yo mama Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 (edited) maybe because the unions will sooner strike than agree to it? I swear to God that unions are the worst thing to happen to unions. Edited June 24, 2011 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted June 24, 2011 Author Share Posted June 24, 2011 I swear to God that unions are the worst thing to happen to unions. see greece. the EU agrees to throw yet more money at them in return for a new plan of tax hikes and spending cuts, and I bet you can't guess how the greek public unions responded Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 maybe because the unions will sooner strike than agree to it? Why would you have to get the union to agree to something that is prohibited legislatively? I didn't say anything about breaching the contract already in-place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 see greece. the EU agrees to throw yet more money at them in return for a new plan of tax hikes and spending cuts, and I bet you can't guess how the greek public unions responded Why do I suddenly have visions of the plant from Little Shop of Horror's crying, "feeeeeeed me, Seymour"... right before he eats Rick Moranis' girlfriend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Why do I suddenly have visions of the plant from Little Shop of Horror's crying, "feeeeeeed me, Seymour"... right before he eats Rick Moranis' girlfriend. Did that star Goldman Sachs like the problems in Greece? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Did that star Goldman Sachs like the problems in Greece? I've got no love for the financial sector's pillaging. But that doesn't excuse poor behavior on anyone's part, including unions. Or crooked politicians. Or any segment of society that expects more than it contributes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsfan Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 and you said you're a federal employee, so I have zero sympathy whatsoever. you're well-paid compared with the private sector, and you basically have iron-clad, recession-proof job security. federal employee health benefits are outstanding. With all due respect, you have no idea what you are talking about. I used to work in the private sector in commercial and military hardware, and I now work for NASA. I work at NASA because I feel I am positively contributing to society and I have fun at work. I also get to spend time with my family. Believe what you will. As a comparison: Health Care - I pay 10-15x more now on healthcare, through salary withdrawals and co-pays than I did in private industry. I also no longer have dental or vision coverage. Pay - In private industry, I had significant opportunities for wage increases and promotions. As a fed at NASA, there is little/no opportunity for promotion or wage increases regardless of performance. NASA has not adopted the new wage scales that DOD uses. My previous employer contacted me two weeks ago to ask if I would come back, with an offer of $120k more per year than my current salary. Business Travel - In industry, I could fly anywhere/anytime and stay wherever I wanted to based on work needs. Ask any fed about fedtravel and the travel regs and you will not find a single positive response. Work environment - Both jobs were/are enjoyable in their own ways. When I worked in industry, I got to work on cutting edge tech. and I was on the failure investigation team for high-profile issues. My job now does allow a lot more lee-way, and I get to work for NASA, which is awesome. In short, any engineer worth his/her salt can make 2-3x more money in private industry with better benefits than at the fed. If I was working for any other agency, I think I would have left years ago. I also do not belong to any union, nor do I support union representation. As a point of reference, all of our young engineers are being scooped up by oil/gas because they offer to double their salaries. Tough to pass up with the end of manned spaceflight in the US. My problem with NJ is that they are reneging on the agreements they have in place with their employees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borge007 Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 sorry buddy...I cant keep supporting you... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caddyman Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 damn...with witty replies like that it looks like you will be mooching for years to come. Oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted June 25, 2011 Author Share Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) With all due respect, you have no idea what you are talking about. oh, I think I do. if you have an offer for $120K more than you make in the gov't, then it seems you may be a fool for not taking it, but the larger point is that you are more the exception than the rule. study after study shows that, on average, federal service pays better than comparable private employment. and the benefits are MUCH better, on average. at the highly skilled, more highly paid end of the spectrum, these generalities are less true, but even there federal service is still highly competitive with the private sector more often than not. and of course, the job security is second to none. maybe less so at NASA these days, but it's overwhelmingly true as a general statement. the proof is in the pudding....far more people seek federal employment than seek to leave it. Edited June 25, 2011 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 The Republicans are determined to get rid of our quality teachers and police officers. I applaud this, because without an uneducated America, their threats of death panels might actually win them some votes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 In short, any engineer worth his/her salt can make 2-3x more money in private industry with better benefits than at the fed. If I was working for any other agency, I think I would have left years ago. I also do not belong to any union, nor do I support union representation. As a point of reference, all of our young engineers are being scooped up by oil/gas because they offer to double their salaries. Tough to pass up with the end of manned spaceflight in the US. My problem with NJ is that they are reneging on the agreements they have in place with their employees. Yeah there is no salary cap for free agents in the job market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsfan Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 oh, I think I do. I may be the exception, but I value spending time with my family more than money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millerx Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 The Republicans are determined to get rid of our quality teachers and police officers. I applaud this, because without an uneducated America, their threats of death panels might actually win them some votes You got it! ... because you can't professionalize until you Federalize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) I am okay with benefits and such of all new people coming into the system being cut back bunches - I don't know how I feel about changing (by a large degree) things that are already in place. Edited June 25, 2011 by Duchess Jack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 maybe because the unions will sooner strike than agree to it? we agreed in sconny, but that did not matter that is why we are fighting back. even walker says removing collective bargaining will not help[ the state budget but he is doing it anyway because he has been the front man for the movement ordered out of D.C. The new game plan for the republitards is to end unions, cut taxes for the wealthy and screw the middle class even farther into the ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borge007 Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 we agreed in sconny, but that did not matter that is why we are fighting back. even walker says removing collective bargaining will not help[ the state budget but he is doing it anyway because he has been the front man for the movement ordered out of D.C. The new game plan for the republitards is to end unions, cut taxes for the wealthy and screw the middle class even farther into the ground. This Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 This Yep the Sconny republicans have stated over and over they just want to screw the middle class as much as possible. This whole we are running out of money is just a side bar - all they really want is to screw people over. Come on - be serious. Maybe you don't agree with what they are doing but trying to screw the middle class is not the agenda - They are trying to fix Wisconsin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 I am a local government employee. Only fair, I suppose, to get that out up front. I am unsure what comparisons to federal workers have to do with state workers. I mean i get that both are government employees, but the analogy may other wise not be strong, or may even be inapt, unless it can be shown that it is a good analogy. I am quite fiscally conservative. I believe budgets have to be balanced. It is irresponsible to defer present costs into the future absent extraordinary emergency, and unfortunately the practice has become routine. We now have to address the errors of the past, and that is going to mean some potentially harsh austerity measures. Putting it off any longer only compounds the unbelievable irresponsibility of the past. Society has a compact with retired government workers. We made promises, pormises upon which those workers relied, and potentially relied to great detriment if we do not honor those promises, even if they were irresponsibly made. Retirees pensions should not be messed with. The compact, the contract, must be honored. As for those still working I see nothing wrong with saying from this point forward the offer, the potential promise as of this date is cahnging. See I don't see the promise or the conditions upon accepting employment extending through a career. Each day, or each year can be a new promise, a new contract. For these employees change the offer if that is what is fiscally responsible. They can then continue employment under the new terms, having the benefits accrued up until the promise changed, and then accruing the new benefits applicable until retirement or termination. If the employees find the new deal unacceptable they can find employment elsewhere. In the end trying to put our costs off into the future or into the past are both wrong, as I see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 I am a local government employee. Only fair, I suppose, to get that out up front. I am unsure what comparisons to federal workers have to do with state workers. I mean i get that both are government employees, but the analogy may other wise not be strong, or may even be inapt, unless it can be shown that it is a good analogy. I am quite fiscally conservative. I believe budgets have to be balanced. It is irresponsible to defer present costs into the future absent extraordinary emergency, and unfortunately the practice has become routine. We now have to address the errors of the past, and that is going to mean some potentially harsh austerity measures. Putting it off any longer only compounds the unbelievable irresponsibility of the past. Society has a compact with retired government workers. We made promises, pormises upon which those workers relied, and potentially relied to great detriment if we do not honor those promises, even if they were irresponsibly made. Retirees pensions should not be messed with. The compact, the contract, must be honored. As for those still working I see nothing wrong with saying from this point forward the offer, the potential promise as of this date is cahnging. See I don't see the promise or the conditions upon accepting employment extending through a career. Each day, or each year can be a new promise, a new contract. For these employees change the offer if that is what is fiscally responsible. They can then continue employment under the new terms, having the benefits accrued up until the promise changed, and then accruing the new benefits applicable until retirement or termination. If the employees find the new deal unacceptable they can find employment elsewhere. In the end trying to put our costs off into the future or into the past are both wrong, as I see it. Agree but don't forget that republicans only want to screw the middle class nothing else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 Agree but don't forget that republicans only want to screw the middle class nothing else. It's the same tired shtick they've been saying since they got their butts handed to them last November in WI and the rest of the nation. It didn't work then and it certainly isn't working now. My question is how many times are they going to lose before they realize that things have changed in WI? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 we agreed in sconny, but that did not matter that is why we are fighting back. even walker says removing collective bargaining will not help[ the state budget but he is doing it anyway because he has been the front man for the movement ordered out of D.C. The new game plan for the republitards is to end unions, cut taxes for the wealthy and screw the middle class even farther into the ground. You keep fighting back but keep getting knocked back down by WI taxpayers. Shout out all the lefty talking points you want (no matter how untruthful), the game has changed in WI - and for the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 You keep fighting back but keep getting knocked back down by WI taxpayers. Shout out all the lefty talking points you want (no matter how untruthful), the game has changed in WI - because it had to and for the better. A bit more accurate in my opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 i need to change my bait. i get the same 2 small fish every time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 Yep the Sconny republicans have stated over and over they just want to screw the middle class as much as possible. This whole we are running out of money is just a side bar - all they really want is to screw people over. Come on - be serious. Maybe you don't agree with what they are doing but trying to screw the middle class is not the agenda - They are trying to fix Wisconsin. How are they trying to fix sconny? by giving tax breaks to the wealthy, destroying one of the only good public school systems left or handing over public works for penny's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.