Yes, Horace, you have a point, but can't the union 'bees' see that its not just the managers on the govt side, but the managers (e.g., the Fire Marshalls) on the Union side as well, that are screwing the worker bees royally! It makes no sense to take sides here... Just eliminate the possibility that any shenanigans can be perpetrated by everything being openly debated and recorded for public (taxpayer) review...
-Mark -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:12 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT: Collective bargaining On Feb 23, 2011, at 8:56 AM, Mark Iverson wrote: > In Nevada, collective bargaining and behind doors negotiating has > resulted in Fire Marshalls making a quarter of a million dollars a > year in total compensation! That is absolutely ridiculous... Who is to blame for that? Who signed the contract? Who negotiated the contract? Take names and fire the management. > I > would only be in favor of it if its done in the open.. These are > public employees, and the taxpayers have a right to know EXACTLY what > public employees' total compensation is. > > -Mark Typically, public employee salary ranges are public information. They are frequently established after doing local salary surveys, and take into consideration salary and all benefits. If there are abuses of overtime then the blame for that should fall on the management, not the employees. Same goes for incompetent management of contract labor, like plumbers, architects, etc. The bills for mismanaged contracts are less visible, and are opportunities for graft and corruption. Why is it that when the management is incompetent that collective bargaining itself, or union members, get all the blame and not the management? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Horace Heffner [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:20 AM > To: Vortex-L > Subject: [Vo]:OT: Collective bargaining > > There are advantages to collective bargaining for management as well > as employees. One is the simplicity of dealing with all contracts and > work rules at once, and the improved stability of the workforce due to > uniform work rules. > > If labor unions in Wisconsin and other states are dismissed by > legislation, the workers are then free to file individual breach of > contract suits, tens of thousands of them. Retirees can sue for > lifetime annuities to make up the difference. When the government > goes broke then the bond holders will have to pay up their share of > the pain. Dismissing the unions seems to me to be a stupid strategy. > > Better to spend the money on energy development. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
