factory smog controls and the like and then wonder why their cars did not get better milage or run better...

When you see something in society like a union, or even a church, while you may disagree since they seem to cost so much, or cause trouble, or do so little, it is foolish (and you are a fool) to think you can just dispense with them, or that they do not exist for a reason... Union membership costs all their members money, and actually demand a lot of time if they are taken seriously... Why then would they exist if their members did not find them absolutely necessary???...

I would ban all churches, and at a minimum end tax support for churches... I do not presume that they exist for no purpose as you seem to do with unions... Rather, when they give charity it is with a purpose, and they resist the efforts of government to help the needy when it gains them nothing, so they do not really want to see people helped, but they want the suffering to be even more widespread so they get the benefit of allieviating some of that pain...

Communism is at its heart Christian, and the early Christians were communistic... But; they hate secular communism even while they can see huge numbers in need of help who they cannot help, and whose help they hinder by hindering government... Yet, they do not exist to no purpose... I would destroy them by destroying the need for them, but no one hating the union will do the same and destroy the unions by destroying the need for them... Instead, they are attacking the unions which are for some the only solution they have to injustice...It is not because they do not work that those who hate them hate them... It is because they work at all that they are hated... Those who hate the union, hate humanity, and hate democracy and have no place in their hearts for liberty or sympathy for their fellow citizens... They say taxpayers as though they love them, and say union members as though they hate them, but they are very often the same people... The reason those with something are increasingly asked to pay more is that so many have been driven into poverty by low wages and higher costs and the destruction of the unions will make that situation worse rather than better... They are continually saying low wages are good for America, but what is bad for Americans can never be good for America.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

Quote:

I'm not proud of my own state's union, either. It takes my dues against my will and gives them to Democrat politicians who vote for legislation to which I am strongly opposed....

So this guy is accusing the union of illegal contributions? Does he have evidence? If so, take it to a prosecutor. If not, then perhaps he should educate himself.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
I'm not proud of my own state's union, either. It takes my dues against my will and gives them to Democrat politicians who vote for legislation to which I am strongly opposed....

So this guy is accusing the union of illegal contributions? Does he have evidence? If so, take it to a prosecutor. If not, then perhaps he should educate himself.

The unions are not responsible for having to get nekid with the ones who will get nekid with them... When citizens are forced into a bidding war with business to have their rights recognized and enforced they are doomed from the start... And look at it from the objective position of law... Every single effective method of organized labor to bargain or receive recognition has be found unconstitutional... It is because law must weigh the rights of property against the rights of human beings, and since they are of that class, property decides the issue... But if there is no balance between the rights of property and those of unions then it is our national union, the union os states and the union of nations in this country that is most endangered... The state may be defined by the property within its bounds, but it is labor, which is people that it is all about, and the rights of property do not protect people, but the rights of people most certainly protect property... Are we going to accept that the rights of property come at the expense of human rights and are in conflict with them??? Because from my perspective, the constitution as written says no where that its only goal was the protection of property....In fact, in its formal statement of goals it says nothing about the protection of property, but the achievement of human goals, moral goods to be exact...

0 Replies

@Swimpy,

Sumi's ruling blocking the law can be found here -

Sumi ruling

0 Replies

A judge whose last name is pronounced 'sue me'. That's kinda cute! Smile

1 Reply

@Irishk,

It's an interesting read. She lays out the law quite clearly and states why the case should move forward.

0 Replies

Sumi is obviously the designated goalie in this case and is involved in a corrupt practice. She needs to be impeached and removed from the bench and probably will be.

For such a restraining order to be legit you need several conditions, none of which are in evidence here. Foremost, you need a litigant to show a likelihood that he will ultimately win, and irreparable harm should the law proceed before his case is decided.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Injunction

Quote:

To obtain a temporary restraining order, a plaintiff must prove four elements: (1) likelihood of success on the merits; (2) irreparable harm,absent the order; (3) that less harm will result to the defendant if the TRO issues than to the plaintiffs if the TRO does not issue; and (4) that the public interest, if any, weighs in favor of plaintiff.[1] If the balance of hardships tips in favor of plaintiff, then the plaintiff must only raise "questions going to the merits so serious, substantial, difficult and doubtful, as to make them fair ground for litigation and thus for more deliberative investigation."[2]

Again none of those conditions apply here and in fact, the public interest is diametrically opposed to that of any possible litigant and the case is so clear that, again, a reasonable person has to view the judge's action as a corrupt practice.

2 Replies

@gungasnake,

If you bothered to read her decision gunga, she laid out exactly how those standards were met.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

Let's examine the law gunga

The law states that all meetings must be open to the public. The capitol was locked when this meeting was held so that doesn't meet the law.

Quote:

Wisconsin Statutes §19.87(2) provides that “no provision of the Open Meetings Law which
conflicts with a rule of the Senate or Assembly or joint rule of the legislature shall apply to a
meeting conducted in compliance with such rule.”

While each house of the legislature has a rule 93 that allows for calling meetings on short notice during a special session, this was not a meeting of either house. It was a joint meeting. There is no rule 93 for joint meetings.

Quote:

§19.84(3), states that, “Public notice of every meeting of a governmental body shall be
given at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of such meeting unless for good cause such
notice is impossible or impractical, in which case shorter notice may be given, but in no case may
the notice be provided less than two hours in advance of the meeting.”

The law also details what can constitute an emergency meeting. Sumi didn't deal with that for her injunction but it will come out when the case goes to trial. Emergency requires the bill deal with a fiscal matter. Fiscal matters require a 3/5 quorum. It can't be an emergency and not require a 3/5 quorum the way I read the law. We will see what the courts have to say.

Quote:

that the public interest, if any, weighs in favor of plaintiff

You confuse public interest with public opinion. They are not the same thing gunga.
The public has an interest in open meetings. What the public opinion is about the law that was passed has no bearing on the public interest in the meeting being open.

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

If you bothered to read her decision gunga, she laid out exactly how those standards were met.

Bullshit.

1 Reply

I mean, you're telling me that these stupid fuckers can run away and hide in another state so as to deny the majority a voting quorum and then cry about a meeting being less than open to them while they're off in the other state hiding out????

2 Replies

Wis. GOP strips public workers' bargaining rights

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know