Politics and religion.

[cassiesmom]

But why should public sector employees have less rights than private sector?

I don't see it as public sector ee's having less rights; just different rights. That's because my tax dollars pay their salary. They are providing services that keep our society running in an organized fashion - everything from collecting trash to the practice of law in the state's attorney's office. When they agree to work in the public sector, there are certain things they give up in exchange for what they gain.

For example, I did agency work at a local hospital operated by the county health services bureau. They observed the federal holidays like Columbus Day, Veterans' Day and Dr. King's birthday - three additional days off with pay per employee per year. Their health benefit plan (for both employees and retirees) was waaaay more robust than private settings. They had access to purchasing plans for big-ticket items at deep discounts, theater and amusement park tickets, tax-free uniform purchasing (again at deep discounts), and I could go on from there. They were getting cheap prescription drugs long before Wal-Mart came up with their $4 generics. They had preferential hiring that the private sector doesn't get - they hardly ever hired from outside and they paid their existing employees gobs of overtime instead of hiring additional staff.

They could retire far earlier than the private sector. The manager to whom I reported was preparing to retire at 55. She would collect a full pension and go on to work for another 10-12 years in a completely different setting.

So ... in my mind ... public sector employee, you're working for me as a taxpayer. You chose that setting when you accepted the position. You might not realize just how good you have it as opposed to the rest of us. Take it or leave it.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Cassiesmom - I don't disagree. But I can tell you what my brother, who works for the federal government would say - Yes, government employees have many benefits - but the pay is lower. That is the trade off. He could make much more money working in the private sector - but he likes what he does and he likes that it benefits people.

You are paying the wages of every employee. When you buy an automobile you are paying the wages of the workers who make the cars. But a can of beans - you are paying the wages of the people who picked the beans and the people who canned them. When you make a phone call you are paying the wages of people who work for the phone company.

But I said it before and I'll say it again. If the public sector benefits are too high - negotiate with them - reduce them.

But why take away the right other employees have - the right to stand united in their relationship with their employer? They did not give that up - now some folks are trying to take away a right they had when they took the job. For political reasons.

By the way...do you know what "CF" means?

[caseysmom]

Cialis Factory????

[Puckstop31]

I stand by my assertion that PUBLIC employee unions negotiate against the taxpayer. Simply because when the union wins a concession, the taxpayer has to pay for it.

Then there is the fact that unions are HUGE contributors to political campaigns. The statistics say that a vast majority of those union donations go to guys with a "D" after their name. I am SURE that those "negotiations" are on the up and up. As if a governor/legislature/what have you is going to fight hard against what a union wants when the unions money helped to get them elected. What we are seeing now, all around the country, is the long term result of the utter joke that public employee union "negotiations" result in.


Something has to give. I feel for the honest union member. But what are they to do?

Public employee unions need to have different rules. There has to be some kind of a limit to what they can get out of a 'negotiation'. Otherwise, next time the political climate is full of people they helped get elected.....

[sasvermont]

CF = cluster f**k

I don't usually add much to this topic, but I do know what CF means. It was my favorite term while working with lawyers for 30 some years.

[wombat2u2004]

CF = cluster f**k

I don't usually add much to this topic, but I do know what CF means. It was my favorite term while working with lawyers for 30 some years.

HAH !!!! That's still my favourite term when dealing with government. But yeah, I have to agree that lawyers are very CFish....hee hee.

[Puckstop31]

HAH !!!! That's still my favourite term when dealing with government. But yeah, I have to agree that lawyers are very CFish....hee hee.

Think back to your days in the service Wom....


What generally happens when a new Lieutenant tells a Sergeant HOW to do something?



Oh the stories I could share.... But this is a family show. LOL

[wombat2u2004]

What generally happens when a new Lieutenant tells a Sergeant HOW to do something?

Yeah, that's a bit gruesome to discuss here. But it's sort of along the lines of the Sgt ripping off the Lt's arm and beating him to death with it.

[Lady's Human]

THis is very much against my better judgement, however, I feel forced by the tone of some of the comments to say something.........

Public sector unions.......yep, we're all about greed. I admit it.

The Unions in the postal service have nothing to do with the thousands of workers who used to sit in hold rooms waiting to sort mail.......off the clock. They were required to be there, not getting paid, waiting to be called on to work, at which point they'd clock in and go to work.

Nah, the 8 in 10 rule we have in our contract is just about greed.

They have nothing to do with protecting workers' bids. Management would never do something like hire someone based on an offered job then change the hours making it impossible for the new hire to follow their original plans......

Management would never refuse to post a needed job because they didn't like the person who was going to get it.....

No school board would ever fire a teacher just for personal pique....

No town would ever fire a highway worker because the worker ran for a political position and lost.....

Nope, government agencies are pure as the wind driven snow, and would never violate labor laws or ethical standards of conduct, and would never, EVER use their relatively unlimited funds to fight a worker in court over an improper firing or unsafe working conditions.

Patronage doesn't exist in government, and there's no need for standards of conduct to be contractually enforced. No government agency would EVER hire someone because of politics.....

Unions exist in the public sector for the same reason they exist in the private sector...........to avoid the abuse of power by management. Toss political power into the mix, and it can, and has, gotten ugly in short order. The APWU is in contract negotiations right now, and the wage scale is the least of my concerns.

What's going on in Wisconsin has nothing to do with excessive spending, the Union(s) have offered concessions in those areas. This is about breaking the collective bargaining rights for public employees nationwide.



This statement has been brought to you by a corrupt, greedy local union official, a fat cat living off of the money from dues paying workers. The $248.56 I get every quarter from the Union is the only reason I deal with the phone calls at home, people waiting for me at the time clock, negotiating with management only to see the deals broken minutes later, high blood pressure and headaches.

[RICHARD]

CF = cluster f**k

I don't usually add much to this topic, but I do know what CF means. It was my favorite term while working with lawyers for 30 some years.

LOL,

CF is beyond a CJ.

[cassiesmom]

CF = cluster f**k

I don't usually add much to this topic, but I do know what CF means. It was my favorite term while working with lawyers for 30 some years.

I just looked this up on Urban Dictionary-- some days this expression totally describes my work situation! Especially when the managers have been in lengthy meetings and aren't aware of what has occurred while they were gone. That's an apt description for those moments. Thanks, sasvermont for giving me a laugh today!

We've moved away from unsafe working conditions?

I was thinking of the kind of extreme work conditions Upton Sinclair wrote about in "The Jungle". What a working person would have encountered in 1911, not 2011. Maybe I should have chosen a different phrase. My error.

I think I should stay out of this topic now. Don't want to end up saying something amiss. Off to Thursdays for cocoa.

[RICHARD]

but I've got a 3-word answer: accidental needle sticks.

SHARPS container!

[cassiesmom]

SHARPS container!

exactly- the darn thing was too full and we were taking it out of the holder for environmental services to discard.

[Edwina's Secretary]

At my company, you get to be a peer with everyone, even the owners.

That is easier to achieve when you have 10 or 20 employees.

Not so easy when you have 30,000 or even 100.

That is what unions do. Level the playing field. Put the worker bees on more of a peer level with management.

You are prepared to deny other employees the same working conditions you enjoy?