Pursuant to Governor Scott Walker’s new rules, as of Monday the State of Wisconsin is no longer taking union dues out of the paychecks of government workers. The state is also charging more for these employee’s healthcare and pensions.
Even though there is still a question open of a compromised judge’s ruling to set aside the new law, the state is surging forward and implementing it anyway. Because of the legal confusion, some cities are not implementing the law.
The cessation of the state removing union dues will be a great blow to the government unions and will save the state millions of dollars in administrative costs.
Like many states, until this ruling Wisconsin automatically deducted union dues from the checks of state employees and deposited that money straight into the union’s bank accounts. This saved the unions millions of dollars because the union did not have to pay for the administration and accounting costs of taking dues. It also made sure that the unions automatically had their dues money given to them without having to rely on the union members to write a check for dues on their own.
This was all a great boon to the unions and to the Democrats that the unions constantly gave campaign contributions to.
Now, unions will be forced to rely on the members to write checks of their own to the unions and this always results in a large drop off in union dues collected by the unions as members find themselves reluctant to pay their dues. This is, of course, why the unions got their bought and paid for Democrat politicians to make laws that forced the state to remove dues from worker’s pay checks in the first place.
But no matter that the cessation of this dues removal practice will hurt the unions — which itself is a good thing — it is a good thing that this practice has stopped for it is ultimately a very un-American practice to force the state to remove dues for the benefit of unions. It is un-American to force the taxpayers to help unions get rich and to foot the administrative costs of the policy.
So, kudos to Scott Walker. Let the unions collect their own dues.
If this isn’t just the way the most corrupt state in the country works, there’s nothing that will show it. As the state of Illinois loses businesses and her citizens lose their jobs by the thousands, government workers in Illinois get richer and government unions are even adding members. Now there’s more government union members in Illinois than ever leaching off a dwindling base of taxpayers.
As the state sinks in red ink, government unions have grown to the point where nearly 97% of the state’s government workers have become unionized with better pay, more lucrative pensions, and richer healthcare than every other average citizen who is forced to pay the government union member’s exorbitant pay.
According to the AP, more than 10,000 state employees have joined unions. This is a four-fold increase over the previous eight years.
John O’Connor makes some great points about Illinois Governor Pat Quinn’s hypocrisy on his, too. Quinn is quietly trying to get the government unions in Illinois to give back some of their lucrative benefits because he knows that the union demands are killing the budget. Yet even as he is pushing unions to give back bennies, Quinn goes before the news cameras and lambastes Wisconsin’s governor for attacking the poor, poor unions!
What a slimeball politician Quinn has become.
It is plain that the unions are ignoring Quinn’s quiet, behind the scenes pleading, too. Applications for even more government unions are in the process.
Currently, the Labor Relations Board is considering 31 applications seeking unionization for more than 1,100 employees. That would bump up the number of unionized state employees to 96.5 percent from 94.3 percent, according to an analysis of CMS numbers.
So, what will union puppet Quinn do? Crack down, or shrug his shoulders and give in to unions like he has since he became the accidental governor of the Land of Lincoln?
Since taking office, Pres. Barack Obama has shown a remarkable penchant for changing the law by fiat. From Citizenship and Immigration Services’ debating how best to let the maximum number of illegal aliens off the hook to the EPA’s declaring it would treat carbon-dioxide emissions as a pollutant, the administration has taken the stance that votes in Congress aren’t really necessary, even for dramatically contentious subjects. Who needs a debate and a vote when you can rule by regulatory decree?
One critically important example of this was the 2010 decision by the National Mediation Board — a body whose three members are appointed by the president — that made it far easier for airline and railroad unions to take power over those industries by changing the way union elections are held. This week, the House is considering a law that would reverse the decision. The law deserves support without reservation, and the House’s vote will be a sign of what’s to come from the new Congress on labor.
The dispute can be traced back to the Railway Labor Act, a 1926 law that made it relatively difficult for railroad workers to unionize — the idea being that without serious limits on union power, labor organizations could hold the nation’s crucial transportation infrastructure hostage to unreasonable demands. The following decade, none other than Franklin Delano Roosevelt expanded the law to cover America’s emerging airline sector as well…
See the rest at National Review.
-By Larry Sand
Weingarten is schooled by WSJ’s Jason Riley; Van Roekel is clueless as usual.
The National Education Association and the American Federation of teachers represent over 4.5 million teachers and educational support workers across the United States. These two unions have been under attack for the past few years by reformers who point to their slavish clinging to the status quo as a major barrier to badly needed education reform.
Since the election in November when American citizens voted forward thinking legislators and governors into office, education reform has made great strides across the country. The elected officials have been attacking the union’s sacred cows with a ferocity that hasn’t been seen before – eliminating seniority and tenure, introducing merit pay, defining teacher accountability, more school choice programs, etc. are all on the agenda.
The unions, feeling the heat, have decided to take their case to the public.
In an article on the NEA website, NEA President Dennis Van Roekel tries to take on what he calls the “anti-seniority crowd.” He claims that bad teachers shouldn’t be in the classroom. “If a teacher isn’t qualified, he or she shouldn’t be in the classroom. There are procedures in place in every school district to terminate unqualified or incompetent teachers, and administrators shouldn’t wait for a budget crisis to remove them. The fair dismissal process should be transparent, efficient and fair. We owe it to everyone concerned – especially students – to resolve cases as quickly as possible.”
As quickly as possible?
As you can see in this typical flow chart, getting rid of one incompetent teacher is a Byzantine procedure – 27 union mandated steps, 2 to 5 years to circumnavigate the process and a several hundred thousand dollar expenditure to the taxpayer. If, and it is a big if, the teacher is found guilty, they get to retire immediately with full benefits.
Then Van Roekel came out with a feeble attempt to defend the seniority system. “I taught math for 23 years, and I know without a doubt I was a much better teacher in year 20 than year 2. In no other profession is experience deemed a liability instead of an asset.”
Question for Van Roekel: “Since you are opposed to the thought of any objective based teacher evaluation, how do you know that you were better?” In fact, most studies have shown that after five years teachers don’t typically improve – thus a five year and a 25 year teacher are typically equally effective.
And then there is American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, who has been courting the media of late in an attempt to make a case that unions really are for reform. In last weekend’s addition of the Wall Street Journal, Ms. Weingarten consented to be interviewed by Jason Riley.
Bad move.
On point after point, she comes out with mind-numbingly vapid, standard issue unionista statements, attempting to discredit any real reform. Riley, to his credit, is not shy about explaining why everything she says is wrong.
On seniority, she says, “It’s not the perfect mechanism but it’s the best mechanism we have. You have cronyism and corruption and discrimination issues. We’re saying let’s do things the right way. We don’t want to see people getting laid off based on who they know instead of what they know. We don’t want to see people get laid off based on how much they cost.”
Huh? Cronyism? Discrimination?
Reform minded people want to get rid of bad teachers, not good teachers who can be replaced by an incompetent relative or someone of a certain skin color. Riley adds, “Why can’t teachers who have been chronically absent from work be the first to go? Or the ones who have been convicted of crimes? Or the ones who are languishing—with full pay and benefits—in some “reserve pool” because no school will hire them?”
Weingarten then tries to convince us that “teachers unions are agents of change, not defenders of the status quo.” But as Riley points out that in the next breath, she “shoots down suggestions for changes—vouchers, charter schools, differential teacher pay and so on—that have become important parts of the reform conversation.”
Each time union leaders speak, they show themselves to be nothing more than rigid and clueless — clinging to stale clichés, shopworn platitudes and empty rhetoric that doesn’t fool anyone any more. The public has caught on — bad news for the unions, but good news for children, their parents and all taxpayers.
______
Larry Sand began his teaching career in New York in 1971. Since 1984, he has taught elementary school as well as English, math, history and ESL in the Los Angeles Unified School District, where he also served as a Title 1 Coordinator. Retired in 2009, he is the president of the non-profit California Teachers Empowerment Network – a non-partisan, non-political group dedicated to providing teachers with reliable and balanced information about professional affiliations and positions on educational issues – information teachers will often not get from their school districts or unions.
CTEN was formed in 2006 because a wide range of information from the more global concerns of education policy, education leadership, and education reform, to information having a more personal application, such as professional liability insurance, options of relationships to teachers’ unions, and the effect of unionism on teacher pay, comes to teachers from entities that have a specific agenda. Sand’s comments and op-eds have appeared in City Journal, Associated Press, Newsweek, Townhall Magazine, Los Angeles Times, San Diego Union Tribune, Los Angeles Daily News, San Jose Mercury News, Orange County Register and other publications. He has appeared on numerous broadcast news programs in Southern California and nationally.
Sand has participated in panel discussions and events focusing on education reform efforts and the impact of teachers’ unions on public education. In March 2010, Sand participated in a debate hosted by the non-profit Intelligence Squared, an organization that regularly hosts Oxford-style debates, which was nationally broadcast on Bloomberg TV and NPR, as well as covered by Newsweek. Sand and his teammates – Terry Moe of the Hoover Institution and former U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige, opposed the proposition – Don’t Blame Teachers Unions For Our Failing Schools. The pro-union team included Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. In August 2010, he was on a panel at the Where’s the Outrage? Conference in San Francisco, where he spoke about how charter school operators can best deal with teachers’ unions. This past January he was on panels in Los Angeles, San Diego and San Mateo in support of National School Choice week.
Sand has also worked with other organizations to present accurate information about the relationship between teachers and their unions, most recently assisting in the production of a video for the Center for Union Facts in which a group of teachers speak truthfully about the teachers’ unions.
CTEN maintains an active and strong new media presence, reaching out to teachers and those interested in education reform across the USA, and around the world, with its popular Facebook page, whose members include teachers, writers, think tankers, and political activists. Since 2006, CTEN has experienced dramatic growth.
-By Larry Sand
Misinformation is at the heart of unionspeak.
Public school teachers have been told for years that they are only respected by the general public because Big Union fights for them and gets them that respect.
However, the opposite would appear to be true. America still loves its teachers…the good ones, that is. They don’t like the bad ones, the self-pitiers and the bullying unions that keep incompetent teachers on the job, ruining the lives of thousands of children every year. Nothing makes this point better than the recent situation in Wisconsin where certain members of the teaching community showed their true colors.
The unions also tell teachers that if not for them they’d be toiling away for minimum wage. But again, that’s wrong. And it’s not only teachers who buy this line – much of the general public does too.
Last week, Mike Petrilli, Executive V.P. of the Fordham Institute, became the latest to debunk the teacher salary myth. He compared teachers’ salaries in districts across the country which allow collective bargaining with those that don’t. He found that teachers who worked in districts where the union was not involved actually made more than those who were in collective bargaining districts. According to Petrilli, “Teachers in non-collective bargaining districts actually earn more than their union-protected peers–$64,500 on average versus $57,500.”
While admittedly his analysis was not methodologically sophisticated, it does jibe with other recent, more meticulous analyses.
Stanford Professor Michael Lovenheim, in an elaborately detailed 2009 study, The Effect of Teachers’ Unions on Education Production: Evidence from Union Election Certifications in Three Midwestern States came to a similar conclusion, saying, “I find unions have no effect on teacher pay.”
While Lovenheim’s study used data from just three states, Andrew Coulson, using national data, also came to the same conclusion. “Salary hikes, wage compression, and dramatic increases in the staff to student ratio have all undeniably occurred, but they have occurred in both unionized and nonunionized public school districts.”
The teachers unions also tell us that seniority is a fair way to make staffing decisions. They tell us that we need to hold on to arcane and harmful tenure laws which keep the worst rabble on the planet working with our children. They tell us that their budget busting pensions should not be blamed for the fiscal nightmare that many cities, counties and states find themselves in.
Okay, regarding the latter, it’s not all their fault. Other public employee unions share in the blame for that.
Recently at an international education conference, president of the National Education Association Dennis Van Roekel said, “It’s obvious to the people here that high-performing countries without exception have strong unions. You have to have strong collaboration with whoever is implementing the policies.”
When asked if lower performing countries have collective bargaining, Van Roekel said he didn’t know.
Indeed, the teachers unions don’t know very much and what they do “know” is wrong.
______
Larry Sand began his teaching career in New York in 1971. Since 1984, he has taught elementary school as well as English, math, history and ESL in the Los Angeles Unified School District, where he also served as a Title 1 Coordinator. Retired in 2009, he is the president of the non-profit California Teachers Empowerment Network – a non-partisan, non-political group dedicated to providing teachers with reliable and balanced information about professional affiliations and positions on educational issues – information teachers will often not get from their school districts or unions.
CTEN was formed in 2006 because a wide range of information from the more global concerns of education policy, education leadership, and education reform, to information having a more personal application, such as professional liability insurance, options of relationships to teachers’ unions, and the effect of unionism on teacher pay, comes to teachers from entities that have a specific agenda. Sand’s comments and op-eds have appeared in City Journal, Associated Press, Newsweek, Townhall Magazine, Los Angeles Times, San Diego Union Tribune, Los Angeles Daily News, San Jose Mercury News, Orange County Register and other publications. He has appeared on numerous broadcast news programs in Southern California and nationally.
Sand has participated in panel discussions and events focusing on education reform efforts and the impact of teachers’ unions on public education. In March 2010, Sand participated in a debate hosted by the non-profit Intelligence Squared, an organization that regularly hosts Oxford-style debates, which was nationally broadcast on Bloomberg TV and NPR, as well as covered by Newsweek. Sand and his teammates – Terry Moe of the Hoover Institution and former U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige, opposed the proposition – Don’t Blame Teachers Unions For Our Failing Schools. The pro-union team included Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. In August 2010, he was on a panel at the Where’s the Outrage? Conference in San Francisco, where he spoke about how charter school operators can best deal with teachers’ unions. This past January he was on panels in Los Angeles, San Diego and San Mateo in support of National School Choice week.
Sand has also worked with other organizations to present accurate information about the relationship between teachers and their unions, most recently assisting in the production of a video for the Center for Union Facts in which a group of teachers speak truthfully about the teachers’ unions.
CTEN maintains an active and strong new media presence, reaching out to teachers and those interested in education reform across the USA, and around the world, with its popular Facebook page, whose members include teachers, writers, think tankers, and political activists. Since 2006, CTEN has experienced dramatic growth.
The Hill newspaper has an interesting quote from Ohio Democrat Senator Sherrod Brown. He says the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), of the Card Check bill is a dead issue in the senate this year.
Senator Brown was being interviewed on WVIZ radio in Ohio when he was asked what he thought about the success of the EFCA in the Senate for the 112th Congressional session. “It’s not going to happen now,” the senator said.
If this is true then Big Labor should be extremely upset with President Obama and the Democrat leadership in congress. Will they take out their anger by withholding their enthusiastic support of Democrats in 2012?
One would think that this singular failure of the Democrats to get Big Labor’s most wished for legislation passed would be a deal breaker for labor. After all, labor has spent over $400 million in the last few years on getting Democrats elected and it seems that all that money went for no benefit to them. Labor’s loss of power has grown commensurately with its expenditure on Democrats, anyway.
Like old dogs that cant learn new tricks, though, it is likely that they will double down and try to pump more money than ever into the pockets of pliant Democrats. Like a beaten wife they keep coming back, it seems.




