March 30, 2011

Ohio crushes public-employee unions.

The NYT reports:
The bill would bar public employees from striking and would prohibit binding arbitration for police officers and firefighters. It would allow bargaining over wages, but not health coverage and pensions and would allow public-employee unions to bargain only when the public employer chose to do so....

The bill would allow public employees who are covered by union contracts but who choose not to belong to the union to opt out of paying union dues or fees. The bill would also bar any governmental unit in Ohio from deducting any part of a worker’s paycheck and giving it to the union for political activities unless the worker gave express permission....

51 comments:

Maguro said...

The horror...

Synova said...

Maguro.

Thread winner. :-)

edutcher said...

Kasich just earned my vote for any office for which he wishes to run - ever.

The part about public employees striking is especially important.

WV "crolons" I don't know what they are, either, but they're coming for us.

The Grand Inquisitor said...

Good for them!

Cleveland rocks!

Gotta love the NYT's drama. I bet they get even more hysterical now that they have to fight to get people to bother to check their website.

Palladian said...

Wait, where were the weeks of protest? The occupation of the Ohio capitol building? The visits by Jesse Jackson? The "creative" signs? The drum circles?!

TJ said...

Tit for tat, Mr. Obama.

Ram your health care through, see the unions crippled.

Now for Wisconsin.

Lance said...

So does this take the heat off Walker as he moves forward with further budget reforms?

Synova said...

I don't know about heat off Walker, but it's fairly certain that Walker took the heat off the fellow in Ohio who we don't even know the name of.

traditionalguy said...

Wow! The Wisconsin government employees got a much better deal than the Ohio ones.

T said...

Apparently Indiana bent the Dems and the unions over as well. As Meatloaf once said: No matter what ultimately happens in Wisconsin, Two out of three ain't bad.

Methadras said...

Palladian said...

Wait, where were the weeks of protest? The occupation of the Ohio capitol building? The visits by Jesse Jackson? The "creative" signs? The drum circles?!


Even Wisconsinites wouldn't dare go to Ohio.

wv = shine = you did that today Kasich. Keep it up.

AJ Lynch said...

NYT calls it anti-union and of course leaves out the "govt worker" adjective.

So I recommend conservatives stay on message with this issue..."we oppose govt worker unions for the following reasons.....govt workers are paid more than the taxpayers and our fiscal health & the country's future is on the line."

ALH said...

Where are the massive protests? The unions can't be out money or motivation...I truly don't get it.

I have to assume that those individuals that are negatively affected by this in OH are just as angry as those in WI were??

Kudos to the Buckeyes for getting this done in a much more efficient way than Wisconsin. (Although it is a mathematical fact that Buckey > Buckeyes)

Jenny said...

Shazzam!

Lem said...

I'll some TEA please.

SteveR said...

FDR, Jimmah, Walker and Kasich

Peter Friedman said...

Yes, Cleveland Rocks, and this bill will be reversed by referendum.

PaulV said...

Are you pretending that Ohio is not broke and that your corrupt democrats, who need need and are enslaved by Big Labor, were not refudiated by the People in Novemebr?

sydney said...

The unions protested, but all the reporters and camera crews were in Madison. If it's not on TV or in the newspapers, it doesn't happen, you know. Also, the unions spent all their money agitating in Madison. Didn't have any left to do the same in Ohio. No money for busing in outsiders, etc. And, Ohio State students are more interested in partying than protesting.

Chuck said...

Hard to get one rent-a-mob in several places at once.

Kick ass Kasich.

bagoh20 said...

As it should always have been. Just fixing a few past mistakes. They are easier to make than to fix.

bgates said...

I've seen a study that says every dollar spent crushing public-employee unions generates $792.13 in economic activity.

wv: foxya. Ohio Republicans - they'll foxya. Or if you're a public-employee union, outfoxya.

edutcher said...

Palladian said...

Wait, where were the weeks of protest? The occupation of the Ohio capitol building? The visits by Jesse Jackson? The "creative" signs? The drum circles?!

They were there, but WI is so much sexier.

Everybody was wanted a glimpse of the Meadehouse lovebirds and OH couldn't compete.

Franklin said...

CongratulatIons Ohio!

Crimso said...

Forget asking where the drum circles are. Garage mahal has repeatedly insinuated the pro-Walker crowd here are cowards for not standing up to police and firefighter unions. Care to comment, GM? Are the people of Ohio simply more courageous than those of WI? In any case, the line you have insisted nobody had the guts to cross has now been crossed.

David said...

I don't exactly see how this is crushing. They can still bargain for salary, and the workers can choose to check off for dues. It's not quite the gulag.

Gabriel Hanna said...

Unions have no honset reason for having the state take dues out of paychecks.

If they want to run a closed shop they can have people fires who won't pay dues. They don't want to be in that position, so they want the goverment to collect the money for them.

If they can't represent their members well enough that people voluntarily pay dues, then they have no business representing them.

Tim said...

I'd been excited by this, but now I'm afraid implementation will get at least delayed by the referendum process. I don't know whether or not a ballot initiative would succeed in overturning it, but apparently if they get enough signatures to put it on the ballot, implementation is on hold until the election.

Oh, I hope that doesn't happen. I'm a state university professor in Ohio, and I'm one of only about five non-union members at the university. And I am absolutely fed up with the union raiding my paycheck each month. Sick of it. If nothing else, I want them prohibited from deducting union dues. This is actually one thing that could make me quit my job and go elsewhere. Somewhere without a unionized faculty.

Gabriel Hanna said...

@Tim: Aren't you glad you're not an adjunct? Then they could raid your paycheck for the benefit of people who get far more money, benefits, and security than you.

Tristram said...

Just goes to show you what pikers the cheese heads are. THIS is how you smack public unions around.

Walker & the Wisconsin Republicans need a field trip of their own to Columbus.

tim maguire said...

I support most of these reforms, but this really is the death knell of public unions in Ohio. If workers can get union benefits without paying union dues, then who would pay?

Which, again, I am fine with--public employee unions should be banned outright--but I'm uncomfortable with the backdoor method of achieving it.

How about a full-frontal assault? Throw down the gauntlet and have the real debate we need to have. Private sector unions cannot simply be grafted onto the public sector. There are no protections for taxpayers in the arrangement.

Peter Friedman said...

All I'll say is we'll see if, as the Professor has it, Ohio has "crushed" public unions. Kasich's approval rating -- already! -- is at 30%, his disapproval rating at 46%. It's interesting, I think, that neither he nor Walker breathed a word about killing public employee unions during their campaigns. So the intense reaction in both states to their moves cannot merely be written off as the howling of a disgruntled minority that lost on the issue at the ballot.

As to Tim, doesn't the fact he's one of only 5 non-union professors at his university say something about the support for public unions?

So, as I wrote above, I am fairly confident Ohio voters will overturn SB5 on a referendum. And, hey, then we'll really know what the voters think of the right of teachers, firefighters, police, and other state employees to bargain collectively for a decent wage.

Bryan C said...

Don't worry - I hear Judge Sumi has decided to expand her jurisdiction to cover Indiana, too. I bet the TRO is already on its way.

DADvocate said...

We could hear the crunching all the way in Cincinnati. The Cinci MSA is the most conservative area of Ohio. Kasich will carry it as long as he wants.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gabriel Hanna said...

@tim maguire If workers can get union benefits without paying union dues, then who would pay?

If the union wants to run a closed shop, they can have people who don't pay fired.

The unions don't want to be in the position of having to fire and dun people for not paying dues. They want the government to take care of it for them, so they can pretend that being in a union is all benefit and no cost.

Even in right-to-work states people still join unions.

Defenseman Emeritus said...

And, hey, then we'll really know what the voters think of the right of teachers, firefighters, police, and other state employees to bargain collectively for a decent wage.

Uh, Pete?

1) State employees already make "a decent wage."

2) As the article explicitly states, "The bill would...allow bargaining over wages".

Are there any other misunderstandings you have that I can clear up?

TosaGuy said...

"And, hey, then we'll really know what the voters think of the right of teachers, firefighters, police, and other state employees to bargain collectively for a decent wage."

And if the voters don't pass such a referendum then it will only encourage more states.

This is a process that the public unions know they will lose once legislators and the public realize they can take on these special interests and win. The unions can't afford to lose a single battle or they will all fall like dominos. That is why they went all in in WI. Unfortunately for them, WI has distracted them from IN and OH and the other states who will decide to take on the issue next. No matter how things play out in WI or for Gov. Walker, he has done a wonderful thing for the fiscal health of our nation.

WV: cries

J said...

Aynhouse Teamsters opposed to public education on the march again. Go kick in the face of some schoolteachers tough guys.

It's mostly a fundamentalist thing--preachers hate education, and they tell their zombie congregation to follow suit. That and some Ayn Rand Greenspam-TP de-reg hysteria.

cubanbob said...

Peter Friedman said...
All I'll say is we'll see if, as the Professor has it, Ohio has "crushed" public unions. Kasich's approval rating -- already! -- is at 30%, his disapproval rating at 46%. It's interesting, I think, that neither he nor Walker breathed a word about killing public employee unions during their campaigns. So the intense reaction in both states to their moves cannot merely be written off as the howling of a disgruntled minority that lost on the issue at the ballot.

As to Tim, doesn't the fact he's one of only 5 non-union professors at his university say something about the support for public unions?

So, as I wrote above, I am fairly confident Ohio voters will overturn SB5 on a referendum. And, hey, then we'll really know what the voters think of the right of teachers, firefighters, police, and other state employees to bargain collectively for a decent wage.

3/31/11 8:20 AM

You really believe Ohio taxpayers are going to go all out to support public sector unions so they can have the joy of paying even higher taxes to maintain public sector workers pay and benefits? Perhaps if the polls were to ask how much more in taxes are you willing to pay so public sector workers can maintain pay and benefits then the disapproval ratings of Kasich and Walker would be reversed. It's all well and fine to support collective bargaining rights in the abstract but when it comes to actually having to pay for it people will put their pocket ahead of yours just like the public sector unions put their ahead of the taxpayers.

E.M. Davis said...

There were protests, but they were timid in comparison to the goings on in Madison. And short lived.

Columbus just isn't the liberal enclave that Madtown is. It's a typical Democrat urban center surrounded by a very conservative suburbs.

I previously posted an ad run in the Dispatch by the police and firefighters unions suggesting that SB5 would diminish their ability to keep people "safe." I thought that was pretty shitty of them.

Real American said...

Union Thug Busters 4 Life!

Class factotum said...

If workers can get union benefits without paying union dues, then who would pay?

The only reason I could imagine belonging to a union is if I didn't think I could get a better wage on my own. And as I am pretty sure I am better than the average employee, I am pretty sure I could get a better wage.

Pastafarian said...

Hey J, you haven't been around for a while.

In your absence, which seemed to coincide with the release of and uproar over a certain threatening statement, there was some speculation (by commenters here, who will remain nameless...cough, cough, me) that your actual name is:

Jim Shankman.

So? Do I win a cookie?

Jim Bullock said...

If workers can get union benefits without paying union dues, then who would pay?

The simple alternative is to allow the "benefits" of union representation to flow to union members, while those who don't join get paid whatever they can negotiate on their own - presumably less.

This is different from, for example, requiring younger union members to pay dues, which are used to negotiate contracts in which older, "more senior" members get one level of pay, opportunity, and benefits while the younger "less senior" folks get a lesser level.

Phil 3:14 said...

What's intriguing in all of this are the polls.

I would have thought that most people would read the stories and say:

They're only paying ___percent for their ________ (health care, retirement, other). Hell I pay _______ (5-10% more). What are they belly aching about!

and thus drive the polling in a decidely anti-public union direction. That doesn't seem to be the case.

mariner said...

That's not as strong as it looks. The state will still deduct union dues; the unions will say that dues are not being used for political action.

granmary said...

It is over in Ohio. The unions will try to have a referendum on the bill in Nov. But after all the intimidation and threats of boycotts against business owners who won't go along with the thug unions[including Police unions] in Wisconsin they will have a snowball's chance in hell of winning. The unions have just insured their own destuction. The rest of the country does not want to be like the disgraceful state Wisconsin

dick said...

I had a contract with a company that had a combination of union and non-union workers in all their branches. The non-union workers had higher wages, less deducted from the paychecks and better benefits than the union workers did. It was to the advantage of the company to do this since by the time you added up what the company had to pay to the union, to the union retirement, to the workers and then the cost of the union dues and the amount the union people had to pay in initiation fees the difference was unbelievable.

abeer ahmed said...

visit us on lifeandstylemag.com
http://whois.domaintasks.com/lifeandstylemag.com

lakecityjokes said...

Chittorgarh City

Chittorgarh Tourism

Chittorgarh Tour



About Chittorgarh City

Chittorgarh Tourism Guide

Chittorgarh Virtual Tour