Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MyFox Twin Cities)   Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker wants the union refs back in the NFL   ( divider line
    More: Ironic, NFL, Wisconsin, World Wrestling Federation, Green Bay, labor dispute, Roger Goodell  
•       •       •

1066 clicks; posted to Sports » on 25 Sep 2012 at 5:12 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-09-25 02:26:29 PM  
2 votes:
While you're at it Gov. d*ckface, can I get that raise I've I haven't gotten in the last 4 years.
2012-09-26 12:20:06 PM  
1 vote:

fuhldang: So Republicans, i.e. Scott Walker and the Mittster, are now saying we need highly qualified, experienced union workers to referee a sporting event, but we don't need highly qualified, experienced union workers to educate our children? Nice priorities, GOP.

I don't claim to speak for anyone else, but I want highly qualified, experienced workers to referee NFL games. That wish has nothing to do with whether I believe they should be unionized.
2012-09-26 09:31:02 AM  
1 vote:

persyus: Soooo.... why is everyone blaming the NFL and no one asking what the Ref's demands are and if they are reasonable?

I don't know what they are asking for salary increases, but I read that:

a) they are asking for $38,500 PER OFFICIAL PER YEAR contributed to their pensions
b) on average, they have already missed out on pay of $50,000 this year

Does this not seem insane to anyone else? If this doesn't make a case against unions, I don't know what could...

They already have an agreement with the league where the league pays that. The league wants to drop the pension - essentially forcing a pay cut for refs.

The league also wants more 'backup' refs on staff along with tfor power for the Commish to UNILATERALLY decide whether to remove or replace any official deemed to be 'under-performing' with no outside appeal allowed.

The refs want a continuation of the pension the league already agreed to - but have compromised in that new refs that haven't vested in the pension get 401k's instead.

They also want an independent arbiter over demotions/removal from active duty and a aren't keen on the NFL having full time replacements to replace a whole team on a whim.

The last sticking point is that the NFL wants refs to be full time instead of part time. The refs now would have to quit jobs as successful attorneys, bankers, etc and live ONLY on the NFL's cash. Add to that the NFL's desired ability to demote/fire/not give work to a ref on a whim and you have employees completely at the mercy of the league.

They'd be idiots to fold to Goodell.

And finally - no, it's not crazy. The NFL makes BILLIONS a year and the refs have proven that they are uniquely qualified employees whose skills are near irreplaceable and also necessary to the proper function of the league. Pay the men their money because you clearly don't have anyone else capable of doing the job.
2012-09-26 03:21:26 AM  
1 vote:

bubbaprog: MoeSzyslak: 3. What was their take on merit based accountability where good teachers are rewarded and under performing teachers are let go?

Given that it's impossible to measure merit in the worst neighborhoods when student turnover can be up to 80% in a given year, pretty much everybody who actually knows anything about education rejects merit pay as being impossible.

The only people who promote merit pay are those who have absolutely no idea what life is like for "the other 47%" and essentially do not give a shiat if those kids get a good education or not.

So there's no such thing as a bad teacher because a lot of poor people make shiatty parents? Everybody who goes into teaching should have a government job for life because there's no possible metric to judge teachers? You know who the shiatty teachers at your high school were and so do they and the rest of the teachers. Only the union won't let them say who the bad teachers are because what's good for the goose is good for the gander to the detriment of the students who have no say in the matter. Good teachers looking the other way when it comes to bad ones is no different than it is for cops. Test the teachers regularly if you don't want to go by student grades. Make it possible to actually get rid of bad teachers. There are legitimate things that can be done that they will never agree to but why would they so long has anyone for changes "doesn't care about the children" and other such derp.

As for your "other 47%" retarded nonsense, keep drinking that kool-aid. You don't know me, don't know my life, and don't know what I've been through so don't pretend to have so much as a clue as to how I or anybody else you don't know bases their opinions. You realize your stupid farking argument is nothing more than "only democrats give a shiat about the education of children" as if they're the only people with kids? While it's true that all the shiatty parents that are making teachers look bad are going to vote for Obama that has nothing to do with the fact something needs to be done with public education and it has fark all to do with the point Romney was making. 47% will vote democrat no matter what so why would he waste his time and money pandering to them when they'd never vote for him anyway was his point. What that has to do with public education is beyond me.
2012-09-25 09:21:13 PM  
1 vote:
It almost makes you believe in cosmic karma, that Wisconsin would be the state hardest screwed by the union lockout.
2012-09-25 09:14:15 PM  
1 vote:

MoeSzyslak: organizmx: Got it. Public unions protecting teachers making $50k a year = bad. Private unions protecting refs making $160k a year = good.

Thank you all for clearing that up.

1. What is the average salary of the Chicago teachers who recently went on strike?
2. Were they offered a raise before they went on strike?
3. What was their take on merit based accountability where good teachers are rewarded and under performing teachers are let go?
4. Should unions who are payed with tax dollars just automatically be given whatever they ask for because unions are wicked farking awesome?

Good questions that I don't know the answer to. I'm actually not familiar with what was going on in Chicago (just to be honest), but we've been dealing with our fair share of education struggles here in New Jersey, which is what I had in my head when I made that statement.

New Jersey has one of the strongest teachers' unions in the country, and because of that, its a job that pays well, and its a highly respected, and highly desirable career to have. As a result, New Jersey's public schools consistently rank amongst the best in the country, and we have, as a state, the lowest drop out rate in the nation. (North Carolina, as an example, as no teacher's union, starting pay is about half of what it is in NJ, they struggle to find qualified teachers to take jobs, and the drop out rate in the state is about 50%).

My point? Well public schools are under attack here too, by politicians and wealthier members of the private sector who want to start privatizing education on tax payer dollars. Right now, the teachers union in New Jersey is needed more than ever. I was referring more to what was happening in this state - I don't know much about the details of Chicago.

Merit pay is a whole other issue. Would we judge cops like this also? Should cops in cities with high crime be considering "failing" police officers, while cops in mostly safe, affluent suburbs be considered "successful" police officers? Should cops in inner cities be paid substantially less if the crime rates go up in their areas? No? Then why would this apply to teachers? Why should a teacher in a mostly wealthy suburb be considered a success, while a teacher who has to work twice as hard to get kids to do half as much in an inner city be considered a failure and get paid less. It makes no sense.

And no, I don't think unions should be allowed to do whatever they want. They shouldn't be disbarred completely either. Wether public or private. They play an incredibly important role in making sure the working class in America has a fare shot against people with a lot more power and influence. It helps level the playing field for the average joe. It also makes no sense to be AGAINST public unions for teachers, but be FOR public unions for cops and firefighters, as Walker is.

Sorry sports fans - this really belongs in the politics tab - but then again I guess this entire thread does.
2012-09-25 08:55:39 PM  
1 vote:
You get what you pay for.
2012-09-25 08:31:32 PM  
1 vote:

organizmx: MoeSzyslak: BGates: Learn the difference between public and private unions.

They're willfully ignoring the difference so they can make this ridiculous talking point that has no basis in reality. Did you see how much they fellated subby in the other thread about this? The refs aren't paid with tax dollars and they're negotiating with the NFL (private company) not politicians the they spent a shiat load on to get elected. Apples and oranges.

To steal from another poster in a politics thread:

Unions giving to politicians should be illegal because politicians then have to neogotiate with the unions on contracts.
But corporations doing business with the government or being regulated by the government should be able to give unlimited money in secret with no oversight and no public disclosure and even give money from overseas

Both are conflicts of interest and both should be changed but what exactly does any of that have to do with a private union negotiating with a private company as is the case here?
2012-09-25 06:59:33 PM  
1 vote:

Get over it cheeseheads! It was the right call!!

/Go Bears!
2012-09-25 06:44:20 PM  
1 vote:

kstofer: I promise I don't have an axe to grind, and I have no interest in going out of my way to defend Scott Walker...but perhaps someone can explain to me the apparent inconsistency in his statements? Saying you want good refs to come back to the game you watch and love does not equal saying you value the importance of just says you value their importance as competent refs.

If there wasn't a union, the locked out refs would all be fired, and all you'd have is these replacements. A union insures you can't just replace an entire workforce with cheap labor.
2012-09-25 06:40:12 PM  
1 vote:
I see we aren't making a distinction between public and private sector unions on the Internet today.
2012-09-25 05:31:41 PM  
1 vote:

Uniters of Mankind

2012-09-25 05:19:22 PM  
1 vote:

Dead for Tax Reasons: dletter: "If you were born and raised in Wisconsin, you were raised on the Packers," Erpenbach said. "Every Sunday it's Packers and pancakes, not necessarily in that order."

Am I wrong, or is that bad usage of the "not necessarily in that order" phrasing... if the emphasis is supposed to be on how much people love the Packers? He should have said "pancakes and Packers".

do the packers play at 8am?

No but it is a well known fact that Packer fans are drunkards and layabouts with no social skills so expecting them to just be waking up before a MNF game is a highly probable expectation. They also smell and like to smell their own butts.
2012-09-25 05:16:26 PM  
1 vote:
walker is a douchenozzle. the nfl is too. especially for locking out the refs over an amount that is essentially a rounding error for their multibillion dollar league that has a license to print money. just pay them already.
Displayed 14 of 14 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.