This is an interesting analysis of the changes that occurred in Wisconsin. CNN Impact of Changes in Wisconsin Though it certainly seems that the jury is still out. Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Raising social involvement, self awareness and self improvement topics, because our communities are the sum of our personal beliefs, behaviors, action or inaction. Only "we" can improve our family, work place, school, city, country, etc.
Search This Blog
Useful Links
YOU CAN HELP NOW !!!
Tell friends, relatives, co-workers, neighbors, politicians, etc to google give2attain or send them this address now !!!http://give2attain.blogspot.com/ Then I promise to keep posting unique and/or helpful thoughts, and hosting open polite dialogue. Thank You !!!
Trying for Balance
G2A Email and Rules
email: give2get@live.com
G2A will only discuss things that are general public knowledge. (ie no privileged info)
G2A will only link to public / posted documents. (ie school and other websites)
G2A will not post based on singular specific personal conversations or information without permission from the information provider.
G2a will only post after observing common themes, issues, discussions, etc. (ie it is out there and people are talking about it)
G2A will moderate any comments that apply derogatory labels. Be it to G2A, another commenter, group of people, etc.
G2A will moderate any comment that includes offensive language. (ie swearing)
G2A will only discuss things that are general public knowledge. (ie no privileged info)
G2A will only link to public / posted documents. (ie school and other websites)
G2A will not post based on singular specific personal conversations or information without permission from the information provider.
G2a will only post after observing common themes, issues, discussions, etc. (ie it is out there and people are talking about it)
G2A will moderate any comments that apply derogatory labels. Be it to G2A, another commenter, group of people, etc.
G2A will moderate any comment that includes offensive language. (ie swearing)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2017
(304)
-
▼
November
(14)
- ACA Reduces Uncompensated Care?
- Ostructionism vs Responsible Votes
- Most People Choose Ignorance
- Teacher Compensation: Steps and Lanes
- Orienting Principle Must Be Truth
- Consequences of Weakening Unions?
- America Needs Better Leaders
- Will Trump etal be Good for DEMs in 2018
- Guilty Until Proven Innocent?
- Tax Bill Review
- Why Do I Have to Love or Hate Trump?
- Vegas, Texas and Better Gun Control
- China Thoughts / Pics
- Those Silly Women
-
▼
November
(14)
About Me
- John
- I am married and we have 3 adult daughters and a dog. We live in Plymouth MN. My interests are learning, communicating, home improvement projects, motorcycling, boating, and other outside activities. Thank you for reading my blog and have a great day !!!
18 comments:
It's the difference between "Norma Rae" and PATCO. "Norma Rae" was a late 1970's widely released commercial movie, Sally Field won her first Oscar for it, that glorified unions. You can see the movie on various streaming services today. That represented the high mark for unions in this country, culturally. The decline started soon after with the PATCO strike, ironically resulting in the destruction of one of the few unions that supported Ronald Reagan. Since then, the power of management has grown enormously largely at the expense of shareholders has grown enormously which largely explains the income gap, between rich and poor. One place we see the results of that is Wisconsin. But you can see it also practically every where else as well.
--Hiram
Hiram,
According to my friend who became an air traffic controller for a little while, unfortunately PATCO or some equivalent is still there and making things inefficient and expensive for us travelers and tax payers. Wiki PATCO Strike
And let's not confuse the benefits that early Unions brought to our employees with the waste that the current Unions too often brings.
"At 7 a.m. on August 3, 1981, the union declared a strike, seeking better working conditions, better pay, and a 32-hour workweek (a four-day week and a eight-hour day combined). In addition, PATCO wanted to be excluded from the civil service clauses that it had long disliked. In striking, the union violated 5 U.S.C. (Supp. III 1956) 118p (now 5 U.S.C. § 7311), which prohibits strikes by federal government employees."
Hiram,
Please explain your logic regarding "the income gap, between rich and poor."
How again would strong American Unions have convinced American Consumers to pay more for their product?
Please note that Michigan became a Right to Work State in 2012 because consumers simply did not value what those Unions offered.
"That would cut into the unions' budgets and reduce their power, which could lead to the same weakening of pay and benefits that Wisconsin's teachers have experienced."
Oh, boo hoo. Union power reduced, and teachers forced to compete for jobs based on merit? Of COURSE pay and benefits go down if the older, not-so-good teachers walk away and the younger, much better teachers get hired. Eventually the "product" will get better. And by all accounts, teacher benefits got better because districts weren't locked in to buying them through the union. Teachers actually got a pay raise because they aren't paying union dues. Seems as if your article is making a whine out of sour grapes.
Jerry,
Same old question... Do you have any sources to back up your claims?
- Not so good Teachers walk away
- Better Teachers hired
- Better benefits
- Pay raise
The PATCO folks were pretty hideous. That was clear at the time. And to some extent they were sold out by the labor movement as a whole, which had been alienated by their support for Reagan, and their arrogance. Labor paid a high price for their failure to support PATCO.
Labor needs to do their job better, particularly in these times when their bargaining position has been so weakened. Many criticism of them, I am sure, are fair. But in this context my point is that the collapse of the labor movement in this country is a contributing factor to income disparity. Unlike shareholders, they don't have unity, and unlike managers, they don't have economic and legal power. Lacking those things, they lose.
--Hiram
The "Labor" has something much more important if they choose to use it.
Every individual has the ability to improve their knowledge, skills and attitude. And every individual is free to change jobs, careers, cities, etc as often as they wish until they reach their goal.
I just don't understand the desire by these employees to give up their individuality to become an "entity" that is described by their Step / Lane. And worse their freedom to negotiate individually based on their personal merits with multiple possible employers.
Same old answer:
1) Simple logic. Without union power, merit becomes a bigger factor. Unprotected they walk away, or find jobs in better-paying districts, and that's according to your source.
2) Simple logic, follows from (1). Some new teachers will inevitably be better than some already on staff.
3) Contemporary news reports at the time.
4) Simple math.
Do meritorious work forces get paid more? My sense is rather that workforces get paid what the market will bear. Managers focus, not on rewarding merit, but on keeping costs, including labor costs down. I have never heard of shareholder meeting where management told the shareholders, "hey, we lost money this year, but the upside is that we employ a lot of really great people."
--Hiram
Let's see how the logic works. I think Jerry gets an F...
Claim 1: Not so good Teachers walk away
Proof 1: Simple logic. Without union power, merit becomes a bigger factor. Unprotected they walk away, or find jobs in better-paying districts, and that's according to your source.
Note 1: Maybe be true if the contracts, steps, lanes, etc change over time. On the other hand I have found that often the best most confident employees walk away from jobs that no longer entice them to stay. The poorest and least confident cling to the job until they are forcefully removed.
Claim 2: Better Teachers hired
Proof 2: Simple logic, follows from (1). Some new teachers will inevitably be better than some already on staff.
Note 2: As the proof says... Some may be better and some may be worse... We have no clue. The schools with the most challenging students / families will have the hardest time attracting the best Teachers. Why would they go to a disruptive classroom / school when they can take a good job in the burbs? Especially when the burb schools have a bigger tax base to pay them.
Claim 3: Better benefits
Proof 3: Contemporary news reports at the time
Notes 3: Really? Not even worth commenting on.
Claim 4: Pay raise
Proof 4: Simple math
Notes: The loss in pay raises, benefits and job security could easily exceed the union dues. No proof here.
Hiram,
Actually good managers and companies focus on maximizing profits, and this involves watching out for many stakeholders:
- Customers
- Investors
- Employees
- Community
If a company treats their employees poorly, it can have catastrophic results on profit. All the companies I have worked for have kept a pretty close eye on employee morale and engagement. They know what happens when those slip. :-(
As for this question. "Do meritorious work forces get paid more?"
The answer is often yes since many companies have some form of bonus or profit sharing in their compensation plan.
And yet again you want to turn individual people into the "work force"... I have known many individuals who started out on the assembly floor, in paint booth, out in the field operating equipment, etc... Then they showed the interest in improving their knowledge and skills and worked their way into an office job... And then they showed their capability and became supervisors making some serious money because of their merit.
It seems you want people to make more without them making an investment in themselves and their capabilities.
Remember what I asked my older co-worker when he complained that he only got a cost of living raise...
Why should they give you more than cost of living?
Have you learned something that makes you more valuable than you were last year?
Have you taken on additional responsibilities?
Has the market for your particular skills increased more than inflation?
Do people really pay older fixit men with the same qualifications and recommendations as a younger fixit man significantly more just because they are older?
Isn't that reverse age discrimination?
Isn't that reverse age discrimination?
I am not sure. I do think in business these days, more companies have policies of shorter term employment. One of the consequences of this is to move out older, higher paid employees with younger and cheaper workers. That's part of the point of eliminating teacher unions. An argument I often hear is that things like tenure and union rules prevent the hiring of young teachers who are assumed to be better teachers. It's an arguable point, but when implemented, the notion is it would make schools cheaper.
--Hiram
I guess we are back to the question of if people should be paid more just because they are older?
Which would mean people should be paid less just because they are younger or have not been with the organization as long?
Now assuming they have:
- the same work load (1 class or subject)
- the same responsibilities
- the same performance
Should the 50 year old teacher make twice what the 30 year old teacher makes just because they are old? If so, what is the rationale?
As discussed previously, I make about 1.7 times what a new engineer out of college makes. However it is not because I am older, it is because have very different job than they do. They are responsible for the design of various components / machines, where as I manage the release, design, build, installation and acceptance of many complete systems across the world.
Now if highly compensated Teachers had different work loads, responsibilities and performance, then I can understand paying them more?
However having 2 third grade Teachers paid very differently in 2 classrooms that are next to each other with a similar mix of and quantity of students just because one is older makes no sense to me.
For Ref see RDALE Teacher Contract Appendix A
From Page 42... Does anyone know how this works?
Are both the Performance and Longevity categories mostly time based then? And getting an advanced degree just moves you to the right faster.
12-5-4 Performance Increment Increase
If a teacher's first day of employment is prior to February 1, the teacher shall receive a performance increment increase at the beginning of the following school year. If a teacher's first day of employment is on or after February 1, the teacher shall receive a step increase the Fall following the completion of one full school year contract.
12-5-5 Longevity Increments
Longevity increments will be paid to teachers according to the salary schedule listed in Appendix A. The 16th and 21st years shall be considered longevity increments. If a teacher's first day of employment was prior to February 1, the teacher shall receive a longevity increment at the beginning of the 16th and 21st year. If a teacher's first day of employment was on or after February 1, the teacher shall receive a longevity increment the fall following the completion of 16th and 21st year. The years of service need not be consecutive.
Post a Comment