There’s an interesting political cross-pollination here. The states are out front in the drastic cuts thing. The feds are trailing behind. So will cuts at the state level prepare people for the idea and make them more fatalistic? Or will state cuts make them more determined to resists further pain?
So will cuts at the state level prepare people for the idea and make them more fatalistic? Or will state cuts make them more determined to resists further pain?
As Mao responded when asked whether he thought the French Revolution had been a good idea, it’s too early to tell. I honestly think it might go either way. For one thing I don’t think that Wisconsin public employees covered themselves in glory yesterday. That might result in their garnering less sympathy than might otherwise have been the case, particularly from those who don’t have jobs at all.
From my southerly vantage point, Wisconsin politics are exceptionally moralistic, often in unpredictable ways: pro-life, anti-war, communitarian, highly influenced by Catholic and Lutheran religious thought, and with high ethics/lobbying regulations. At least at one time, Milwaukee was the most unionized city in America.
Assuming that collective bargaining rights of public workers get reduced without a backlash that immediately restores them, I would have to think it reflects a moral judgment that the public unions are acting irresponsible in this recession, and that their salaries and benefits are hurting the less-well off. It’s an interesting turn of events.
From my southerly vantage point, Wisconsin politics are exceptionally moralistic, often in unpredictable ways: pro-life, anti-war, communitarian, highly influenced by Catholic and Lutheran religious thought, and with high ethics/lobbying regulations.
Some time ago I wrote a post on this subject that still gets a lot of hits. The political views of the immigrants who settled in particular areas continue to influence the political thought in those areas for generations, even for centuries.
The Upper Midwest has a hefty proportion of Scandinavians and Germans who emigrated to the United States in the late 19th century. Their views tend to reflect the political milieu that was prevalent in Scandinavia and Germany at the time.
The heart of the Grange movement, which formed the backbone of the late 19th early 20th century Progressive Movement was in the Upper Midwest. Wisconsin and Minnesota continue to be the home to a highly regional sort of liberal political figure of which Hubert Humphrey is prototypical. Robert La Follette, William Proxmire, Russ Feingold, Paul Wellstone just to name a few.
Look, I can see the point of view of public employees: they bargained and got what they got. Why break the deal? WRT – teachers, they are probably frustrated that peformance criticisms are probably driven by minority/bilingual issus. And so forth.
But really, if you signed a contract, and you knew you had hoodwinked the other side, or exercised undo leverage with them at the time, would you really not expect a backlash down the road.
I don’t think I’m the only small businessman on this forum, but one of the few. Anyone ever had a contract with, oh, Wal-Mart/Home Depot/American Greetings etc? You know what that contract is worth when the economic realities change? I’m cupping my hand and fingers into a big zero.
The public empoyees unions got away with murder in the gravy days, enabled by irresponsible vote seeking pols. Now the people who have to pay for it are in deep shixt trouble. Guess what?
Anyone ever had a contract with, oh, Wal-Mart/Home Depot/American Greetings etc?
Those, no. Sears and K-Mart, yes. That was quite some time ago and I suspect that the experience was somewhat difference. Their general strategy was to try to turn you into a captive, selling only to them.
But I get what you mean and I agree with it.
This paragraph:
The public empoyees unions got away with murder in the gravy days, enabled by irresponsible vote seeking pols. Now the people who have to pay for it are in deep shixt trouble. Guess what?
really gets to the root of the problem.
The problem isn’t just the current contract; it’s also the contract before the contract previous to the current contract. And maybe the one before that.
The conditions are really considerably different from the ones that were expected and compensation plans have been built on top of compensation plans. That’s what it means to be in the most serious economic downturn in 70 years. Conditions are different than they’ve been in 70 years.
Maybe I’m not understanding the whole picture here, but how does removing collective bargaining rights help Wisconsin in it’s current predicament? I can see how, eventually, if this is successful, the state could get to the point where it might reduce the cost of its employees, but isn’t that a ways down the road? Did the state try to renegotiate the contracts, seek concessions and pursue other measures with more immediate effect that would not have garnered such a backlash?
but how does removing collective bargaining rights help Wisconsin in it’s current predicament?
It doesn’t. What it does is raise a Republican governor’s visibility and make him a hero to right wing ideologues. I doubt this has anything to do with Madison. I imagine this has to do with a whole different city, roughly 85o miles east southeast.
Maybe I’m not understanding the whole picture here, but how does removing collective bargaining rights help Wisconsin in it’s current predicament?
That’s why I generally avoid commenting about the politics in states other than my own. I have no idea whatever of the context of the actions and don’t have any plans to learn. I have enough to deal with keeping up with the goings-on in Illinois.
Drew, I think it’s more a case of the unions playing the long game, and the government playing to not lose the next election. In this sense, I think Madigan’s proposal to amend the constitution to require a super-majority vote to increase pension benefits is a good idea, though late.
As I understand the legislation, it violates the collective bargaining agreement by requiring the employees to increase their contributions for healthcare and pensions. I’m guessing that the bill not only authorizes collective-bargaining to be overriden in this situation, but makes it easier to do so in the future.
I found this legal primer on the bill useful. Key graph:
“Collective bargaining for local government employees (except for firefighter unions, police unions, and deputy sheriff associations, now called public safety employees) will be limited to only negotiating on base wage rates. Other wage adjustments such as experience steps for payments based upon length of service would not be subject to collective bargaining.”
@Drew
“I don’t think I’m the only small businessman on this forum”
Don’t make me throw up. The young guy, his father, and their two helpers who came over and repaired my roof last week are small businessmen. You ain’t.
Rules of thumb for defining small businesses: companies including management companies (holding companies, etc.) of less than $7 million, manufacturing concerns with fewer than 200 employees (depending on what they’re manufacturing)
Lesson for urban planning: Don’t locate large universities within blocks of the state capitol.
There’s an interesting political cross-pollination here. The states are out front in the drastic cuts thing. The feds are trailing behind. So will cuts at the state level prepare people for the idea and make them more fatalistic? Or will state cuts make them more determined to resists further pain?
As Mao responded when asked whether he thought the French Revolution had been a good idea, it’s too early to tell. I honestly think it might go either way. For one thing I don’t think that Wisconsin public employees covered themselves in glory yesterday. That might result in their garnering less sympathy than might otherwise have been the case, particularly from those who don’t have jobs at all.
From my southerly vantage point, Wisconsin politics are exceptionally moralistic, often in unpredictable ways: pro-life, anti-war, communitarian, highly influenced by Catholic and Lutheran religious thought, and with high ethics/lobbying regulations. At least at one time, Milwaukee was the most unionized city in America.
Assuming that collective bargaining rights of public workers get reduced without a backlash that immediately restores them, I would have to think it reflects a moral judgment that the public unions are acting irresponsible in this recession, and that their salaries and benefits are hurting the less-well off. It’s an interesting turn of events.
Some time ago I wrote a post on this subject that still gets a lot of hits. The political views of the immigrants who settled in particular areas continue to influence the political thought in those areas for generations, even for centuries.
The Upper Midwest has a hefty proportion of Scandinavians and Germans who emigrated to the United States in the late 19th century. Their views tend to reflect the political milieu that was prevalent in Scandinavia and Germany at the time.
The heart of the Grange movement, which formed the backbone of the late 19th early 20th century Progressive Movement was in the Upper Midwest. Wisconsin and Minnesota continue to be the home to a highly regional sort of liberal political figure of which Hubert Humphrey is prototypical. Robert La Follette, William Proxmire, Russ Feingold, Paul Wellstone just to name a few.
Look, I can see the point of view of public employees: they bargained and got what they got. Why break the deal? WRT – teachers, they are probably frustrated that peformance criticisms are probably driven by minority/bilingual issus. And so forth.
But really, if you signed a contract, and you knew you had hoodwinked the other side, or exercised undo leverage with them at the time, would you really not expect a backlash down the road.
I don’t think I’m the only small businessman on this forum, but one of the few. Anyone ever had a contract with, oh, Wal-Mart/Home Depot/American Greetings etc? You know what that contract is worth when the economic realities change? I’m cupping my hand and fingers into a big zero.
The public empoyees unions got away with murder in the gravy days, enabled by irresponsible vote seeking pols. Now the people who have to pay for it are in deep shixt trouble. Guess what?
Paybacks a bitch.
Those, no. Sears and K-Mart, yes. That was quite some time ago and I suspect that the experience was somewhat difference. Their general strategy was to try to turn you into a captive, selling only to them.
But I get what you mean and I agree with it.
This paragraph:
really gets to the root of the problem.
The problem isn’t just the current contract; it’s also the contract before the contract previous to the current contract. And maybe the one before that.
The conditions are really considerably different from the ones that were expected and compensation plans have been built on top of compensation plans. That’s what it means to be in the most serious economic downturn in 70 years. Conditions are different than they’ve been in 70 years.
Maybe I’m not understanding the whole picture here, but how does removing collective bargaining rights help Wisconsin in it’s current predicament? I can see how, eventually, if this is successful, the state could get to the point where it might reduce the cost of its employees, but isn’t that a ways down the road? Did the state try to renegotiate the contracts, seek concessions and pursue other measures with more immediate effect that would not have garnered such a backlash?
but how does removing collective bargaining rights help Wisconsin in it’s current predicament?
It doesn’t. What it does is raise a Republican governor’s visibility and make him a hero to right wing ideologues. I doubt this has anything to do with Madison. I imagine this has to do with a whole different city, roughly 85o miles east southeast.
That’s why I generally avoid commenting about the politics in states other than my own. I have no idea whatever of the context of the actions and don’t have any plans to learn. I have enough to deal with keeping up with the goings-on in Illinois.
Drew, I think it’s more a case of the unions playing the long game, and the government playing to not lose the next election. In this sense, I think Madigan’s proposal to amend the constitution to require a super-majority vote to increase pension benefits is a good idea, though late.
As I understand the legislation, it violates the collective bargaining agreement by requiring the employees to increase their contributions for healthcare and pensions. I’m guessing that the bill not only authorizes collective-bargaining to be overriden in this situation, but makes it easier to do so in the future.
I found this legal primer on the bill useful. Key graph:
“Collective bargaining for local government employees (except for firefighter unions, police unions, and deputy sheriff associations, now called public safety employees) will be limited to only negotiating on base wage rates. Other wage adjustments such as experience steps for payments based upon length of service would not be subject to collective bargaining.”
http://www.ruderware.com/documents/2011SpecialUpdate-CollectiveBargaining.pdf
@Drew
“I don’t think I’m the only small businessman on this forum”
Don’t make me throw up. The young guy, his father, and their two helpers who came over and repaired my roof last week are small businessmen. You ain’t.
Rules of thumb for defining small businesses: companies including management companies (holding companies, etc.) of less than $7 million, manufacturing concerns with fewer than 200 employees (depending on what they’re manufacturing)
Usually it’s “the Berkeley of the Midwest”. I don’t think anyone will have any objection to that moniker in light of current events.