Do you Think Teachers Unions should be disbanded?

Photo-fish wrote: The Rasmussen survey was designed to blur over the distinction between the budget & benefit cuts that Walker seeks and his other goal, effectively abolishing collective bargaining for public workers. During the campaign, Walker said nothing about abolishing public workers' right to form a union in order to bargain over their working conditions-- and it looks to me like for many Wisconsin voters, this is an unwelcome surprise.

Ah, but that is where you are wrong. Nothing in this bill abolishes their right to form a union, they just can't collectively bargain. And the union can't use the state to force employees to pay dues to a union they don't want.

For the last two election cycles Nate Silver has been dead on, he uses some of the more non-partisan methodologies out there and does averaging/weighting of other polls... This is his take on the Rasmussen poll:

Rasmussen Poll on Wisconsin Dispute May Be Biased
By NATE SILVER
We’ve noted before that the automated polling firm Rasmussen Reports has had problems with bias in a statistical sense: in the election last fall, its polls overestimated the standing of Republican candidates by roughly 4 percentage points on average.

A somewhat different issue arises today in a poll the firm conducted on the dispute in Wisconsin between Gov. Scott Walker and some of the state’s public-employee unions.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.co ... be-biased/

Photo-fish wrote: During the campaign, Walker said nothing about abolishing public workers' right to form a union in order to bargain over their working conditions-- and it looks to me like for many Wisconsin voters, this is an unwelcome surprise.

If this indeed is the perception of the Wisconsin voters due to the way the issue is being presented to them by the union, the media and the Democrats, then they are woefully, and intentionally, misinformed as to the facts. Walker has not said anything about the public workers' right to form a union, and has done nothing to infringe upon their ability to do so. What he is doing is protecting the state and local government's ability to have control over their budgets as a result of a collective bargaining agreement between the various public employee unions and the government.

Public employee union members would still be able to engage in collective bargaining for their wages under the proposed plan, but if the agreement the union wanted was in excess of what was exhibited in the Consumer Price Index, the voters would have to approve of it in a referendum vote instead of the politicians that may have an incentive to reward a special interest group which helped them win the election. I see nothing that is unfair to the union members, the citizens, or the state government contained in that portion of the proposal.

Wisconsin's public employee pension plan is something like $44 Billion in the red at the moment. That shortfall is guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the state of Wisconsin, which means that the taxpayers of the state are on the hook for that amount unless it is covered by other means such as requiring an increased contribution from the union members. That shortfall is the direct result of the inherent conflict of interest that occurs when a union has the ability to engage in collective bargaining with a monopoly entity, which a government most certainly is. In the private sector, when union wages and benefits push the cost of a product too high, the consumer can walk away from patronizing that entity. Such is not the case when we are talking about government. I am required to do business with the government, under penalty of law if I fail to comply. I must send in the taxes that they say that I owe, or face fines, interest and possible imprisonment. If the union wages and benefits push the cost of government too high, I have no recourse, my participation is compulsory, I have no choice.

Closed union shops also deny a choice to the worker, the choice of whether or not they wish to support the union that others in that branch of public employees have voted to represent them. What if a union is chosen that the employee doesn't wish to be represented by? Why must they be compelled to support that union involuntarily with dues collected from their paycheck by the government? If the union is not voluntarily supported by most of the people it is supposed to be representing, then the union can decide if it wishes to continue representing the workers, can't it? If the majority of the workers are not paying dues to the union, does that not also tell us something about what they feel the value of the union is to them as individuals? For these reasons I support voluntary participation in paying union dues, which is also part of the proposal. Why do Democrats generally support choice for the termination of a pregnancy but not to pay dues to a government employee union?

Walker might just be posturing. He is a successful businessman who knows how to negotiate. Now the teachers and other unions are more than willing to take pay cuts to keep their collective bargaining rights. And now it looks like they are also willing to give up collective bargaining on wages too.

Side note: Sad to see all the Nazi style hyperbole on the teacher union signs. You would think educators would show a little more class. (Pun unintentional)

Wisconsin protests....Myth vs. Fact

[youtube:2viuel34][/youtube:2viuel34]

OK here it is. I think all the teachers who protested should be fired!! Read the real facts of what they make and how it compared to the average worker in Wiconsin. Read some of the salaries and benefits of the teachers who are protesting. $80 -$90,000 per year with salary and benefits and they are off for 3-3 1/2 months a year! That is about $10,000 per month they are receiving! And one father had the gall to say........
Brad Lutes and his wife, Heather Lutes, told MSNBC’s Ed Schultz that Walker’s budget would hit them twice as hard.

“Having to explain to an 8- and 10-year old that the governor of your state basically wants to take money away from dad and mom? It’s just really, really frustrating,” Brad Lutes told Schultz.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/21/wisco ... etting-on/

Teachers in the state are only contracted to work part of the year, too. Most teachers start their work year around Aug. 30 and end around June 3, according to the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. They also get vacation time during the student breaks, like during Christmas, fall vacation and spring vacation. Year-round, teachers in the state are out of the classroom for about 13 or 14 weeks.

Per the Department of Commerce, in 2009, the average personal income for all Wisconsin workers was $37,398.

And most of them work year round! That is about $3000 per month!

The Viking wrote: OK here it is. I think all the teachers who protested should be fired!! Read the real facts of what they make and how it compared to the average worker in Wiconsin. Read some of the salaries and benefits of the teachers who are protesting. $80 -$90,000 per year with salary and benefits and they are off for 3-3 1/2 months a year! That is about $10,000 per month they are receiving! And one father had the gall to say........
Brad Lutes and his wife, Heather Lutes, told MSNBC’s Ed Schultz that Walker’s budget would hit them twice as hard.

“Having to explain to an 8- and 10-year old that the governor of your state basically wants to take money away from dad and mom? It’s just really, really frustrating,” Brad Lutes told Schultz.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/21/wisco ... etting-on/

Teachers in the state are only contracted to work part of the year, too. Most teachers start their work year around Aug. 30 and end around June 3, according to the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. They also get vacation time during the student breaks, like during Christmas, fall vacation and spring vacation. Year-round, teachers in the state are out of the classroom for about 13 or 14 weeks.

Per the Department of Commerce, in 2009, the average personal income for all Wisconsin workers was $37,398.

And most of them work year round! That is about $3000 per month!

Of course your post is intended to mislead, comparing salary plus benefits for teachers compared to salaries only for average worker salaries. The annual salary is about $48,000 per year, which is low for college educated professionals with 20 years experience, many of which have graduate degrees. Also, most teachers work 10 plus hours a day with all of the reporting requirements they are subjected, grading, extracurricular activities they are required to "volunteer" for, parent meetings, etc. Futther, the union has agreed to the cut backs that Hosni Walker has insisted are necessary.

Also, most teachers work 10 plus hours a day with all of the reporting requirements they are subjected, grading, extracurricular activities they are required to "volunteer" for, parent meetings, etc.

LOL, I have averaged over 10 hours per day (year round) for over 40 years in non-union private employment, and have never had all the benefits they have. I'm not complaining. They should try employment in the real world for a while. Or better yet, try running their own business, and see how many hours they work.

I don't think most workers in your "real world" would make it a week as a teacher......especially in some inner city school. This is not an easy job folks, and I am more than grateful there are people willing to take it on. They deserve what the get paid, and then some.

I agree it is not an easy job to do - my mother was a teacher, my brother was a teacher, I was 'educated' as a teacher. Most jobs I know of aren't easy, if they are done well.

Near as I can tell, the teachers in WI don't have much to complain about, compared to many others.

They are asked to give up union negotiated automatic raises above the cost of living, without a vote of the citizens who pay them, and this is a major crisis?

Not in my book!