Thread: Protesting in Wisconsin....Just the beginning?

The tumult being seen across the globe stems from economic hardship.

I'm finding the protests in Wisconsin very interesting to watch. I think protests such as these are the tip of the iceberg in this country for the simple fact that IMO, what is happening in Wisconsin is quite simply reaction and protest by government and government related workers vs. the plight and hardship the rest of the citizenry has been experiencing for some time now.

I worked in a municipal job from 1997-2001 in Minnesota and to be honest, I was actually a bit ashamed at the level of generous benefits we received, high wages and laissez fair management. At that time, we received free health care (no copays, no premium payments), generous vacation, paid holidays, sick leave paid days, the list when on and on.

I can understand that the workers benefiting directly from jobs in Wisconsin that would be affected by changes in Wisconsin law are upset. I just wonder if such jobs were compared to similar private sector jobs if the public jobs are at this time many many levels "above" the private sector in bennies, etc.

In my home state of Minnesota fairly recently Northwest Airlines insisted that if the unions did not make significant concessions in negotiations, Northwest could not survive....Unless I'm mistaken, the unions did not agree and Northwest did not survive.

In the city I grew up in, Duluth, MN, city workers were known to have one of the best and most generous retirement packages anywhere. Free healthcare for life, etc. The city of Duluth has been fighting for years saying that the city will soon be bankrupt if concessions or modifications are not made to the retirement plan. The retirees, many of whom I understand are no longer residents of the state have very fiercely resounded a collective "we don't care" attitude.

I sure don't have the answers. My point is I think we're going to see a lot of government workers across the country become very vocal in protest against cuts to their benefits, wages, bargaining, etc. I do wonder if such protests will have a backlash, however, with the majority of the citizenry that works for and tries to find employment in the private sector; I wonder if the protests in that regard will fall on deaf or at the least, unsympathetic ears.

Chris L

Originally Posted by ChrisL

I wonder if the protests in that regard will fall on deaf or at the least, unsympathetic ears.

I think that will be the case. I've seen it twice locally... Once was when the state workers went on strike, and the other time was when a local teacher's union went on strike. In both cases, people that weren't somehow connected to those on strike were generally unsupportive.

It's hard to get the public to be sympathetic when your salary and benefits package is well above the median for the area that you're in.

On the other hand if you believe that a contract is something that is legally binding and in the supremacy of the law, it is the collective responsibility of all who voted for the politicians signing the other end of those contracts.

The question then is how much you would be willing to turn a blind eye on principles for the sake of economic benefit. And yeah, one solution is to bankrupt the state, the municipality, the company or whatever and then all those obligations are wiped off in a perfectly legal way. Would anybody learn from something that harsh - I wouldn't hold my breath.

It's not dissimilar with the national budget either - cut the spending to match the revenue and the unemployment will skyrocket with all the consequences, keep borrowing and you get the protests due to it's unsustainability. The problem is chronic (lower taxes, high spending, and continued borrowing before there was a recession), and the hard part is transitioning from one state of dynamic equilibrium to another one.

Everybody wants somebody else to be the party that is going to foot the bill, and those who are in stronger position aren't shy to leverage it. Hopefully at some point when things get much worse, but before a civil war the rational thinking will prevail over the irresponsible politicizing.

Originally Posted by gugi

Everybody wants somebody else to be the party that is going to foot the bill, and those who are in stronger position aren't shy to leverage it. Hopefully at some point when things get much worse, but before a civil war the rational thinking will prevail over the irresponsible politicizing.

In the mean-time, stockpile food, water, and ammunition.

Do you think there are any rational solutions to these types of problems, Ivan? I'd be interested to hear any that you may have.

Chris L

Originally Posted by Utopian

In the mean-time, stockpile food, water, and ammunition.

Or just ammunition. I am pretty sure that will be the new currency.

What a lot of people miss when they get upset about what public sector employees make is that those salaries are relative to the areas they live in. I'll use public safety as an example, since that's my background. In Los Angeles, for example, a police officer with an AA/AS degree will start at $47,000. In some parts of the country, this may be a huge salary. Here in Southern CA, this is sufficient if you're single, or have a spouse that works, but there's no way you'll raise a family on this. Another thing that a lot of folks miss is that public safety employees get a lot of the benefits they do to compensate for the fact that they work in a dangerous environment, the hours and days off suck for the most part, and chances are when they retire, they'll do so without all of their body parts working as they did when hired (After 22 years, I've got knee, back and neck problems that aren't going away anytime soon).

My wife has taught for the L.A. Unified School District for over 20 years and the only increases in salary she's received are cost of living or those she received because she took additional classes (at her expense). I can't recall the last contract raise she had. This is the same school district that pumps class sizes to 35+ students and yet is about to issue 4,000 or so preliminary layoff notices. The other thing that goes under the radar regarding teachers is the incredible amounts of their own time and money that they spend to accomplish their job. My wife probably spends 3 hours a day, more on weekends, grading papers, planning lessons (for five different classes, no less), etc. I can't tell you the amount of money she spends to make sure her class is properly equipped. And yet we have politicians and members of the public that think teachers pay and benefits should be cut. Really??

It's amazing the number of folks that bitch and complain about public employees salaries, but I don't see them lining up to do those jobs.

If I had to offer one solution, it would be for governments to cut truly unnecessary spending. Does Los Angeles need a Dept of Cultural Affairs? NO! Does it need a Department on Disability? NO! Does the City Council (all 12 of them) need take home cars? NO!

Before the public demands that governments balance the budget on the backs of it's employees, they should demand the government take a good look at wasteful spending practices.

This really isn't or shouldn't be a political issue or a matter of respect for teachers. When all the layers of the onion are peeled it comes down to economics, simple pencil and paper math. Having been a high school English teacher, I know the hours the people put in and the sacrafices they make. It's a tall job and my hat is truly off to anyone who does it.

All of that said, the core issue here is basic math. The states simply cannot afford the sweetheart deals that these unions have set up for these people. What the teachers and all the people screaming about their "entitlements" don't seem to understand is that yes, they may have to pay for some health care or pay into a retirement fund but they will still have jobs. If we do nothing, the states and in time the federal government ends up bankrupt and can afford to pay no one.

Now being a Southerner, I've never been big on labor unions but it seems to me that the Governors of Wisconsin and Ohio are simply doing what they were elected to do, straighten out this unsustainable mess. I'm encouraged when politicians not only do what they say but have the stones to make some long overdue business decisions. Unpopular though they might be with some, these guys are simply doing what employers in the private sector do all the time. Basically, here's what I can afford to pay you and here's the benefits package. If you can't live with that, get to steppin'. Nothing unfair or illegal there.

My final point is probably what bothers me the most about these protests. Just about every sound bite I've heard from these "teachers" has been laced with some of the most appallingly stupid remarks I've ever heard in my life (i.e. this is just like what happened in Egypt, Governor=Hitler, I want what I'm entitled to, etc.) Worse yet teachers walking off the job shutting down the schools for multiple days and, my personal favorite, BRINGING THEIR STUDENTS TO THE PROTESTS. I mean honestly, what kind of example are they really setting for their students? When life doesn't give you exactly what you want or feel entitled to, simply walk off the job to rabble rouse in the streets and throw a fit like a five year old in Walmart. If my kids were being bused out to this crap in lieu of going to school, I'm pretty sure my foot would be straight up someone's backside. The kids should not be used as a rent a crowd for stuff like this and most of these folks seem a whole lot more concerned with their "entitlements" than the best interests of their students. Firing these idiots would be no huge loss, says I. I'm sure there are people who would be more than happy to take their jobs even with the reduced benefits. The military has consistently cut benefits over the last 20 years, there were no angry mobs in the streets, no one refused to deploy because their raise wasn't big enough. Whether they agreed or not, they did their job. If the cuts were too objectionable they simply left the service at their earliest opportunity. Then again, GIs typically are not statist socialist Democrats and we had no union with enough money to have bleeding heart politicians in their hip pockets. Speaking of which, I think the next sweetheart deal that needs to be addressed is the retirement package and benefits extended to elected officals.

yea those corporate big shots are real concerned with the welfare of their employees and their customers. They come first before anyone else. That's why before there were unions employees earned great wages and worked reasonable hours and enjoyed vacation and sick leave and a five day work week. Those unions had to come along a muck it all up eh? You know it's all in the history books if you care to read all about it. Oh this is the 21st century that could never happen again. Think so?

I worked for the Federal Govt and when I started in the 1970s all my friends made fun of me.If you worked for any Govt you were looked down upon and during good economic times you couldn't give a Govt job away. All these folks complaining about Govt jobs being too plush I'll bet would never have worked in those jobs a few years ago. My friends all made way more than I did and enjoyed a better life because of it. The only thing I had over them was the pension. People seem to think that if you are a public servant that is exactly the way you should be treated, as a servant.

You can't make a generalization that govt workers are overpaid anymore that everyone at Smith Barney is overpaid. Maybe the brokers are but is the mail clerk too? There are many people who work in specialized positions the Gov't can't fill because no one will work for the wages they pay.

As far as Wisconsin is concerned the state was scheduled to have a budget surplus until the new Gov gave it away in tax breaks to the rich and corporations. In New Jersey the former governor raided the pension plan funds and never replaced the money and the state government hasn't made a pension contribution in years. It's like the old story of setting someone up to fail and when they fail you just blame them.

The fact is in this country people mostly suck it all up and take it in the shorts. If this was Europe there would be a national Strike over this.

The folks on the ultra right better tread carefully cause if they push too much they may learn the hard way they have awoken the proverbial sleeping giant.

This has not been mentioned at all so far as I know, but consider this: the SCOTUS Citizens United ruling last year allows corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money for political advertising.

If unions cease to exist (elimination of collective bargaining agreements), that leaves who for political spending...? Payback, anyone...?

On a side note, where is the voluntary giving up of salaries/perks/bonuses by management (both public and private sector)when "times are tough"? You never hear upper management/owners/legislators called "greedy" now do you? Only the workers. "We have to tighten our belts" never seems to include those @ the very top (in either the public or private sector)...

Proportionately, as a share of total payroll, executive compensation is relatively small, but as a message to send to your workers, it's abysmal leadership to continue to take home large paychecks and perks while demanding your workers give various things up . Just terrible leadership.

(For the record, my political beliefs run the gamut. I own a (very!!!!!) small business, and being a pipe & cigar enthusiast, despise anti-smoking policies/propaganda/activism etc. I'm also not a fan of being told I shouldn't use animal products or drive a car or shoot fireworks shows or fly airplanes or... [you get the idea])