Thousands protest anti-union bill in Wisconsin

EnglishLady

Veteran Expediter
AP Feb 16 1.40pm

MADISON, Wis. – Thousands of people descended on the Wisconsin state Capitol again Wednesday to protest a bill that would strip most public employees of their collective bargaining rights, but Gov. Scott Walker insisted he has the votes to pass the measure.

On the second consecutive day of demonstrations, Walker said he was open to making changes in the legislation, the boldest anti-union proposal in the nation. But he said he would not "fundamentally undermine the principles" of the bill, which he says is needed to help balance a projected $3.6 billion budget shortfall and avoid widespread layoffs.

"We're at a point of crisis," Walker said.

The full Legislature could begin voting on the proposal as early as Thursday.

More than 13,000 protesters gathered at the Capitol on Tuesday for a 17-hour public hearing on the measure. Thousands more came Wednesday, with hundreds chanting "Recall Walker now!" outside the governor's office.

If adopted, the bill would mark an especially dramatic shift for Wisconsin, which was the first state to pass a comprehensive collective bargaining law in 1959. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees — the national union representing all non-federal public employees — was founded in 1936 in Madison.

There were some signs that support for the plan may be waning among Republicans who control the Legislature. Senate Republicans met in secret Wednesday morning to discuss the bill. Asked where Republicans stood on Walker's proposal, Sen. Dan Kapanke of La Crosse told The Associated Press, "That's a really good question. I don't know."

The protests have been larger and more sustained than any in Madison in decades. More than 1,000 protesters, many of whom spent the night in sleeping bags on the floor of the Rotunda, shouted "Kill this bill!" on Wednesday.

In Madison, more than 40 percent of the 2,600 union-covered teachers and staff called in sick, forcing the superintendent to call off classes Wednesday in the state's second-largest district. No other widespread sickouts were reported at any other school, according to the state teachers union which represents 98,000 teachers and staff.

Prisons, which are staffed by unionized guards who would lose their bargaining rights under the plan, were operating as normal without any unusual absences, according to Department of Corrections spokeswoman Linda Eggert.

Walker has said he would call out the National Guard to staff the prisons if necessary. A union leader for prison workers did not immediately return messages.

Before Tuesday's marathon hearing, Republican leaders in the Senate and Assembly said they had enough votes to pass the bill as Walker proposed.

Scott Spector, a lobbyist for AFT-Wisconsin, which represents about 17,000 public employees, said the demonstrations were having an effect on lawmakers.

Union representatives were attempting to sway key moderates for a compromise, but Democrats said the bill would be tough to stop. Democrats lost the governor's office and control of the Legislature in the November midterm elections.

"The Legislature has pushed these employees off the cliff, but the Republicans have decided to jump with them," said Sen. Bob Jauch, one of 14 Democrats in the 33-member chamber.

While other states have proposed bills curtailing labor rights, Wisconsin's measure is the most aggressive anti-union move to solve budget problems. It would end most collective bargaining for state, county and local workers, except for police, firefighters and the state patrol.

Protesters targeted the budget committee's public hearing Tuesday to launch what Republican Rep. Robin Vos called a "citizen filibuster," which kept the meeting going until 3 a.m. Wednesday.

Two floors below the hearing, dozens of University of Wisconsin-Madison teaching assistants and students poured into the Capitol rotunda late Tuesday evening, putting down sleeping bags and blankets. Many were asleep on the floor when the hearing ended.

"I just think it's really crappy," said Alison Port, a 19-year-old freshman from Wauwatosa. "Let's take all the rights away. If he starts here, where's he going to stop? What else is he going to throw at us? It's only going to get more extreme."

But when voters elected Walker, an outspoken conservative, along with GOP majorities in both legislative chambers, it set the stage for a dramatic reversal of Wisconsin's labor history.

Walker's plan would make workers pay half the costs of their pensions and at least 12.6 percent of their health care premiums. State employees' costs would go up by an average of 8 percent. The changes would save the state $30 million by June 30 and $300 million over the next two years to address a $3.6 billion budget shortfall.

Unions could still represent workers, but could not seek pay increases above those pegged to the Consumer Price Index unless approved by a public referendum. Unions also could not force employees to pay dues and would have to hold annual votes to stay organized.

In exchange for bearing more costs and losing leverage, public employees were promised no furloughs or layoffs. Walker has threatened to order layoffs of up to 6,000 state workers if the measure does not pass.

Wisconsin is one of about 30 states with collective bargaining laws covering state and local workers.

Walker has argued that the public employee concessions are modest considering what private sector workers have suffered during the recession. Democratic opponents and union leaders said Walker's real motive is to strike back at political opponents who have supported Democrats over the years.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Good!

Protest so we can get even more p*ssed off at you.

Someone once said that this will never happen in my lifetime, but because it started in my lifetime, I hope it ends in my lifetime.
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
The world's smallest violin is playing for them. Millions of people have had to take pay cuts. Why should a government worker be any different?
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
I think that if it comes to a state going under, their pensions should be the first to go. If they can't live off of social security like everyone else - too bad.
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
In Madison, more than 40 percent of the 2,600 union-covered teachers and staff called in sick, forcing the superintendent to call off classes Wednesday in the state's second-largest district. No other widespread sickouts were reported at any other school, according to the state teachers union which represents 98,000 teachers and staff.
The above action should demonstrate to the good people of Wisconsin why this legislation was drafted in the first place. Hopefully, Gov. Walker will stick to his guns and push this bill across the finish line.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I think that if it comes to a state going under, their pensions should be the first to go. If they can't live off of social security like everyone else - too bad.


Did they pay into these pensions? Did the State set aside money each year to cover their share?

I don't believe that government employees should have unions. They are servants of the people and the people should decide what they pay them.

I also have a problem with ignoring valid contracts, no matter who they are with.

Social Security was never meant to be a pension, only meant to subsidize private funds. S.S. has not been funded and that is going under as well.

Are there any REAL answers to this?
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
Walker is making the union people responsible for the whole states past spending habits....

What are the politicians donating to the effort....20-30% pay cut? How about dept managers? what are they losing?

Why are emergency services exempt?
 
Last edited:

greg334

Veteran Expediter
OVM,
1 - these people do not ever deserve union representation, they work for the people of the state/city at the behest of the people which means that if their jobs are not needed - they go.

2 - the politicians are acting on the desires of the people, those who voted them in. The majority of the people who voted are not unionized state/city workers and time and time again it has been proven that the people in general have less of a voice when a union is involved.

3 - the government's prime purpose is to keep people safe, from the military to the local police and fire groups. The exemption is justified, even for me that they are excluded while many like you seem not to notice that when a city or county gets into trouble, they lay off the police and firemen first because their union is not the same as the others who seem to be locked into lifetime jobs. Ask yourself this - do you want to have a building department respond to your call for police or the actual police?

4 - the pension obligations IF they are employee funded should be there for the worker but if they are state/city funded, then if there is no money, there is no obligation.

Did you know that the biggest thing preventing my region from moving forward is the problems with municipal workers and their unions. Why do I need to have a guy in my county who is a building inspector be there for more than 40 years while cops have a career life less than 20 because they can get laid off when the building inspect will never get laid off.

I hope it passes and other states get smart and do the same thing because we need to put back some sanity into this country.
 

Poorboy

Expert Expediter
Heard on the radio `1370 A.M.Toledo this afternoon that the Dumocrat senators from Wisconsin all boarded a little yellow bus and left the state so they wouldn't have to vote on this bill today! They wouldn't look out the window for fear of being recognized..Typical Dumocrat bull crap!!:D
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Many of those pensions are going to policemen, firefighters, Paramedics and EMTs. On the federal level there are military, DOD, intell people etc. Many of those federal employees, most non-union, did NOT pay into S.S. and cannot collect it. They paid 7% of their pay into the system and the Feds were going to match. They never did. So much for contracts.

Don't forget pensions to disabled vets, they want to cut those. Then they will sit around, scratching they noses wondering why no one wants to enlist.

If we don't require the government to honor contracts, why should anyone? Honoring contract is the honest thing to do.

I don't pretend to know how to solve this but I do know that a legal contract should be honored.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Layout, EMTs, Cops and firemen are not the issue and they are not the problem with what I have with pensions.

BUT the problem is THERE IS NO CONTRACT with a civil servant that I or you have to abide by when the state or city can not afford them or for that matter the state has no obligation other than paying them their wage - period.

WE have to get away from this BS concept that there is some sort of contract with the worker who does something that ANYONE can do, be it a road worker or a sewer worker. They are being EMPLOYED, just like anyone else and when they make more than the average taxpayer, there is no reason for them to even be there - be it a building inspector or the guy sweeping the leaves down into the gutter.

Again ...
An EMT or cop or firemen are exclusive class of workers and again not the issue but they are a group that is closed off to public employment or substitution when there should not be a law against it.

By the way Layout, I want to see something happen to social security that you may not like.

Start cutting people off who are making more than twice the poverty level.

This message has been deleted by OntarioVanMan.

What?!?

You didn't like my comments?
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
"Start cutting people off who are making more than twice the poverty level."

Nope, if you paid in, you collect. It was not built as a welfare system. I would go further: two FULL benefit checks for husband AND wifes when BOTH paid in. No more of this stupid stuff where a wife, or husband, cannot collect on 100% of what they paid in.

IF you want to cut those people out, return EVERY penny that they paid in. It is, after all, their money.

Congress and the presidents are the cause of this S.S. mess, take it out of THEIR pay.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Being realisitic, there is no obligation to get money out of social security that was paid into the system.

This was decided a long time ago, nullifying any government obligation that FDR sold the public on.

We are not talking about military retirees, people who work in intel or anything like that, but the common man/woman who had taxes taken out of their check.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I got a MUCH better idea. DO NOT pay ANYTHING to bums who spent their entire lives on welfare and did NOT pay into the system. Realistic? We send hundreds of billions to places like Haiti, for AIDS in Africa and so on and so forth. Then have NO problem ripping of those who worked hard, paid what they were FORCED to pay, and then rip them off? Time to load the rifles in my book. It will be a cold day............. :mad:
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
See Layout, I equate those who demand social security as the same as those who demand to stay on the welfare rolls. Regardless how you look at it, it is a true form of slavery, nothing less.

BUT here is one solution that can work if we want it to.

Let's just say we actually admit that Social Security was a great experiment and it failed.

So we set a sunset date - 1/1/2032, etch it in stone and then cut people off like those who were born on say January 1, 1962. Raise the retirement age to 70, allow people who are on Medicare a choice to either pay for insurance with all the benefits or get Medicare with reduced benefits.

Have those who are born after 1/1/62 still pay into the system until 10 years after the sunset date but what ever they invest for retirement in any form is absolutely tax free on all levels and they take it out after 60.

When 2032 rolls around, the Social Security system is closed off and should have enough money to sustain itself for another 10 years at the level of the last year it was active. Those who are on it have 10 years to live out their lives and then it is done with, allowing the states if they need to continue it to come up with their own system.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I have NO problem with a Phased out system. The government has been stealing that tax money from hard working people with the "promise" of returns. It should have never been put into place. It should have NEVER been FORCED, like health care, at the point of a gun. We had NO option to for go that system. They STOLE that money.

Cut off the bums. Got an Obama cell phone? NO S.S. etc.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Hey Layout, we are the only ones to blame for allowing them to take anything from us. NO one has been king or queen here since 1783, so the blame sits on our shoulders.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Hey Layout, we are the only ones to blame for allowing them to take anything from us. NO one has been king or queen here since 1783, so the blame sits on our shoulders.

Yep, I have always said that but there is nothing I can do about it. IF I don't pay that tax, they come after me, ARMED, to make SURE I pay it. It will be the say if this health care garbage is not overturned only now I don't care, bring 'em on!! That is EXACTLY what I told Dingellberry.
 
Top