Senate Bill 5 Targets Collective Bargaining for Elimination!

• chippblue

  

  Teachers and schools get no respect because whenever times get tight they never want to try to live within their means they always threaten the public with cuts that ultimately effect the children. I know that with my business if times are tight I have to provide the same service at the same cost, but make up the rest on my end. When Ohio received the tobacco settlement we should have consolidated a lot of schools and we probably could have built new schools in most districts that small communities could support. I am voting yes on issue 2!
• Belly35

  

  
  
  What Veterans?
  
  I'm a disabled Vietnam Vet, Private Business owner and Property owner
  
  I'm voting YES on ISSUE II and III
  
  I'm protection my property, my business, my future grandkids education and Ohio business to create jobs I don't care about your Union. mofo:mad:
  
  
  Belly35 support the police, fire, ems and the school system for years but Issue II and Issue III is about ME and YOU as tax payers and citizen not Union backed organization. Yes on issue II
• coach_bob1

  fish82;949190 wrote:The state budget is already in place based on SB5. Why would there be layoffs?

  Expected income from the federal government is expected to change. I know for a fact that SSA is getting ready to decrease the funding they pay to each state to process claims.
• QuakerOats

  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/11/colorado-voters-reject-higher-taxes-education.html
  
  At some point the members of public sector unions will simply disavow their union 'leadership', and we may be able to have rationale discourse about finances. Until then, the national union propaganda machine will continue its greedy campaign to defend the status quo and impoverish middle class taxpayers for the benefit of the very few.
• QuakerOats

  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/27/1030642/-Issue-2:-Labor-backed-group-says-polls-overstate-chances-of-victory-on-Ohioinitiative
• QuakerOats

  SB5 repeal group now bringing in communists to support their cause --- WOW.
  
  http://biggovernment.com/bytor/2011/11/02/we-are-ohio-enlists-admitted-communist-van-jones-as-spokeperson-in-issue-2-battle/
  
  At what point will union members stand with American and Ohio taxpayers, and NOT with communists? Are they truly that brainwashed by the greedy and powerful union 'leadership'?
  
  Absolutely stunning.
• QuakerOats

  [LEFT]"The silent majority will emerge in favor of commonsense reform in Ohio.
  In eight days, Ohio voters will go to the polls to decide the fate of Senate Bill 5, which institutes reasonable reforms in the way public employees are compensated. A yes vote on Issue 2 is a vote to keep the law in place.
  Gov. John Kasich signed SB 5 into law last March, recognizing the need for local government flexibility in dealing with widespread budget pressures. By requiring government workers to pay a portion of their health and retirement benefits and instituting a system of compensation based on merit, local governments are able to avoid the layoffs and tax increases that have become commonplace in recent years.
  Of course, the left has run a well-funded and intense smear campaign largely funded out of union headquarters in Washington, D.C. They have relied on the politics of fear to frame this initiative as an assault on police, fire fighters and teachers. And to wit, recent public polling data suggests the unions are winning: Last week’s Quinnipiac poll had Ohioans supporting repeal 57-32. Clearly $30 million goes a long way in an off-year election.
  But this has always been a race for the independent vote, and the “silent majority” will break toward a yes vote in the final week before Election Day. The major tenets of SB 5 remain consistently popular across the political spectrum, and especially with self-identified independent voters:

  • Voters support requiring public employees to pay at least 15 percent of their health insurance costs by a 60-33 margin.
  • Voters support requiring public employees to contribute at least 10 percent of their wages toward their pensions by a 57-34 margin.
  • Voters support determining pay increases based on merit rather than seniority by a 49-40 margin.

  
  And those voters who do not identify with either major party are not loudly voicing their opinions either way, for a few reasons. The most prominent is fear of union retribution. The small business owner that supports SB 5 as a hedge against property tax increases probably isn’t putting up a sign for fear of a union-backed boycott. The teacher who supports merit pay as a way to be fairly compensated for hard work doesn’t dare oppose Ohio’s powerful teachers union. And the school administrators who need flexibility in balancing their budgets know that going toe-to-toe with unions could have catastrophic consequences should SB 5 be repealed.
  But perhaps more importantly, the average Ohio family doesn’t have the luxury of a paid day off to take a bus to Columbus to scream and wave a sign in support of SB 5. Nor should they be expected to be so passionate. At the heart of the SB 5 debate is the conflict of concentrated benefits with dispersed costs. Of course the unions are going to spend $30 million on a hysterical smear campaign to oppose a very moderate piece of legislation. Automatic pay increases, “free” benefits and insulation from reform are their lifeblood. The average Ohioan just has to pay a little bit more in local property taxes and state income taxes, but unionized government employees experience an absolute windfall.
  But at the end of the day, taxpayers know that the status quo is broken at both the state and local levels. And they are aware, in the words of the Buckeye Institute, that the Grand Bargain is dead. No longer do government workers take less pay but better benefits for the opportunity to perform a public service. Now they get great benefits and a bigger paycheck than the rest of us, with nearly no accountability to those of us paying the bills.
  The left knows that Quinnipiac’s 57-32 situation isn’t going to happen next Tuesday. In fact, a recent internal labor memo warns that a blowout is not “remotely possible” and that Quinnipiac’s polling language is misleading. The same day the Democratic Governors Association dropped an emergency $150,000 check on the pro-repeal coalition.
  I think internal polling is slowly showing independents breaking toward a yes vote, as it should. This is not a partisan issue or an attack on Ohio public workers, most of whom do honorable and effective work. It is rather an attempt to curtail the power of their unions, who have effectively bankrupted Ohio’s local governments with inflexible demands and outsized political influence. A yes vote on Issue 2 is a vote for a sustainable government sector in Ohio.
  
  
  
  Read more: http://atr.org/expect-independents-support-ohios-issue-a6563#ixzz1ceScJpot[/LEFT]
• Cleveland Buck

  

  The empirical evidence simply does not bear out the conventional wisdom regarding unions. If employers were really in a position to impose whatever wage rate they wished, then why in the decades prior to large-scale labor unionism did wages not diminish to near zero? (In fact, as we shall see below, real wages skyrocketed in the decades before modern labor law took shape.) For that matter, why did skilled workers earn more than unskilled workers? If firms were really in a position to tell workers to take or leave whatever pathetic wage they might choose to offer, why would they have felt a need to pay skilled workers more than unskilled workers? Why not just pay them both the same pittance?
  
  The case for labor unionism does possess a superficial plausibility, but it is in fact entirely fallacious. Real wages rise not because of union activity but because of the process that George Reisman describes in his productivity theory of wages (which I describe here). In short, business investment in machinery increases the productivity of labor and therefore the output that the economy is capable of producing, and this greater supply puts downward pressure on prices.
  
  As Reisman explains, "It is the productivity of labor that determines the supply of consumers' goods relative to the supply of labor, and thus the prices of consumers' goods relative to wage rates." This phenomenon is not always easy to see in an inflationary economy such as ours, in which prices of most goods seem to go up consistently. But the point remains: prices become lower than they would otherwise be, and all real incomes (wages included) increase.
  

  http://mises.org/daily/1685/Forgotten-Facts-of-American-Labor-History
• QuakerOats

  For the FACTS, or if you have questions and need answers go here:
  
  http://www.aproundtable.org/pdfs/faqonOH_SB5.pdf
• ernest_t_bass

  

  QuakerOats;957535 wrote:
  THAT IS A COMPLETE LIE. RETRACT IT!
  
  For the FACTS, or if you have questions and need answers go here:
  http://www.aproundtable.org/pdfs/faqonOH_SB5.pdf

  LOL, how long ago did I post that?
• Writerbuckeye

  

  I'm loving stories like this one. People campaigning against Issue 2 can't even keep their lies straight...
  
  http://thirdbasepolitics.blogspot.com/2011/11/democrats-still-pushing-lies-about.html
• Belly35

  

  Oh! Less police, fire and ems officers if Issue 2 is passed….
  Oh! Your protection is at jeopardy long response time
  Oh! Less teacher
  
  This is the crap that the Democrat and Unions are pitching to the public BULL MOFO :mad:
  
  Less teacher false; Wisconsin now in many district now are hiring more teacher, less class size and new equipment ….. what the Problem?
  
  http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/9104783/wisconsin_schools_hiring_more_teachers.html?cat=3
  
  
  The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports:
  Cost savings from worker contributions to health care and retirement, taking effect today as part of the new collective bargaining laws, will swing the Kaukauna School District from a $400,000 budget deficit to an estimated $1.5 million surplus…. The district… plans to hire teachers and reduce class size. Let’s stop and think of all the protesters who carried signs asserting that their opposition to Scott Walker was for the children.
  
  
  Less police, fire and ems false: Where have we hear this; Local government will have to cut back police and fire if budge cut are not made: Police and Fire Unions take cut to save jobs.
  Stupid mofo… The Union agrees to take the cuts to save their ass and a few jobs. However those cuts are more that what would have been taken under Issue II. Again stupid mofo:laugh:
  
  Secondary note: with Issue to YES vote there will be a budge deficit same same as with teacher which will provide more hiring, provide addition equipment and better overall protection to those police, fire and ems personal…. What the problem?
  
  Issue II YES vote is a job creator..
  
  However to all who are private citizen Issue II is not about Teacher, Protection or Police and Fire UNIONS
  
  Issue II is about YOU and ME the property we own, the tax payers and the future of our children and grandchildren
  
  I have to pay my share of insurance and retirement …… I’m tried of government public employees using my property and my taxes as their Union check book…
  
  Vote YES on Issue II and III
• Glory Days

  

  John Glenn voting no on Issue 2!........
• Glory Days

  

  Belly35;957648 wrote: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports:
  Cost savings from worker contributions to health care and retirement, taking effect today as part of the new collective bargaining laws, will swing the Kaukauna School District from a $400,000 budget deficit to an estimated $1.5 million surplus…. The district… plans to hire teachers and reduce class size. Let’s stop and think of all the protesters who carried signs asserting that their opposition to Scott Walker was for the children.

  Did you know if public workers paid 100% of their health care etc, that school system would have even more millions of dollars in surplus!!!! why stop at 15%, why not 20%, 25%?
• QuakerOats

  Glory Days;957651 wrote:John Glenn voting no on Issue 2!........

  
  So would Howard Metzenbaum .... which is about all you need to know to realize that you should be voting YES on Issue 2.
• QuakerOats

  Glory Days;957655 wrote:Did you know if public workers paid 100% of their health care etc, that school system would have even more millions of dollars in surplus!!!! why stop at 15%, why not 20%, 25%?

  Good point -- private sector workers pay on average 31% !!
  
  And then of course there is the other side of the equation that no one is YET talking about: how much do the health care plans cost to begin with? In the private sector they average about $12,000 for family coverage; in the public sector it is sometimes $24,000. So, the public will not only be paying 85% of the load, but it is 85% of a massively inflated load. How about scaling back the lavishness of the plans to around $15,000, then your 15% contribution will be more meaningful as Ohio taxpayers will get a break from paying 85% of cadillac plans!
• WebFire

  Glory Days;957655 wrote:Did you know if public workers paid 100% of their health care etc, that school system would have even more millions of dollars in surplus!!!! why stop at 15%, why not 20%, 25%?

  
• Glory Days

  

  WebFire;957668 wrote:

  just think. if we tax the hell out of the 1% and make public workers pay more in healthcare etc, this country would be out of debt in no time!
• QuakerOats

  "Tax the hell out of the 1%" ......... Yes We Can!
  bho
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Glory Days;957675 wrote:just think. if we tax the hell out of the 1% and make public workers pay more in healthcare etc, this country would be out of debt in no time!

  Actually, no.
  
  You could confiscate every penny the 1 percent has and it still wouldn't get us out of debt. That's how much this country is in the hole. That's why this whole "tax the rich" thing is such a sham. The only way out of debt is to start cutting FIRST.
  
  Oh and I realize your post was sarcasm...just thought I'd contribute a little info to it.
• Gblock

  QuakerOats;957665 wrote:Good point -- private sector workers pay on average 31% !!
  
  And then of course there is the other side of the equation that no one is YET talking about: how much do the health care plans cost to begin with? In the private sector they average about $12,000 for family coverage; in the public sector it is sometimes $24,000. So, the public will not only be paying 85% of the load, but it is 85% of a massively inflated load. How about scaling back the lavishness of the plans to around $15,000, then your 15% contribution will be more meaningful as Ohio taxpayers will get a break from paying 85% of cadillac plans!

  Surely you have a link for those facts?
• Gblock

  The study, Out of Balance? Comparing Public and Private Sector Compensation Over 20 Years, also found that on a national level health care, retirement and other benefits make up a slightly larger share of compensation in the public sector (32%) than in comparable firms in the private sector (31%). Still, better benefits do not completely eliminate the gap in compensation between public and private sector workers.
  "This new report explains why you never hear people say, 'I'm leaving the private sector to go make more money,'" said Stephen Herzenberg, Ph.D., Keystone Research Center Economist and Executive Director. "Simply put, the most generous salaries are in the private sector.
• Bigdogg

  QuakerOats;957535 wrote:For the FACTS, or if you have questions and need answers go here:
  
  http://www.aproundtable.org/pdfs/faqonOH_SB5.pdf

  Your "facts" are more like fiction and ferry tails.
  

  he claim does contain an element of truth. The non-partisan Center for Retirement Research would agree with the notion that benefit packages on average can increase the value of a public employee’s compensation package above that of the average private sector worker.
  
  But there are critical facts that give a different impression of Building a Better Ohio’s claim.
  
  There is general agreement that public employee wages, on average, are less. The AEI study Building a Better Ohio relies on estimates they are about 2.5 less than comparable private employees.
  
  The ad from Building a Better Ohio flatly states that public employees "make 43 percent more" than private sector workers. We think the average listener would interpret that as meaning the average public employee is paid - in wages and benefits - 43 percent more. But some components of the AEI study aren’t based on money changing hands, but rather on the value to the employee of certain benefits.
  
  Even leaving out the considerable disagreements over the calculation of pension costs, the inclusion of job security as a monetized figure in compensation is questionable. The AEI study says that security has a value of 10 percent of the pay. But that doesn’t translate to more money paid to the employee.
  
  Whether it exists or not, job security is an intangible factor, like job satisfaction, that can't be spent, saved or taxed. It doesn’t put more dollars and cents into employee compensation.
  We think it is misleading to include it in an accounting of what workers "make."
  
  Also, the AEI study arrived at its 43 percent figure through rounding that we could not follow, and which the Center for Retirement Research questioned, after adding the 10 percent for job security to the 31.2 percent advantage in non-wage benefits it says that public workers have a 43 percent edge over their private sector counterparts.
  
  And that 31.2 percent advantage -- whose calculation is the subject of considerable disagreement in the pension and financial worlds -- is more than three times the finding of the Center for Retirement Research.
  
  On the Truth-O-Meter, we rate Building a Better Ohio’s claim Mostly False

  http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/11/building_a_better_ohio_says_pu.html
• QuakerOats

  http://www.ohiopoweredbymanufacturing.com/oma/issue_2_employees.pdf
• QuakerOats

  Dogg -- I assume you meant 'fairy tales' not "ferry tails".
  
  And the only people believing in fairy tales and living in fantasy land are public sector unions. The jig us up.