Guidette Frankentits: I don't got mine, fark you?


Good thing the pension reform in San Jose will be overturned. The city has contracts with the Public Employee Unions that they signed off on. No judge in their right mind would void those contracts.

Eh, we'll have to see how stuff goes in San Jose. I find it pretty hubristic of the unions who say that, basically, nothing can be taken away from them without something given in return, yet things can be given to them ad infinitum with nothing taken away in return.

Union pensions currently take up 20% of the general fund in San Jose (they've gone from costing around $70 million to $250 million in the past decade, and they'll continue to rise). That's clearly unsustainable.

cman: cman: DarwiOdrade: Bill_Wick's_Friend: cman: WTF is wrong with me today?

Same thing that's wrong with you most days.

Your knee-jerk need to declare "Obama bad! Unions bad! Both sides wrong so vote Republican!" overrides your brain. Your car is in "drive" before the keys are in the ignition.

But he's totally not a conservative, and don't you dare say he is!

Yes, I am the rightest of the right, a proud Republican donor! My great Republican ideology of marriage equality, transgender equality (changing ones birth certificate to indicate their correct gender), freedom to burn the American flag, ensuring that church and state stay separate, ending the war on drugs, the legalization of all drugs, ensuring a proper treatment for the GITMO detainees (who should have legal representation), anti-racism and support for the 1964 civil rights voting act, and the big one, not worshiping with all of my heart the armed forces. Very Republican, aint i?

Oh, and to top it all off, I supported the recall against Walker, and I wanted the Democrat nominee to take it home. I was very active in those threads and I gave my reasons why I supported it. But, to save you the trouble, I will sum it up: I wanted Walker out for his hyper-partisanship and for denying teachers the right to have collective bargaining as a right. I wanted the GOP to be humbled (maybe they would have stopped much of their bullshiat if they were)

But of course, I am just one of those right-winged Republican bigots.

Is this some sort of reverse trolling bit?

Wangiss: Do you mean this for desk jockeys as well?

How many desk jockeys retire from their jobs on disability? Probably nowhere near as many as cops and firefighters. But sitting at a desk all day isn't going to help chronic medical conditions. That's true of a public or private sector job.

Few things are certain: health care costs are increasing, more people are getting more chronic medical conditions, we have more people in prison than any other country and there will always be a need for firefighters, cops and teachers.

Take away those 3 jobs or make the those three occupations so undesirable no one wants to do them and see what happens.

turbidum: Union pensions currently take up 20% of the general fund in San Jose (they've gone from costing around $70 million to $250 million in the past decade, and they'll continue to rise). That's clearly unsustainable.

What's unsustainable is the cost of living in San Jose and California. But sure that's totally the union's fault.

MFL: Unions can play the victim all day long, but this working class hero crap doesn't stick too well when the people that are paying for them to retire at 55 with full benefits and a generous pension could only imagine having that luxury themselves.

Yes, how dare the people who run into your house to save your ass not be compensated.

Guidette Frankentits: Wangiss: Do you mean this for desk jockeys as well?

How many desk jockeys retire from their jobs on disability? Probably nowhere near as many as cops and firefighters. But sitting at a desk all day isn't going to help chronic medical conditions. That's true of a public or private sector job.

Few things are certain: health care costs are increasing, more people are getting more chronic medical conditions, we have more people in prison than any other country and there will always be a need for firefighters, cops and teachers.

Take away those 3 jobs or make the those three occupations so undesirable no one wants to do them and see what happens.

Is someone arguing for a situation that would make those three occupations so undesirable no one wants to do them? There are pretty rigorous requirements and pretty decent waiting lists for all of them. I don't see that labor pool running out any time soon. I don't think we're even close to under-compensating the cops and firefighters. Teachers seem to have some sort of Socratic ideal and a fascination with hemlock. I'm going to have to admit upfront that I don't understand teachers.

"You can go to school for six years and make money, or go to school for six years and not make money. Which do you choose?"

"I want to be a teacher!"

I long thought of becoming a professor of Japanese pedagogy. That won't happen for me unless the waiting lines get shorter. I'd rather live a decent life and let the masochists suffer for their art.

Wangiss: Guidette Frankentits: Wangiss: Do you mean this for desk jockeys as well?

How many desk jockeys retire from their jobs on disability? Probably nowhere near as many as cops and firefighters. But sitting at a desk all day isn't going to help chronic medical conditions. That's true of a public or private sector job.

Few things are certain: health care costs are increasing, more people are getting more chronic medical conditions, we have more people in prison than any other country and there will always be a need for firefighters, cops and teachers.

Take away those 3 jobs or make the those three occupations so undesirable no one wants to do them and see what happens.

Is someone arguing for a situation that would make those three occupations so undesirable no one wants to do them? There are pretty rigorous requirements and pretty decent waiting lists for all of them. I don't see that labor pool running out any time soon. I don't think we're even close to under-compensating the cops and firefighters. Teachers seem to have some sort of Socratic ideal and a fascination with hemlock. I'm going to have to admit upfront that I don't understand teachers.

Don't you get it? The waiting lists are for people who want to join a career that gives them good benefits. How long do you think the waiting list is gonna be when people aren't getting medical care for injuries they sustained on the job while fire fighting?

"You can go to school for six years and make money, or go to school for six years and not make money. Which do you choose?"

"I want to be a teacher!"

I long thought of becoming a professor of Japanese pedagogy. That won't happen for me unless the waiting lines get shorter. I'd rather live a decent life and let the masochists suffer for their art.

You proved my point.

Guidette Frankentits: turbidum: Union pensions currently take up 20% of the general fund in San Jose (they've gone from costing around $70 million to $250 million in the past decade, and they'll continue to rise). That's clearly unsustainable.

What's unsustainable is the cost of living in San Jose and California. But sure that's totally the union's fault.

Good job not responding to my actual point.

Guidette Frankentits: Wangiss: I long thought of becoming a professor of Japanese pedagogy. That won't happen for me unless the waiting lines get shorter. I'd rather live a decent life and let the masochists suffer for their art.

You proved my point.

That's what weirds me out. It's not like you have to suffer to be a teacher, but they all seem to do it. Why? For the cause? If we have such a steady stream of applicants that only people who are using it as a second household income can afford to teach, and we keep lowering the pay and benefits (that's hypothetical) and we still have an overwhelming supply of eager and willing teachers, there's still no point to raise pay. We'll still have teachers working. Over and over we see that raising pay doesn't improve teacher performance. And even when we do raise pay it doesn't last because the bureaucracy is siphoning off every dollar they can to "administrators" and the teachers still get what they insist is crap pay. And yet, so many people will line up for the pleasure of this pain.

It is not our responsibility to feed these people. It's our job to teach the kids, so we have to compensate the teachers enough to keep a stock of them. Would they do it for free?

So because your 401K tanked you need to take it out on the pensioners so you can feel better about yourself. Hooray for the race to the bottom!

Jackson Herring: Corporate media biased towards unions?


holy fark is this not the dumbest sentence ever committed to the electronic ether?

Everybodys' sarcasm meter is broken today apparently.

Virulency: wheres that chart that shows that govenment pay was supposed to keep up with private pay because private pay was just skyrocketing when the middle class was growing, its just that private pay stagnated and fell while government pay continued the trend... is it that government pay should be lowered or that private workers are just not moving....

Back in 2006 private employees used to make fun of their government counterparts because they had better pay, benefits, and a fat 401K because the market was booming. Now that private employees are largely stuck with reduced and stagnating wages, fewer benefits, and retirement accounts that tanked, public employees make easy targets for those that want to distract from their wealthy benefactors who are laughing all the way to the bank.

Benevolent Misanthrope: So, people are upset that union workers get better pensions than they do - and their answer to that is not to organize and demand better benefits themselves, or pass laws that make sure everyone gets good benefits, but to fark over the unionized city employees so they get the same corporate-controlled, shiatty retirement option as everyone else.

Great. Absolute genius, you farking assholes.

They smarter than the idiots who thinks those benefits pay for themselves or are financed by Obama money.

And if by people you mean the tax payers who have to pay for those exorbitant government benefits of course they are upset. The private sector is not able to just reach in the pockets of the tax payer (unless you are the UAW and GM) to finance those benefits. They have to answer to shareholders and investors plus actually generate a profit to pay for the benefits.. Now the politicians and unions are finding out the tax payers are not willing to be treated like their private ATMs anymore.

Politicians and government employee unions scratched each others back with the tax payers footing the bill. Unions help the politician get elected in exchange for those benefits They kicked any financial concerns down the road hoping they would not have to answer for it when the bills came do. Well the bastards have run out of road. The single largest source of debt many state and local governments now face are those same exorbitant benefits.

Heaven forbid that government employees should have to contribute more toward their own benefits the way people with real jobs have to. Outside of the emergency service types few civil "servants" do any real work that they have to show resutls for.

Fark the assholes who rather bankrupt a city for their own greed. They are just as bad as Wall Street bankers in my book.

WE ARE WINNING!!!

Many states and cities are going to a 401 K style retirement and doing away with pensions altogether. There is hardly a remaining pension plan in place anywhere that is not trying to either freeze pension benefits, raise the eligibility age, decrease benefits, or increase the employee contribution percentage.
Most state and municipalities chose to either raid pension monies along with the general operating budgets, underfund them or leave them completely unfunded.
These actions mirror what is taking place with Social Security.

The promises of EITHER political party are WORTHLESS! Particularly those made several decades ago. Is one single person truly surprised that voters, ergo all humans, can be short-sighted, greedy and lack empathy??? If given the choice between new roads, police & firefighting budgets or paying Ms. Crabapple's pension for 38 years of faithful teaching service, I promise most of you will tell the poor teacher or nurse to eat catfood and fark off & die already, old bag.

Even democratic voters and union members voted to change current pension AND union benefits as they were seen as unsustainable. I am hoping to collect my nursing pension, but if I don't I will not starve nor will I 'fark off & die'. Weapons, ammo, fishing supplies are also an investment strategy these days for a truly diversified retirement portfolio. I'll kill the rich and the politicians for shiats and giggles, I'll eat their fat children because they're so tender. MMMMMM, long pig.

Guidette Frankentits: MFL: Unions can play the victim all day long, but this working class hero crap doesn't stick too well when the people that are paying for them to retire at 55 with full benefits and a generous pension could only imagine having that luxury themselves.

Yes, how dare the people who run into your house to save your ass not be compensated.

But what about the guys who build the fire trucks for those firefighters or the equipment they wear or the hoses they use? Are they less valuable because they only make the things that help keep firefighters safe? Because while a firefighter who runs into a building can retire with a nice pension at 55, the guys making all those things for firefighters are struggling to get by, won't be able to retire until they're 70 if they're lucky, will never seen $1 of a pension and it's their taxes that pay the pension of that firefighter.

And to be fair, I highly doubt most of the pension we're talking about is going to firefighters. It's going to DMV clerks, jury duty processors and school secretaries. All have important jobs in our society, but what makes answering phones at a high school for 20 years to put food on your table better than someone who is sitting in a corporate office doing the same thing for their family? How come you get to retire at 55 with full pension and benefits paid for by the person doing the same job with nowhere close to the same benefits?

KungFuJunkie: Was reading this morning that MN and MI are going to be more aggressive against unions after the recall fail.

"But Walker's victory Tuesday is encouraging Republicans in other states to push ahead with their own efforts to curtail unions' power and chop away at the benefits gained for their members over the years.

GOP lawmakers in states such as Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri and New Hampshire are likely to push harder for right-to-work legislation or other measures that restrict automatic union dues collection."

The only way Republicans will do it in Minnesota will be by Constitutional amendment. We have a DFL (Democratic) governor Mark Dayton and he will veto anything like Walker & the Fitzgerald brothers unethically forced through. They did get gay marriage and voter ID on as amendments this fall, so I can see a anti-union measure pushed through by 2014 unless the DFL regains at least one house of the legislature this fall.

cabbyman: WE ARE WINNING!!!

cabbyman: WE ARE WINNING!!!

Yes, you and Charlie Sheen do make a cute couple. I don't care what your mom says.

Fart_Machine ...Great minds and all that. Liked your comment BTW. Some people are just askin' for it. LOL

Dahnkster: Fart_Machine ...Great minds and all that. Liked your comment BTW. Some people are just askin' for it. LOL

Low hanging fruit and all that. :P

sabreWulf07: Bound and determined to do this all over again, eh? Do it. Vote yourselves into serfdom. It's what America deserves.

My favorite part of the book is the slight tint if the milk from the formaldehyde put in it to keep it from spoiling.

/of course now even raw milk is illegal.

Guidette Frankentits: turbidum: Union pensions currently take up 20% of the general fund in San Jose (they've gone from costing around $70 million to $250 million in the past decade, and they'll continue to rise). That's clearly unsustainable.

What's unsustainable is the cost of living in San Jose and California. But sure that's totally the union's fault.

Unions did support Prop 13.

Benevolent Misanthrope: So, people are upset that union workers get better pensions than they do - and their answer to that is not to organize and demand better benefits themselves, or pass laws that make sure everyone gets good benefits, but to fark over the unionized city employees so they get the same corporate-controlled, shiatty retirement option as everyone else. Great. Absolute genius, you farking assholes.

Part of the problem is the perception that California jobs are leaving the state for places like Nevada, Arizona and Texas because California is no longer cost competitive. Somebody from California only has so much power to lift the standards in competing states, so they look inwards instead. That means that they'll lower themselves to remain on the same field as the other guys.

As long as Congress and the president remain so pro-business and we have to compete with unequal trading partners like China, we as a country will just keep sinking back towards the days before unions.

Pincy: "Benevolent Misanthrope: So, people are upset that union workers get better pensions than they do - and their answer to that is not to organize and demand better benefits themselves, or pass laws that make sure everyone gets good benefits, but to fark over the unionized city employees so they get the same corporate-controlled, shiatty retirement option as everyone else.

Great. Absolute genius, you farking assholes.

Yep, that's always the way I've viewed it as well. Instead of organizing to make their own pay and benefits better they'd rather screw everyone who is doing better than them. I've never really understood it myself."


So...out of curiosity, what do you think our economy, employment rate, and domestic health of exportable market segments like manufacturing will look like once everybody's time is artificially priced higher than market rate?

killershark: And to be fair, I highly doubt most of the pension we're talking about is going to firefighters. It's going to DMV clerks, jury duty processors and school secretaries. All have important jobs in our society, but what makes answering phones at a high school for 20 years to put food on your table better than someone who is sitting in a corporate office doing the same thing for their family? How come you get to retire at 55 with full pension and benefits paid for by the person doing the same job with nowhere close to the same benefits?

They get better benefits and pensions because they get worse pay. If you look at public sector vs. private sector total compensations, the public sector employees earn 88% of the pay and have 93% of the total compensation of a similarly educated private sector employee.

Benevolent Misanthrope: So, people are upset that union workers get better pensions than they do - and their answer to that is not to organize and demand better benefits themselves, or pass laws that make sure everyone gets good benefits, but to fark over the unionized city employees so they get the same corporate-controlled, shiatty retirement option as everyone else.

Great. Absolute genius, you farking assholes.

My favorite is, "We promised these people pensions as part of their pay, but we screwed up the budget when we gave all of our friends cushy contracts. Lets just steal that money!" and they have spent BILLIONS to make the proles think its a Great idea.

They will not stop until they have rolled back the clock to the 1500's and we are living in a serfdom.

/ It's NEVER been about the economy. Its about CONTROL.

hasty ambush: Benevolent Misanthrope: So, people are upset that union workers get better pensions than they do - and their answer to that is not to organize and demand better benefits themselves, or pass laws that make sure everyone gets good benefits, but to fark over the unionized city employees so they get the same corporate-controlled, shiatty retirement option as everyone else.

Great. Absolute genius, you farking assholes.

They smarter than the idiots who thinks those benefits pay for themselves or are financed by Obama money.

And if by people you mean the tax payers who have to pay for those exorbitant government benefits of course they are upset. The private sector is not able to just reach in the pockets of the tax payer (unless you are the UAW and GM) to finance those benefits. They have to answer to shareholders and investors plus actually generate a profit to pay for the benefits.. Now the politicians and unions are finding out the tax payers are not willing to be treated like their private ATMs anymore.

Politicians and government employee unions scratched each others back with the tax payers footing the bill. Unions help the politician get elected in exchange for those benefits They kicked any financial concerns down the road hoping they would not have to answer for it when the bills came do. Well the bastards have run out of road. The single largest source of debt many state and local governments now face are those same exorbitant benefits.

Heaven forbid that government employees should have to contribute more toward their own benefits the way people with real jobs have to. Outside of the emergency service types few civil "servants" do any real work that they have to show resutls for.

Fark the assholes who rather bankrupt a city for their own greed. They are just as bad as Wall Street bankers in my book.

You could have just said "I don't know what I'm talking about" and saved yourself about ten minutes.

Benevolent Misanthrope: So, people are upset that union workers get better pensions than they do - and their answer to that is not to organize and demand better benefits themselves, or pass laws that make sure everyone gets good benefits, but to fark over the unionized city employees so they get the same corporate-controlled, shiatty retirement option as everyone else.

Great. Absolute genius, you farking assholes.

The difference is that it's taxpayer money. The taxpayers voted and made it clear they don't want to pay union prices to receive government services. Done. Now if people who were in the public unions don't like the decision, they can go work in a private company and set up a union there, forever safe from having their benefits voted away by the taxpayer. Unless of course the company is bailed out..by the taxpayer.

vernonFL: California VOTERS are the idiots. What did they think would happen when they decided to throw everyone in prison with a "3 strikes" law? So California has overcrowded prisons now, and has to build more prisons and has to staff those prisons. Also they need more police more judges more lawyers, etc...All public sector workers.

No kidding... California not only gave the country Boxer and Feinstein, but they're always a solid blue state every four years.

fozziewazzi: The taxpayers voted and made it clear they don't want to pay union prices to receive government services. Done.

The immediate next step is taxpayers whining that they aren't getting government services anymore. Done.

fozziewazzi: Benevolent Misanthrope: So, people are upset that union workers get better pensions than they do - and their answer to that is not to organize and demand better benefits themselves, or pass laws that make sure everyone gets good benefits, but to fark over the unionized city employees so they get the same corporate-controlled, shiatty retirement option as everyone else.

Great. Absolute genius, you farking assholes.

The difference is that it's taxpayer money. The taxpayers voted and made it clear they don't want to pay union prices to receive government services. Done. Now if people who were in the public unions don't like the decision, they can go work in a private company and set up a union there, forever safe from having their benefits voted away by the taxpayer. Unless of course the company is bailed out..by the taxpayer.

Do you understand why teachers have unions?

Ontos: vernonFL: California VOTERS are the idiots. What did they think would happen when they decided to throw everyone in prison with a "3 strikes" law? So California has overcrowded prisons now, and has to build more prisons and has to staff those prisons. Also they need more police more judges more lawyers, etc...All public sector workers.

No kidding... California not only gave the country Boxer and Feinstein, but they're always a solid blue state every four years. Derp!

Sergeant Grumbles: fozziewazzi: The taxpayers voted and made it clear they don't want to pay union prices to receive government services. Done.

The immediate next step is taxpayers whining that they aren't getting government services anymore. Done.

I'm thinking they can get say, the services of a bus driver for less than $60k/yr with a retirement that includes a guaranteed pension benefit and health insurance. Unions aren't so much about protecting worker's 'rights' than they are about artificially inflating salaries and benefits way above what the open labor market would dictate. If a private company wants to do that fine. When it's taxpayers footing the bill it's a problem.

People complain about their tax money paying for State workers pensions but part of every dollar you spend anywhere, private or public sector, union or non-union, it doesn't matter it goes to someone's retirement.

I'd like to find out were some of these people that complain about public workers are employed so I can go to their management and demand they cut these individuals retirement benefits so they can lower the cost of the product or service. If it's ok to do that for the public sector, should be ok to do it for the private as well.

fozziewazzi: Sergeant Grumbles: fozziewazzi: The taxpayers voted and made it clear they don't want to pay union prices to receive government services. Done.

The immediate next step is taxpayers whining that they aren't getting government services anymore. Done.

I'm thinking they can get say, the services of a bus driver for less than $60k/yr with a retirement that includes a guaranteed pension benefit and health insurance. Unions aren't so much about protecting worker's 'rights' than they are about artificially inflating salaries and benefits way above what the open labor market would dictate. If a private company wants to do that fine. When it's taxpayers footing the bill it's a problem.

Do you have a citation on these bus drivers earning 60K a year?

dennysgod: People complain about their tax money paying for State workers pensions but part of every dollar you spend anywhere, private or public sector, union or non-union, it doesn't matter it goes to someone's retirement.

I'd like to find out were some of these people that complain about public workers are employed so I can go to their management and demand they cut these individuals retirement benefits so they can lower the cost of the product or service. If it's ok to do that for the public sector, should be ok to do it for the private as well.

See here the magic of the free market - you can actually tell a company to lower it's employees pay and benefits...by not buying that company's product or service. Your wallet is your vote. If a company is trying to pay for their employee's salaries and benefits through higher prices on their product, you can refuse.

How does this work in the public sector? We don't have the option of refusing to pay taxes for overpriced services.

Fart_Machine: fozziewazzi: Sergeant Grumbles: fozziewazzi: The taxpayers voted and made it clear they don't want to pay union prices to receive government services. Done.

The immediate next step is taxpayers whining that they aren't getting government services anymore. Done.

I'm thinking they can get say, the services of a bus driver for less than $60k/yr with a retirement that includes a guaranteed pension benefit and health insurance. Unions aren't so much about protecting worker's 'rights' than they are about artificially inflating salaries and benefits way above what the open labor market would dictate. If a private company wants to do that fine. When it's taxpayers footing the bill it's a problem.

Do you have a citation on these bus drivers earning 60K a year?

Just this once I'll pay 'go-fetch' with you.

http://gothamist.com/2010/03/09/bus_drivers_get_paid_2799hour_not_e.p h p

fozziewazzi: Fart_Machine: fozziewazzi: Sergeant Grumbles: fozziewazzi: The taxpayers voted and made it clear they don't want to pay union prices to receive government services. Done.

The immediate next step is taxpayers whining that they aren't getting government services anymore. Done.

I'm thinking they can get say, the services of a bus driver for less than $60k/yr with a retirement that includes a guaranteed pension benefit and health insurance. Unions aren't so much about protecting worker's 'rights' than they are about artificially inflating salaries and benefits way above what the open labor market would dictate. If a private company wants to do that fine. When it's taxpayers footing the bill it's a problem.

Do you have a citation on these bus drivers earning 60K a year?

Just this once I'll pay 'go-fetch' with you.

http://gothamist.com/2010/03/09/bus_drivers_get_paid_2799hour_not_e.p h p

Well your link doesn't work when I cut and paste it so I'm going to guess that includes overtime which isn't unreasonable. City bus drivers earn about as much as city truck drivers for private companies. Meh.

Fart_Machine: fozziewazzi: Fart_Machine:

Well your link doesn't work when I cut and paste it so I'm going to guess that includes overtime which isn't unreasonable. City bus drivers earn about as much as city truck drivers for private companies. Meh.

$27.99/hr over a year is ~$60k. Vacations are paid. Overtime makes that salary a lot healthier. Add in a guaranteed pension and generous health benefits. Compared to what a private bus company would pay a NYC union bus driver is golden.

fozziewazzi: Fart_Machine: fozziewazzi: Fart_Machine:

Well your link doesn't work when I cut and paste it so I'm going to guess that includes overtime which isn't unreasonable. City bus drivers earn about as much as city truck drivers for private companies. Meh.

$27.99/hr over a year is ~$60k. Vacations are paid. Overtime makes that salary a lot healthier. Add in a guaranteed pension and generous health benefits. Compared to what a private bus company would pay a NYC union bus driver is golden.

Depends what the private bus company does. But I know everybody is better off when we drive wages downward amirite?

Fart_Machine: fozziewazzi: Fart_Machine: fozziewazzi: Fart_Machine:

Well your link doesn't work when I cut and paste it so I'm going to guess that includes overtime which isn't unreasonable. City bus drivers earn about as much as city truck drivers for private companies. Meh.

$27.99/hr over a year is ~$60k. Vacations are paid. Overtime makes that salary a lot healthier. Add in a guaranteed pension and generous health benefits. Compared to what a private bus company would pay a NYC union bus driver is golden.

Depends what the private bus company does. But I know everybody is better off when we drive wages downward amirite?

When wages level out to the what the open labor market will bear? You bet, everybody is better. Well, everybody except public union workers used to being grossly overpaid for their services.

fozziewazzi: Fart_Machine: fozziewazzi: Fart_Machine: fozziewazzi: Fart_Machine:

Well your link doesn't work when I cut and paste it so I'm going to guess that includes overtime which isn't unreasonable. City bus drivers earn about as much as city truck drivers for private companies. Meh.

$27.99/hr over a year is ~$60k. Vacations are paid. Overtime makes that salary a lot healthier. Add in a guaranteed pension and generous health benefits. Compared to what a private bus company would pay a NYC union bus driver is golden.

Depends what the private bus company does. But I know everybody is better off when we drive wages downward amirite?

When wages level out to the what the open labor market will bear? You bet, everybody is better. Well, everybody except public union workers used to being grossly overpaid for their services.

Starting city bus drivers make around $20 an hour, drive around on crowded city streets and have to deal with a general public who in an urban area can be dangerous. So no, they aren't all earning 60K a year. After working for years they can make those wages however that isn't to start. So what you are talking about is that you want them to be just as underpaid as how low the market will go.

fozziewazzi: $27.99/hr over a year is ~$60k. Vacations are paid. Overtime makes that salary a lot healthier. Add in a guaranteed pension and generous health benefits. Compared to what a private bus company would pay a NYC union bus driver is golden.

What you're not taking into account is that $60K/year in NYC is like $40K anywhere else. Housing is absurdly expensive and sales tax is 9%.

Kuta: I live in Vallejo, CA and am getting a kick out of these replies.

Pensions are unsustainable, economically and politically. I am all for labor negotiating whatever terms they can get with respect to wages, but tying the hands of the body politic for decades into the future is ethically wrong. Public sector union members (yes, this means police and fire safety too) should do a bit of self-reflection and see that the rest of us really don't think its fair that you get a free retirement on our shoulders. Sorry, that's just how it is.

Pensions are a form of deferred compensation. If we ask someone to work for us, and promise them $20 today and $10 next week, we'd better have that $10 when they come asking for it, don't you agree?

When they're funded in an actuarially sound manner, pensions are by that very definition economically sustainable. When they get used as a piggybank, or when cities underfund them because they can't or won't come up with the scratch, yes, we have a problem.

As far as pensions being politically unsustainable, you're probably right, because it's easier to drag the next guy down to one's level than it is to improve one's own condition. (See also: race to the bottom.)

As for tying the hands of the body politic for decades to come, how do you imagine that bonds work? There's nothing wrong with making a multi-decade financial commitment, unless one has no intention of fulfilling that commitment. I call that fraud.

Wangiss: I dunno, man. Seems like the movement that brought us unions here was pretty important. The Labor movement got us the 40-hour week, an extra holiday, and even aided feminists in the fight against sex discrimination in the workplace. But is there no point at which their efforts get, I dunno, ridiculous? Unions negotiate for the workers, which is fine, but Public Unions also get to vote their boss in, then use a portion (dues) of the tax money the boss gives them as campaign donations. You don't see a conflict of interest there?

Wait. Who gives what to who? Paychecks aren't gifts.
Workers join unions to get collective bargaining.
This raises their pay.
Part of this raise is used to pay the costs of getting the raise.

Simple business.

The government is just another employer to be negotiated with.

If the employers have professional negotiators, why shouldn't the workers?
If the employers can lobby congress, why shouldn't the workers?
If the employers can profit, why shouldn't the workers?

The government is just another employer to be negotiated with.

MFL: Unions can play the victim all day long, but this working class hero crap doesn't stick too well when the people that are paying for them to retire at 55 with full benefits and a generous pension could only imagine having that luxury themselves.



You dropped something.

Fart_Machine: fozziewazzi: Sergeant Grumbles: fozziewazzi: The taxpayers voted and made it clear they don't want to pay union prices to receive government services. Done.

The immediate next step is taxpayers whining that they aren't getting government services anymore. Done.

I'm thinking they can get say, the services of a bus driver for less than $60k/yr with a retirement that includes a guaranteed pension benefit and health insurance. Unions aren't so much about protecting worker's 'rights' than they are about artificially inflating salaries and benefits way above what the open labor market would dictate. If a private company wants to do that fine. When it's taxpayers footing the bill it's a problem.

Do you have a citation on these bus drivers earning 60K a year?

Of course he doesn't. I have a citation, though, that shows that a public bus driver can expect to make an average of $36,000 per year, and that a transit bus driver or a school bus driver can expect to make $23-34,000 per year, with only those in the 95th percentile making more than $45,000.

Link

Link