Massachussetts DEMOCRATS strip unions of bargaining rights

SF: The bill is very narrow and is nothing like what was passed in Wisconsin. Even still, the bill was passed in the dead of the night on short notice for a reason. As the thing moves to the Senate, you can expect a hell of a lot more outrage going forward.
 
NigelTufnel said:
SF: The bill is very narrow and is nothing like what was passed in Wisconsin. Even still, the bill was passed in the dead of the night on short notice for a reason. As the thing moves to the Senate, you can expect a hell of a lot more outrage going forward.
Click to expand...



The big three are wages, pensions and health care. This addresses one of the three. So you are certainly correct to state that it is more limited. Of the three it is probably the second most critical behind pension reform. Good move on the Dems part to take it in steps rather than try for the all at once approach used in WI. Bottom line, it IS about saving money and not just about 'crushing unions' as the left chanted so loudly in WI and OH. It is NOT about making union workers 'slaves' as the left so crassly put it.
 
Superfreak said:
The big three are wages, pensions and health care. This addresses one of the three. So you are certainly correct to state that it is more limited. Of the three it is probably the second most critical behind pension reform. Good move on the Dems part to take it in steps rather than try for the all at once approach used in WI. Bottom line, it IS about saving money and not just about 'crushing unions' as the left chanted so loudly in WI and OH. It is NOT about making union workers 'slaves' as the left so crassly put it.
Click to expand...

This partially addresses health care. It allows for mayors to unilaterally set co-pays and deductables, but premiums, coverage and other issues related to health care are still part of the collective bargaining process. This is about saving money and the unions recognize that. The unions offered a counterproposal to allow for a 45 days of negotiation followed by arbitration for co-pays and deductables and I suspect that is what the Mass Senate will do.

It is a narrowly tailored bill to deal with a real problem that the unions recognize is an issue. It is a far cry from the Wisconsin law which was actually all about crushing the unions.
 
NigelTufnel said:
This partially addresses health care. It allows for mayors to unilaterally set co-pays and deductables, but premiums, coverage and other issues related to health care are still part of the collective bargaining process. This is about saving money and the unions recognize that. The unions offered a counterproposal to allow for a 45 days of negotiation followed by arbitration for co-pays and deductables and I suspect that is what the Mass Senate will do.

It is a narrowly tailored bill to deal with a real problem that the unions recognize is an issue. It is a far cry from the Wisconsin law which was actually all about crushing the unions.
Click to expand...

Ahh... I see...

when Dems do it.... its about saving money
When Reps do it... its about crushing unions

Thanks for that clarification.
 
NigelTufnel said:
This partially addresses health care. It allows for mayors to unilaterally set co-pays and deductables, but premiums, coverage and other issues related to health care are still part of the collective bargaining process. This is about saving money and the unions recognize that. The unions offered a counterproposal to allow for a 45 days of negotiation followed by arbitration for co-pays and deductables and I suspect that is what the Mass Senate will do.

It is a narrowly tailored bill to deal with a real problem that the unions recognize is an issue. It is a far cry from the Wisconsin law which was actually all about crushing the unions.
Click to expand...

If the unions recognize this then why did they have the reaction they did that they will not stand for this bill and will not support any politicians who vote for it?
 
NigelTufnel said:
SF: The bill is very narrow and is nothing like what was passed in Wisconsin. Even still, the bill was passed in the dead of the night on short notice for a reason. As the thing moves to the Senate, you can expect a hell of a lot more outrage going forward.
Click to expand...
Bullshit from the Chief Apoligist for Lefties.....
THIS is the report...

House lawmakers voted overwhelmingly last night to strip police officers, teachers, and other municipal employees of most of their rights to bargain over health care, saying the change would save millions of dollars for financially strapped cities and towns.
The 111-to-42 vote followed tougher measures to broadly eliminate collective bargaining rights for public employees in Ohio, Wisconsin, and other states. But unlike those efforts, the push in Massachusetts was led by Democrats who have traditionally stood with labor to oppose any reduction in workers’ rights.
Unions fought hard to stop the bill, launching a radio ad that assailed the plan and warning legislators that if they voted for the measure, they could lose their union backing in the next election. After the vote, labor leaders accused House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and other Democrats of turning their backs on public employees.

Small potatoes ? Just a narrow issue ?....Spin it all you want ....stick your head in the sand...and hold your fingers in your ears.....apologize apologize apologize apologize .....
 
bravo said:
Bullshit from the Chief Apoligist fir Lefties.....
THIS is the report...

House lawmakers voted overwhelmingly last night to strip police officers, teachers, and other municipal employees of most of their rights to bargain over health care, saying the change would save millions of dollars for financially strapped cities and towns.
The 111-to-42 vote followed tougher measures to broadly eliminate collective bargaining rights for public employees in Ohio, Wisconsin, and other states. But unlike those efforts, the push in Massachusetts was led by Democrats who have traditionally stood with labor to oppose any reduction in workers’ rights.
Unions fought hard to stop the bill, launching a radio ad that assailed the plan and warning legislators that if they voted for the measure, they could lose their union backing in the next election. After the vote, labor leaders accused House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and other Democrats of turning their backs on public employees.
Click to expand...

This is what I was asking about before. The Mass bill is just about negotiating over health care. I believe the WI bill was about health care, pension reform and partly wages?
 
cawacko said:
This is what I was asking about before. The Mass bill is just about negotiating over health care. I believe the WI bill was about health care, pension reform and partly wages?
Click to expand...


The Mass bill is just about negotiating over health insurance co-pays and deductibles. The goal is to allow cities, towns and municipalities to opt into the state health insurance plan (that covers all state employees, union and non-union alike) as considerably less cost that the localities currently pay. That's it.

Pretending this is anything like the Wisconsin law is incorrect.
 
bravo said:
Bullshit from the Chief Apoligist for Lefties.....
THIS is the report...

House lawmakers voted overwhelmingly last night to strip police officers, teachers, and other municipal employees of most of their rights to bargain over health care, saying the change would save millions of dollars for financially strapped cities and towns.
The 111-to-42 vote followed tougher measures to broadly eliminate collective bargaining rights for public employees in Ohio, Wisconsin, and other states. But unlike those efforts, the push in Massachusetts was led by Democrats who have traditionally stood with labor to oppose any reduction in workers’ rights.
Unions fought hard to stop the bill, launching a radio ad that assailed the plan and warning legislators that if they voted for the measure, they could lose their union backing in the next election. After the vote, labor leaders accused House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and other Democrats of turning their backs on public employees.

Small potatoes ? Just a narrow issue ?....Spin it all you want ....stick your head in the sand...and hold your fingers in your ears.....apologize apologize apologize apologize .....
Click to expand...


You should learn to read beyond the first paragraph of an article. Here is what the bill does:

Under the legislation, mayors and other local officials would be given unfettered authority to set copayments and deductibles for their employees, after the 30-day discussion period with unions. Only the share of premiums paid by employees would remain on the health care bargaining table.
Click to expand...

It is much, much, much more limited than Wisconsin which barred collective bargaining on all issues except wages (and allowed bargaining on wage increases only up to inflation), required the union to hold elections every year to remain the bargaining representative and barred employers from deducting union dues from wages.
 
cawacko said:
What, if any, are the differences between the legislation in Mass. and Wis, Ohio?
Click to expand...
Mass legislature is predominantly Democrat where Republicans have majories in Wisc and Ohio.

I think you're going to hear the same thing there too. I think you'll see a schism in the Mass Democratic party along the lines of those who support labor. This will be good news for Repubs in Mass cause as long as they keep their mouths shut on the issue and let Dems form a circular firing squad they will be able to use a divide and conquer strategy.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Mass legislature is predominantly Democrat where Republicans have majories in Wisc and Ohio.

I think you're going to hear the same thing there too. I think you'll see a schism in the Mass Democratic party along the lines of those who support labor. This will be good news for Repubs in Mass cause as long as they keep their mouths shut on the issue and let Dems form a circular firing squad they will be able to use a divide and conquer strategy.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I was actually asking about the legislation itself though. As I understand it now I don't believe the Mass legislation went near as far as WI and O-H-I-O.
 
cawacko said:
Thanks. I was actually asking about the legislation itself though. As I understand it now I don't believe the Mass legislation went near as far as WI and O-H-I-O.
Click to expand...
It doesn't. The OP is a bit of a strawman as this does not strip collective bargaining rights from public employees but limits the ability of public service unions to negotiate on health care premiiums. That's a very substantial differnce. Still, I can undestand why, given the financial support from public service unions for Democrats in the legislature, that they would be angry at them and feel betrayed. It is a betrayal.
 
Yurt said:
isn't it great how our greatest dem apologist nigel is madly defending this

:)
Click to expand...


Describing is not defending. I already said that I am glad my rep voted against it. I don't support it. I am simply answering cawacko's questions about the differences between this and what happened in Wisconisn.

One other thing cawacko, while the Wisconsin bill ends collective bargaining by municipal unions, the Mass. bill leaves it up to the local authorities how they wish to proceed.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
It doesn't. The OP is a bit of a strawman as this does not strip collective bargaining rights from public employees but limits the ability of public service unions to negotiate on health care premiiums. That's a very substantial differnce. Still, I can undestand why, given the financial support from public service unions for Democrats in the legislature, that they would be angry at them and feel betrayed. It is a betrayal.
Click to expand...

It doesn't strip the ability to negotiate health care premiums. In fact, premiums must still be a subject of collective bargaining. The bill allows local leaders to unilaterally set co-pay and deductibles.
 
NigelTufnel said:
Describing is not defending. I already said that I am glad my rep voted against it. I don't support it. I am simply answering cawacko's questions about the differences between this and what happened in Wisconisn.

One other thing cawacko, while the Wisconsin bill ends collective bargaining by municipal unions, the Mass. bill leaves it up to the local authorities how they wish to proceed.
Click to expand...

you're defending
 
NigelTufnel said:
I'm defending the truth, not the legislation. As I said, I'm glad my rep voted against it and I have contacted my state senator urging him to vote against it.
Click to expand...

tff.....when i do the same thing about the birther issue....you call me a birther

don't you hate it when your own logic bites in you in the ass :)

when anyone on the right does what you're doing regarding any issue, they're defending it. i don't care about a gotcha....it would just be nice if you would knock it off....and i know for a fact if this was a pub led house, you would not be so ardently minimizing how it could effect unions....and you know i am right, your past posting proves this.

i don't think this is going to pass the senate though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top