April 10, 2011

Beware of the death unions.

Rush Limbaugh talked to Governor Scott Walker:
[W]e agreed that in terms of messaging, the whole term "collective bargaining rights" has somehow attached itself to people across the country as the essence of fairness such that if a state or an entity of some kind seeks to "deny citizens" -- union members -- their "collective bargaining rights," it is seen as an act of profound unfairness.

It's a messaging thing. Because, of course, "collective bargaining," when you're talking about a public union and public sector employees, who are they collectively bargaining against? Taxpayers. They're bargaining against the people as a whole....

There's gonna have to be something to replace "collective bargaining rights" here as a phrase to explain what's going on. You could say it's "money laundering;" you can say it's "usurpation of taxpayer dollars," 'cause that's what it is. 
Heh. This is like all that endless Democratic Party talk about how the Republicans are doing a better job of "framing" the issues — calling the estate tax the "death tax" and so on. "Death panels." Maybe something with "death"? That seems to work well for Republicans. Try railing against the "death unions" with their "death bargaining." That might scare everybody.

96 comments:

shoutingthomas said...

I like kickback scam better.

PaulV said...

business cartels are illegal, union cartel should be too

ricpic said...

Who said death? Rush didn't. YOU did. Stop with the cheap putting words in other peoples' mouths shtick.

mesquito said...

The battle will be won when the unions must shake down the membership for dues.

vet66 said...

Let the unions handle wage issues. Let the employees represented by unions show their support by mailing in their monthly dues to show their support of the union's efforts whether successful or failing. Otherwise we have a union as a business which ultimately can kill the host company as sure as a parasite weakens a living organism.

Hagar said...

The trouble with "collective bargaining" for public employee unions is that it is not "bargaining" when the other side of the table is not "bargaining" with its own money.

Darrell said...

Collective looting or collective robbery.
It says it all.

Pogo said...

Just tell gubmint employees what FDR said, that what they are doing is "unthinkable and intolerable".

"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.

Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that "under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government." successful.
"

Pogo said...

FDR meant what Althouse said:
Government unions are death unions, because they kill the government itself.

Meade said...

Nothing wrong with calling them "collective bargaining rights." Short for "New! Enhanced collective bargaining rights. Now with more limited statutory collectivity and finely-tuned rights to bargain!" In other words, you can collectively bargain but... no strikes, no slowdowns, and join the union and paying dues is completely optional.

For example, it's what the TSA is doing. How is trusting employees of the TSA with our personal security any more important than trusting public school teachers with the education of our children?

enicar333 said...

It's all about framing the argument. Call public employees just that; they are the TAX BENEFICARY - NOT THE TAXPAYER. Tax cuts increase the net income of taxpayers. Public Employees will fit into the class that the Taxpayers can afford to pay them - from low to high dependent upon the Community - they are NOT the middle class or the working families. Working families are Taxpayers who pay the bills. Being a public employee is a PRIVILEDGE - NOT a right. Public Employees are FREE TO QUIT if they don't like the terms of employment. IT IS IRRELEVANT TO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES WHAT PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYEES MAKE. Don't like it - don't be a public employee. The Taxpayers are sick of the public employees electing themselves funds from the public treasury and so they have LOST the priviledge of collective bargaining and unions. PERIOD.

As a reminder - Teachers are not "special", parents are. The child is the parents responsibility. This needs to be licensed because the current system isn't working. Human Beings have been around for thousands of years, and educating children is so easy, well, "EVEN A CAVEMAN CAN DO IT". Rant off.

bagoh20 said...

I like "Robber Baron Unions" because it's accurate.

Only 3% of the private sector is union, and they feed themselves and completely support all the government employees and their rampant waste. That's really all you need to understand. There is no valid reason for public employees to be unionized, especially against the people's will and their own.

Dulcy said...

How about "Tax Abuse"?

Comrade X said...

collective cronyism

AJ Lynch said...

Geoerge Lakoff was the linguist dipshit who originated this idea that the Dems were poor at messaging. Where is he these days?

RattlerGator said...

I'd like to nominate "selective cartel agreements" or, in the alternative, "selective cartel rights" as the proper framing language that remains cognizant of FDR's warning.

Selective, because to use any other language ignores the context of these unions.

Cartel, because the public sector members - by organizing as a union -- seek to collude against the taxpaying public.

David said...

The failure in messaging is that they have even got us calling it a "right". It is not, even FDR refered to it as a "process"

When you control the language you control the argument.

Aridog said...

I'm surprised Ann and Meade haven't used the newest Foggy Bottom jargon: Kinetic Coercion rights."

Or ... "Kinetic Kickback" vis a vis the payment of dues.

ThreeSheets said...

The problem with referring it to money laundering, etc, is that it highlights the reason for ending it is political; that is, to stop them from donating to Democrats.

You would have to back it up and not "blame" the unions for it, but the officials who are giving them "outrageous" deals.

PatCA said...

I like the idea of showing FDR's quote against his picture, over and over. The GOP would win the messaging battle for sure.

BTW it looks like the WI gang has moved on to WA.

SEIU Thugs It Out

AllenS said...

Here's a messaging thing that makes me scratch my head at the inability of everyone not to understand how they've been had:

Bush and his wasteful deficit spending means that he spent money that the country didn't have.

obama and his stimulus spending means that he spent money that the country didn't have.

Seriously, WTF?

J said...

""They're bargaining against the people as a whole....""

Flush Limbozo, America's fave JW Gacy imitator, with his category error of the morning. Union members pay taxes as well for one. Moreover collective bargaining rights were put into place, democratically (ie, national labor acts, etc)

instead of his usual bullying of education, lets hear Limbozo start dissing the cop and firefighter unions, or trade unionists.

Fr Martin Fox said...

The issue is not "union" or "rights" but coercion.

Here's how "collective bargaining" works under most federal and state law:

1. The union seeks to be the "exclusive bargaining representative" for a "unit" of workers--that unit can be defined various ways, from a single location to a vast number at many locations.

2. "Exclusive" means that if they gain this status, no one else can represent the affected employees to the employer, not even themselves, except as the "bargaining agreement" defines it.

3. Once this status is gained--several ways, see below--the affected workers are compelled to accept the bargaining representation of the union and all that entails. This, right there, is a tremendous power over these workers, because anyone who runs afoul of the union hierarchy can be penalized.

4. The next step, of course, is to bargain--i.e., to form a contract, that defines the working arrangements and pay and benefits of all concerned.

"Where are you going with that ladder?"

"I'm going to change a light bulb over my work area."

"No you're not! Are you an electrician? I didn't think so. The contract says shut things down until an electrician comes over."

5. How does the union become sole--monopoly--bargaining agent? In theory it's democratic, right? Only not always.

a) There should be a vote, but the employer can agree to waive that, so that only by turning in a majority of cards, the union wins.

b) Little known fact: once the union collects a signed card, a worker cannot revoke it, cannot get it returned for verification, till there is an election--if there is an election. Signatures have been known to be collected under spurious circumstances, and of course, what happens when someone refuses to sign a card?

c) If the employer is found to commit an unfair labor practice in relation to this process, the government can--and often will--skip the election and declare the union the monopoly bargaining rep. Note the presumptions: the default desire of workers is for union representation; the remedy for workers being treated badly is a union; and/or, the workers really ought to be in a union. Three guesses who wrote these provisions of law, and the first two don't count.

6. Lastly, of course, comes the contract provision for forced union dues, unless state or federal law prohibits such a provision (i.e., Right to Work). This is always called "fair share" because the union complains of the "burden" of representing workers who don't want to pay union dues.

But the whole system is riddled with coercion. Why can't participation in the bargaining unit be voluntary? Opt in, or opt out? Another little known fact: despite unions complaining about the "burden" of monopoly bargaining, they can seek a non-monopoly role--which is what they sometimes do when they can't gain exclusive status. So the monopoly position is no "burden" imposed on them, it is coveted means of leverage: first over all the workers, and then over management.

Union advocates will label what I just said as "anti-union"--meaning, that they deem the coercive elements essential to unionism. Must that be so? If so, that's a tremendous self-indictment.

Michael K said...

AllenS, have you ever heard that "The dose makes the poison?" Look at a chart of Bush's deficits and Obama's. I was unhappy about the Republican's spending but look at the Bush deficit after the Democrats took over. Also TARP was a swindle. THey didn't buy any troubled assets because once Uncle Sam appeared with a bundle of money, nobody would sell at a market price. The market was gone. Read Nicole Gelinas' book.

Psota said...

Collective Bargaining: it's a privilege, not a right

Chip Ahoy said...

The term death taxes describes money going to the government instead of to intended heirs. Death panels very nicely describes government bureaucrats making your health decisions even those affecting your life and your death. Death unions is inappro … oh, you're being silly. Never mind.

Here's something. If I happen to notice a person step out onto their balcony for a smoke, and then insouciantly flick the butt into the common area, is it alright for me to go down there and return the butt to the offending balcony by slingshot?

McGehee said...

"Moreover collective bargaining rights were put into place, democratically (ie, national labor acts, etc)..."

And in Wisconsin they took them away democratically.

Hello?

Is this thing on?

Fr Martin Fox said...

Sorry...I might add just this:

There's another big reason why unions don't serve as non-monopoly bargaining representatives: management wouldn't like it! Too messy, too much uncertainty.

So what frequently happens is that a union executive and a management executive work out arrangements, deciding what's best for the affected workers, who are not treated as individuals.

J said...

"""Only 3% of the private sector is union, and they feed themselves and completely support all the government employees and their rampant waste."""

exactly. Unionism has been on a decline for years, whereas corporate executives have been making millions . Teachers are fairly expendable, many laid off, headed to Walmart for their new McJOb.

like Limbozo you just don't know what this game is about. Note that Limbaugh did NOT as per FDR separate the public employees from the trade unions--he condemned ALL collective bargaining, ie ALL unions . Must be following orders from Ryan or Queen Cantor, or.... the ghost of Ayn Rand's butt

J said...

10: 12, and in possible violation of Fed laws (ie JFK's order permitting public employee unions)--and it will be going to court anyway. See, like thar's this thing called the Constitution.

shoutingthomas said...

exactly. Unionism has been on a decline for years, whereas corporate executives have been making millions . Teachers are fairly expendable, many laid off, headed to Walmart for their new McJOb.

Well, in most districts (including mine), the student body population has been declining drastically.

So, what else would you propose rather than reducing the number of teachers?

garage mahal said...

Our founders were so pig ignorant about that whole freedom to associate and freedom to peacefully assemble thing. Idiots!

No. We should celebrate the government stepping into our lives and breaking up these organziations, and just trust them to hire, fire, and promote the right people. What could possibly go wrong?

Who wouldn't trust Scott Walker anyway?

edutcher said...

shout is right. Use the word scam in this case. There is nothing enshrined in the Constitution, which the Lefties invoke only when they want to prostitute it, about collective bargaining.

PS Henery Hawk talks about FDR as if he actually read some history (he clearly didn't).

Then again, he talks to the Althousians as if they're unread, when it's obviously him that is.

Jan said...

"Collective extortion" seems apt, no?

shoutingthomas said...

No. We should celebrate the government stepping into our lives and breaking up these organziations, and just trust them to hire, fire, and promote the right people. What could possibly go wrong?

These organizations are the government, garbage. That's the problem. Collective bargaining is one wing of the government bargaining with another wing of the government. The only people excluded are the taxpayers who actually have to foot the bill.

Why do you persist in your pig ignorance?

By the way, you lost. Hope you're choking on it.

J said...

the AAsters following orders from Rush "Gacy " Limbaugh, and .....channeling the ghost of Ayn Rand's butthole...

Twuth hurts

Fr Martin Fox said...

Garage:

When the government authorizes compulsory affiliation with a union--the alternative being to find a job in a non-unionized work site--how does that not run afoul of the freedom of association you rightly praise?

If the First Amendment were construed expansively in labor law, as it and other constitutional provisions, with their spectral "emanations" and "penumbrae," were applied in pursuit of the unenumerated privacy right, this would be death to those provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (and related labor laws) that empower compulsory participation in a bargaining unit.

shoutingthomas said...

the AAsters following orders from Rush "Gacy " Limbaugh, and .....channeling the ghost of Ayn Rand's butthole..

Back from the crack den, J?

How often do you come up for air?

Chip S. said...

There's already a word for the unionists' political agenda, from the dustbin of history: syndicalism.

It's obviously too French-looking to catch on, though, and has too many syllables.

I'd go with labor cartels.

shoutingthomas said...

So, garbage, wasn't it just last week that you were telling us that Walker was doomed because the voters of WI were outraged, and that the Prosser/Kloppy election would prove it?

What happened with that?

Any more prognostications?

I'm all ears.

You're as reliable America's Politico.

Titus said...

I would do Scott Walker

bagoh20 said...

Public sector unionization is a violation of the separation of church and state. It's establishment of a state religion, since it enshrines beliefs not provable though physical fact, and in tern apostasy is illegal. It's a Dem. sharia - or "Demoria".

J said...

Twoooth?? You kun't handle da TWOOOOOOTH!

NLRB

Is Minister of Information Limbaugh suggesting that like NLRB and all labor unions be closed? Wow --Rush sounds nearly Tory-royalist, like his buttboy Sir Elton.

Maybe Rush and the TP can get like a King of the USA. Or Queen--Her Highness, Erica Cantor

J said...

10:30--yr the tweeker here, TomTom the jewboy--thats quite obvious . Not to say ...chester like yr hero Rush, chief Paedo-in charge

fuck off

Comrade X said...

and just trust them to hire, fire, and promote the right people. What could possibly go wrong?

Who wouldn't trust Scott Walker anyway?


and yet you want the government to decide what health care you get. I guess the same thing could possibly go wrong.

shoutingthomas said...

I would do Scott Walker

Let's shorten up the list, Tight Ass.

Who wouldn't you do?

Comrade X said...

jewboy? hitler much?

bagoh20 said...

OK Titus, you've been kidnapped and forced to do all kinds of immoral acts. Well OK, maybe not forced. But, now your captors give you a way out. You have to do either Rush or Michael Moore. Pick your salvation, and no, you can't have both.

Conservatives 4 Better Dental Hygiene said...

Try railing against the "death unions" with their "death bargaining." That might scare everybody.

Which would be just about as dishonorable a thing as I'd expect you to do.

SGT Ted said...

ahh J outs himself as the antisemite bigot and hater. Not to mention his tiny brain that cannot distinguish between public sector and private sector unions.

Meanwhile, garage seems to think that taxpayers are the unions cash cows and have no say in the matter.

Freedom to associate also means freedom to NOT associate with greedy union fat cats and their goons. The ability to do so or not stems from Contitutional individual liberty and not from a mob of union thugs threatening other people with beatings and bombings.

Your unions are free to say that they want more money and we are just as free to tell them to go fuck themselves. What part of that cannot you leftists get through your pea-brains?

Carol_Herman said...

A "union worker" guarantees you a shoddy job!

A better question to raise is how did teachers become known for their incompetence in the classroom? How, exactly, do you screw up the ABC's. And, 2+2=4?

Teachers once commanded respect. Because most parents took what they had to say seriously enough ... that a kid at home would get holy hell, if the teacher called a parent "for a chat."

Now? It's all SUE ME (Sumi). How did we let so many lawyers in?

Poor kids. "Stay-at-home" moms are rare. Illegitimacy is not.

Do teachers deal with this? Or don't kids write Mothers Day, and Fathers Day cards anymore?

WV: strong

Alex said...

Remember the unions gave us:

* 40 hour work week
* lavish medical benefits
* took the monocle off Mr. Scrooge

Alex said...

Which would be just about as dishonorable a thing as I'd expect you to do.

Pot, meet kettle.

Jeff said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jeff said...

How quickly we forget: earlier this year people died in NYC because the government-employee unions refused to plow the streets of a snowstorm, thus preventing ambulances from responding to 911 calls.

Fen said...

OT: Breaking news that Obama has been using John Paul Ludwig's SSN.

Maybe Trump's investigators are onto something.

Steve Koch said...

The term "death panel" is genius. Of course Dems and Republicans are endlessly trying to win the propaganda battle and language/terminology is a huge part of that battle.

Rush brings up the term "public employee collective bargaining rights" so that maybe somebody in his huge audience will come up with a catchy new term that is less favorable for the Dems and more favorable for the Republicans.

The first step is to replace the term "public employee unions" with the term "government unions". It is shorter and replaces "employee" (which is a sympathetic concept that everybody relates to) with "government" (a much more oppressive and less individualistic and sympathetic term that is hard for the typical citizen to identify with).

That leaves "collective bargaining rights". Collective is a negative word so it might stay but the term "bargaining rights" has to be replaced.

The key concepts that have to be emphasized are corruption, collusion, coercive, kickback, and undemocratic. What Republicans are most interested in is preventing the government from automatically deducting dues for the unions, forcing employees to join the union, and forcing employees to contribute to the Dems.

Maybe the new term might be "government union coerced corrupt kickbacks".

Oxbay said...

Hey Althouse, you're often on the mark. This comment, "Try railing against the "death unions" with their "death bargaining." That might scare everybody.", is just plain stupid.

Death tax and death panel are both apt and pertinent phrases. That's why they are used. Your comment above assigns insincerity to people who use those phrases. That is completely wrong.

In this case your cruel neutrality is stupid, cynical, and completely wrong.

John said...

Death Union sounds like something Colbert would use to parody conservatism.

Municipal Employees bounding together at a state or country level to form a cartel, to collusively baragin against taxpayers with campaign contributions, is illegal at the federal level and should be illegal at the state, county and city levels as well.

Government Employee Cartels, should not be allowed to collusively donate to politicians, against tax payers.

AJ Lynch said...

Fen:
In your opinion, is there a reasonable likelihood the Clintns could be behind the soc sec # issue?

Fen said...

I have no idea. I don't even trust the source of the SSN story. Never thought of it from the Clinton angle, because I view Hillary as DOA for 2012. What's to gain other than petty revenge?

AJ Lynch said...

Perhaps, if siginificant doubt was engendered about Obama's authenticity, she could be candidate if he stepped aside.

garage mahal said...

Freedom to associate also means freedom to NOT associate with greedy union fat cats and their goons

then, don't associate with a union.

J said...

11:42, f**k you, neo-Tory-zionist chandala, and the whore you work for ...aka Queen Erica Cantor.

With that, the ghosts of Aristotle, Jefferson, and Ezra Pound and many others agree

Steve Koch said...

Wisconsin does not have a right to work law so employees in unionized shops are forced to join the union.

J said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alex said...

Wisconsin does not have a right to work law so employees in unionized shops are forced to join the union.

If you don't like it GTFO
/garage

traditionalguy said...

Beware of Jimmy Hoffa coming back reincarnated as the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Twelfth President who will drive out Management from the Temple of Greed.

J said...

Jimmy Hoffa. wow, scary

How about like Donald Trump, casino pimp. Or the Koch gang. Or Exxon. etc. Baptists/klansmen/zionists. You don't know who the real enemies of America are.

orbicularioculi said...

I like the term Kollective Kriminal Kickback Bargaining to describe Public Unions. The KKK Thugs of America.

damikesc said...

Ill bite: J, what is so damned scary about the Koch brothers?

Anne said...

Hey Alex..."Remember the unions gave us:

* 40 hour work week
* lavish medical benefits
* took the monocle off Mr. Scrooge"

For sure, and the Republicans gave us Lincoln and the 14th Amendment, not to mention MLK Jr. So why the huge hate on Republicans? Or would you rather we throw the baby out with the bath water. Adulation for the unions because they at one time had some benefit means you should be on your knees before the Republicans for their favorable contributions in the past also.

Alex said...

Anne - get the knee pads ready.

rhhardin said...

UPEC , united public employee cartels

Ut said...

"then, don't associate with a union."

Forced union membership is mandatory in many states, Garage.

But we know you're not educated enough to know such things.

So we pity you. And humor you.

PaulV said...

union death threats?

Ut said...

" ... then, don't associate with a union."

Only 25 of the states have right-to-work laws allowing people to not associate with a union if they don't want to.

But unions aren't the problem. Almost nobody belongs to unions except the government.

That's the problem. The government employees have banded together to extort money from the taxpayers.

That has to stop by whatever means are necessary up to and including the legal and forceful elimination of this illegitimate government.

Alex said...

Ut - remember garage has stated MANY times that anyone who doesn't like the enforced union-age can GTFO of Wisconsin. He's made no bones about it.

Laika's Last Woof said...

Althouse brings it once again. Hilarious!

Phil 3:14 said...

I'm not sure its a messaging issue. The core issue to tease out is
Why do so few private sector workers belong to a union?

Now I know from the liberal/union perspective its because the "fat cats"/management have shut them out of the shop. I doubt it but I'm no expert.

Assuming its something else, the unions will need to either figure out how to sell themselves differently or be content with the public union sector, which is clearly an aberrant market.

That second approach seems doomed to me because:
-more and more office holders see how the longer term economics stack
-the rich benefits become more and more indefensible to the working public.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Alex said:

"Ut - remember garage has stated MANY times that anyone who doesn't like the enforced union-age can GTFO of Wisconsin. He's made no bones about it."

That was, as I recall, the "freedom" blacks had in states and jurisdictions with segregation: you don't like it? Go somewhere else.

Absolutely amazing that union advocates claim the union should have the power to control where you work: work here? accept union representation/union dues; don't like it? get a job in another business/city/state/industry.

SGT Ted said...

garage forgets that it was unions and Democrats who tried to stop integration because they didn't want to compete with black for jobs.

cubanbob said...

garage mahal said...
Our founders were so pig ignorant about that whole freedom to associate and freedom to peacefully assemble thing. Idiots!

No. We should celebrate the government stepping into our lives and breaking up these organziations, and just trust them to hire, fire, and promote the right people. What could possibly go wrong?

Who wouldn't trust Scott Walker anyway?

4/10/11 10:22 AM

Lets see how popular public unions are. Let them negotiate with the taxpayers directly. Put all pay and benefit increases and work rule changes to a vote every November on election day.

Apparently more Wisconsinite voters trust Governor than the unions.

cubanbob said...

J said...
Twoooth?? You kun't handle da TWOOOOOOTH!

NLRB

Is Minister of Information Limbaugh suggesting that like NLRB and all labor unions be closed? Wow --Rush sounds nearly Tory-royalist, like his buttboy Sir Elton.

Maybe Rush and the TP can get like a King of the USA. Or Queen--Her Highness, Erica Cantor

4/10/11 10:44 AM
J said...
10:30--yr the tweeker here, TomTom the jewboy--thats quite obvious . Not to say ...chester like yr hero Rush, chief Paedo-in charge

fuck off

4/10/11 10:46 AM

Yes! Great idea! Lets repeal the Wagner Act so when assholes like you go on strike its perfectly legal to fire you and while we are at it repeal the union exclusion from anti-trust laws and ban them from being tax exempt organizations.

furious_a said...

Wisconsin does not have a right to work law so employees in unionized shops are forced to join the union.

If you don't like it GTFO
/garage


I seem to recall millions of GM and Chrysler customers have made exactly that choice.

Carol_Herman said...

InstaPundit had a link. Bill Maher said that Obama can't negotiate. And, then he asked "doesn't he know a Jew?"

Between Obama and Boehner it's like watching the folding of lawn chairs.

Not much of a crowd.

And, for all the talk of "owning" The University at Madison, doesn't look like a single person at this "rally" earned a degree from there. Talk is cheap. Going is gonna get more expensive.

What part of "bubble" needs to be clarified for these jerks?

Oh, yeah. And, if you were in traffic. Being held up from driving "State Street" ... would you be pissed? What if you were a democrap?

I miss the costumed "cows." And, the guy with the train sticking up at ya. Was it like Halloween? When I saw them it's for a day?

No returnees?

What else is there to do in Madison?

Michael Reinhard said...

Why not replace the phrase "Taking away collective bargaining rights," with its logical equivalent, "Restoring individual bargaining rights?"

Mark said...

How I'd pitch it: "Our past dealings with public employee unions has lead to a Collective Bargaining Death Spiral, where services to citizens have suffered while the costs to taxpayers have skyrocketed, all to benefit a new nomenklatura answerable to no one but the Union Bosses. It's time to pull out of the Death Spiral before it's too late."

SH said...

It is also funny that ‘collective bargaining rights’ also means forcing people to be in unions (or paying dues) and abide by employment contracts they might not want to work under… Sorta reminds me of healthcare being a right really meaning rationing mine / what I was willing to pay for before all the government ‘help’…

Lay offs based on seniority only? Forget about it. I do the work of three people, I should be let go last. Ditto pay scales.

walter said...

Can't we all compromise and allow the Wisco pub sector workers the same "rights" as federal workers? That would be true solidarity across public sector brothers and sisters. Done. So easy.

BTW, why has Jimmy Carter been so quiet on this. Hmmmm.

Fen said...

I seem to recall millions of GM and Chrysler customers have made exactly that choice.

Yup. Have you seen the new line of "Motor City" car ads? I think they're cool, but come on, Detroit is a rotting corpse.

You can thank the Unions for that.

And now these same parasitic brownshirts are demanding their "right" to feed off the taxpayers.

Democrats suck.

Fen said...

Democrats Suck.

Guess that explains their giddy embrace of the "teabagger" slur...

Fen said...

and all the Monica-wanna-be's that didn't let a little sexual abuse get in the way of their oral fixation.

*cough Marcotte Valenti cough*

Martin said...

I'm not so sure the word "rights" is actually the key issue, but if so just say "collective bargaining privileges" or "collective bargaining under the National Labor Relations Act."

Don't Tread 2012 said...

'Collective bargaining opportunity/option'.

This sounds more 'fair' and correct than coupled with the word, 'rights'.

I have the opportunity to talk to my boss about my salary, anytime.

I don't have a 'right', though.

If I used the 'right' meme on my boss every day this week to discuss my salary, by Friday he would be re-thinking my status.

Public employees deserve no better than my opportunity.

Anyone that thinks they do, see a ghost where none exist.

Leonard said...

How about 'labor-racket shakedown'?