Senate Bill 5 Targets Collective Bargaining for Elimination!

• BRF

  

  SB5 is going to bring out very bad things. As a Republican AND a Union member, I understand where this is coming from and I also take into account the history of Unions in our country. To say things like "welcome to our world now" and "it's about time this happened" are moot points to Union members, IMO...of course. It is going to get even uglier.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  There were earlier posts with some people claiming this was nothing but a political war. I'm actually beginning to agree with them!
  
  The History of OAPSE
  

  
  During the 1990's, the union fared serious threats from private companies seeking contracts from school boards to provide services traditionally preformed by OAPSE/AFSCME members. At the same time, OAPSE/AFSCME and every other education organization in the state were embroiled in a decade-long fight over the inadequacy of school funding and the crisis it created in the public schools. OAPSE/AFSCME has fought fiercely and successfully on both fronts at the same time that its organizing successes began to mount. Political and legislative programs were improved by the adoption of a more aggressive approach toward electing public officials at every level of government who support the interests of our members

  
  At first, I was skeptical. But after seeing similar statements on just about every similar site that I looked at, I now have zero skepticism left.
• stlouiedipalma

  How long before we see ad banners on this site ripping the public employees? We see all the anti-Obama stuff, I figure the other isn't far behind.
• dwccrew

  

  I Wear Pants;698363 wrote:There really should be a requirement of at least a bachelors degree to be a cop.

  
  Agreed.
  
  

  Belly35;698446 wrote:I'm all for BS5 and happy it passed ... kinda like &#8220ay to Play” glad those of you in the Public Sector are joining the rest of the team.
  Welcome to the real world ….

  Winning....duh
  

  coach_bob1;698745 wrote:My wife just saw how much her pay will be cut. She currently makes $20.41 per hour. Her pay will be cut to $12.95 per hour. And we have been informed that our daughter's occupational therapy will not be covered.

  
  Are you implying that this is happening because of SB5?
  
  If you are I'm calling bullshit on this one. No one knows how the chips are going to fall yet.
• LJ

  

  stlouiedipalma;698812 wrote:How long before we see ad banners on this site ripping the public employees? We see all the anti-Obama stuff, I figure the other isn't far behind.

  
  Blame Google
• Skyhook79

  

  coach_bob1;698745 wrote:My wife just saw how much her pay will be cut. She currently makes $20.41 per hour. Her pay will be cut to $12.95 per hour. And we have been informed that our daughter's occupational therapy will not be covered.

  
  Here is the entire Bill and i do not see anything like you are describing. Good luck though it is 500 pages but the Salary schedules are there and Collective bargaining for salaries is still intact.
  
  http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/BillText129/129_SB_5_PS_Y.pdf
• CenterBHSFan

  

  coach_bob1;698745 wrote:My wife just saw how much her pay will be cut. She currently makes $20.41 per hour. Her pay will be cut to $12.95 per hour. And we have been informed that our daughter's occupational therapy will not be covered.

  Seems like some person/group is getting paid to work folks up into a lather.
  
  They're doing their job.
• O-Trap

  

  stlouiedipalma;698629 wrote:ernest,
  
  
  I have a great deal of sympathy for anyone who is looking down the barrel of a pay cut or a potential job loss. It's very difficult and stressful. I'm sure it's made even more so when we have the equivalence of class warfare, when it seems that everyone is treating public employees as thieves of some sort.
  
  That said, you've come to the wrong forum if you are looking for sympathy. I think the official Ohio Chatter policy on sympathy is something like this:
  
  "If you're looking for sympathy, you'll find it in the dictionary somewhere between shit and syphillis."
  
  I don't agree with it, but it is what it is. A lot of folks here seem to embrace that philosophy though.

  One can certainly sympathize with the situation, but let me use a more extreme parallel from the movie 'The Replacements'. When the NFL players are being asked about striking, one of them uses the line (pardon me if I butcher it): "Do you know how much it costs to insure a Ferrari?"
  
  In the example, people of a remarkably better-than-average sitz im leben are absurdly out of touch with how the rest of the country lives, and what they perceive to be hardship is still considered luxury by the rest of society.
  
  On a lesser scale, it's the same idea. Having a pay freeze alone would be considered by many to be a wonderful luxury. Some view $12.50 an hour as a hardship, while many other see it as a norm.
  
  To hear complaints about the same things that many of us would consider a blessing can be incredibly aggravating, as many will be thinking, "Why on EARTH are you complaining? Don't you see how lucky you are?"
  
  That isn't to say that they don't like any individual in that position. It's the position itself that can be aggravating.
  

  coach_bob1;698745 wrote:My wife just saw how much her pay will be cut. She currently makes $20.41 per hour. Her pay will be cut to $12.95 per hour. And we have been informed that our daughter's occupational therapy will not be covered.

  Ah. Extrapolated out, that's close to what I make.
  

  stlouiedipalma;698812 wrote:How long before we see ad banners on this site ripping the public employees? We see all the anti-Obama stuff, I figure the other isn't far behind.

  AdSense isn't really anything anyone here gets to control. That's controlled in Silicon Valley.
  

  CenterBHSFan;698916 wrote:Seems like some person/group is getting paid to work folks up into a lather.
  
  They're doing their job.

  It does seem to be working.
• CinciX12

  

  I still see both sides of the issue. The concessions that were made were a slap in the face. Nothing that the opponents of the billed cared about were allowed to be bargained for lol, so Kasich is crazy for thinking people don't realize this when he says he made it bi-partisan.
  
  Bottom line to me though is that passing by a single vote was very telling. I was a little shocked by it and thought it would be a trainwreck and go completely partisan other than maybe 1 or 2 senators.
  
  We can just repeal it when the Dems take everything back over. Then vice-versa. The circle jerk must continue for infinity and beyond boys and girls. Because that is all we have figured out how to do since 1776. Have a bad ass military and argue about the most pointless shit on the face of the planet.
• bases_loaded

  

  stlouiedipalma;698812 wrote:How long before we see ad banners on this site ripping the public employees? We see all the anti-Obama stuff, I figure the other isn't far behind.

  
  You mean like the "Angy Buckeyes" Ad that was on top of the page until the vote?
• Thread Bomber

  

  While I do not approve of the way that this is being handled, I am not opposed to taking away collective bargaining from people on the public dole. Bargaining in the public sector is not bargaining, it is incestuous. The Public labor units contribute in PACS to get their supporters elected, and then the elected officials "negotiate" with the unions and say OK.
  
  In the private sector. the negotiations are truly adversarial. The negotiator for the private company negotiates for the interests of his company and has to be held accountable for his action to the board of directors or the owner. In the public sector, the negotiator is accountable to no one, and he does it with OUR money.
  
  
  The private sector has to deal with real market conditions and has to react in order to be profitable or survive. The Public union employees tell their employers "tough titties, if you dont have enough money get more from somewhere, We don't care".
• coach_bob1

  Trying to find the source right now. It was a pay-grade chart that was published in the Columbus Dispatch yesterday. As far as the insurance goes, we recieved a letter in the mail from HR explaining what the proposed changes were. Also, it is possible the current contract does not have to be fulfilled if a fiscal state of emergency is declared.
• coach_bob1

  Found the source of the graphic. Sec 124.15 of SB 5. My wife is pay grade 31 step 7.
  http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/BillText129/129_SB_5_PSC_N.html
• coach_bob1

  sleeper;698768 wrote:What does she do for a living? Who did she hear this from?

  
  She works for the Bureau of Disability Determination. She makes medical decisions on whether an applicant is qualified to Social Security Disability.
• Thread Bomber

  

  coach_bob1;699169 wrote:Trying to find the source right now. It was a pay-grade chart that was published in the Columbus Dispatch yesterday. As far as the insurance goes, we recieved a letter in the mail from HR explaining what the proposed changes were. Also, it is possible the current contract does not have to be fulfilled if a fiscal state of emergency is declared.

  WE are there now, only it has not been formally declared
• ernest_t_bass

  

  Who gets to declare a fiscal state of emergency? The districts or the state?
• coach_bob1

  ernest_t_bass;699218 wrote:Who gets to declare a fiscal state of emergency? The districts or the state?

  
  The state.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  The unions fighting this aren't being honest with the people they "represent". If somehow a ballot initiative overrides what the legislature is doing and reinstates any savings being made, the ONLY alternative for the governor and school districts will be layoffs.
  
  Look at what's happening in Wisconsin where the union is basically saying to Gov. Walker: go ahead and lay off 1,500 employees, rather than make these changes.
  
  The union DOESN'T GIVE A DAMN IF YOU LOSE YOUR JOB, so long as they win and keep power. After all, it won't be the union bosses who lose their six figure salaries, it will be the same middle class folks they SAID they were protecting by blocking the efforts of Gov. Walker to save money.
  
  Look for the same scenario to develop in Ohio and at a lot of school districts if the unions are successful. Thousands of people will end up getting laid off.
  
  But hey -- at least the union will have won the day.
  
  Won't that make you feel a whole lot better?
• ernest_t_bass

  

  coach_bob1;699227 wrote:The state.

  
  I've said this about 5 times before. My district operates in the black. If we continue to operate in the black (even after budget cuts), should we pay the price for other districts in the red? Honest question, not being trite.
• ernest_t_bass

  

  Writerbuckeye;699251 wrote:The unions fighting this aren't being honest with the people they "represent". If somehow a ballot initiative overrides what the legislature is doing and reinstates any savings being made, the ONLY alternative for the governor and school districts will be layoffs.
  
  Look at what's happening in Wisconsin where the union is basically saying to Gov. Walker: go ahead and lay off 1,500 employees, rather than make these changes.
  
  The union DOESN'T GIVE A DAMN IF YOU LOSE YOUR JOB, so long as they win and keep power. After all, it won't be the union bosses who lose their six figure salaries, it will be the same middle class folks they SAID they were protecting by blocking the efforts of Gov. Walker to save money.
  
  Look for the same scenario to develop in Ohio and at a lot of school districts if the unions are successful. Thousands of people will end up getting laid off.
  
  But hey -- at least the union will have won the day.
  
  Won't that make you feel a whole lot better?

  
  I don't disagree with this statement one bit. I'm FOR getting rid of union big wigs and strong arm tactics. I'd rather see my "union" contributions go towards a local association, if I have to make them.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Your scenario isn't going to happen, though.
• ernest_t_bass

  

  Writerbuckeye;699260 wrote:Your scenario isn't going to happen, though.

  
  Believe me, I know that. Never will.
• O-Trap

  

  CinciX12;699048 wrote:Have a bad ass military and argue about the most pointless shit on the face of the planet.

  I have so much love for the way you put this. It encapsulates the state of our nation so well. Enough military to be left alone so we can argue about minutia.
  

  ernest_t_bass;699253 wrote:I've said this about 5 times before. My district operates in the black. If we continue to operate in the black (even after budget cuts), should we pay the price for other districts in the red? Honest question, not being trite.

  I don't think you should. Not your district's fault that other districts aren't being responsible.
  
  Then again, I'm coming from an "every-man-for-himself" mentality. The reason I don't think your district should have to shoulder a portion of the collective fiscal problem is the same reason I don't think an individual employee should be forced to "average out" with every other employee with whom they are part of a collective.
• derek bomar

  

  As an aside, I had a 350 lb middle school gym teacher (female). Boy was she ugly.
• O-Trap

  

  derek bomar;699491 wrote:As an aside, I had a 350 lb middle school gym teacher (female). Boy was she ugly.

  I had a 500+ pound Athletic Director. He was a good guy.
  
  Thankfully, he's lost considerable weight since then, as well.
  
  I don't get the correlation to the topic, but what the hell, right?