<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Clearing the Browser Tabs &#8211; A Win in Wisconsin Thursday Edition</title> <atom:link href="http://www.sundriesshack.com/2011/03/10/clearing-the-browser-tabs-a-win-in-wisconsin-thursday-edition/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2011/03/10/clearing-the-browser-tabs-a-win-in-wisconsin-thursday-edition/</link> <description>Delivering the Best of the New Media Since 2004.</description> <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 07:05:18 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator> <item><title>By: The Real Message of Wisconsin. &#171; Romanticpoet&#039;s Weblog</title><link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2011/03/10/clearing-the-browser-tabs-a-win-in-wisconsin-thursday-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-703986</link> <dc:creator>The Real Message of Wisconsin. &#171; Romanticpoet&#039;s Weblog</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:46:52 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=15367#comment-703986</guid> <description>[...] notes, it all happened without the loss of a single teacher&#8217;s job. The public sector unions spent months, and tens of millions of dollars in member dues, pushing the story that small government is [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] notes, it all happened without the loss of a single teacher&#8217;s job. The public sector unions spent months, and tens of millions of dollars in member dues, pushing the story that small government is [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Jimmie</title><link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2011/03/10/clearing-the-browser-tabs-a-win-in-wisconsin-thursday-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-701707</link> <dc:creator>Jimmie</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 23:30:32 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=15367#comment-701707</guid> <description>BY the definition that they can bargain for most of the other issues over which employees usually bargain with their employers. In fact, they have more collective bargaining power than their federal counterparts, and workers in several other states. They&#039;re doing just fine.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BY the definition that they can bargain for most of the other issues over which employees usually bargain with their employers. In fact, they have more collective bargaining power than their federal counterparts, and workers in several other states. They&#8217;re doing just fine.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: woodelf</title><link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2011/03/10/clearing-the-browser-tabs-a-win-in-wisconsin-thursday-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-701703</link> <dc:creator>woodelf</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 20:43:29 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=15367#comment-701703</guid> <description>Um, &quot;still have collective bargaining&quot;? By what definition? They may now bargain solely on wage, and no wage increase may exceed inflation, meaning they actually can&#039;t ever get a wage increase.  Their only choices are to have static wages (since they&#039;ll just keep up with the increase in cost of living) or decreasing wages. They can&#039;t even agree to take a temporary wage freeze in return for a bigger increase in the future, because no wage increase may exceed the rate of inflation. So if they *ever* have a wage increase less than the rate of inflation, it will be a functionally-permanent wage cut--can&#039;t even make it up in a boom year.
And how is it bargaining, when the workers have nothing on their side to bargain with? &quot;We&#039;d like to have a bigger wage increase next year, and, in return, we&#039;re willing to give up nothing, because we&#039;re not allowed to bargain on anything else.&quot; or &quot;We&#039;re willing to take a smaller wage increase [or a wage cut], so long as you give us, um, nothing.&quot; Let&#039;s be honest: this bill takes away all functional collective bargaining ability. Public-sector unions in WI now have about the same bargaining rights that you do when shopping at the grocery store. This is true whether you support or oppose that change. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Um, &quot;still have collective bargaining&quot;? By what definition? They may now bargain solely on wage, and no wage increase may exceed inflation, meaning they actually can&#039;t ever get a wage increase.  Their only choices are to have static wages (since they&#039;ll just keep up with the increase in cost of living) or decreasing wages. They can&#039;t even agree to take a temporary wage freeze in return for a bigger increase in the future, because no wage increase may exceed the rate of inflation. So if they *ever* have a wage increase less than the rate of inflation, it will be a functionally-permanent wage cut&#8211;can&#039;t even make it up in a boom year.</p><p>And how is it bargaining, when the workers have nothing on their side to bargain with? &quot;We&#039;d like to have a bigger wage increase next year, and, in return, we&#039;re willing to give up nothing, because we&#039;re not allowed to bargain on anything else.&quot; or &quot;We&#039;re willing to take a smaller wage increase [or a wage cut], so long as you give us, um, nothing.&quot; Let&#039;s be honest: this bill takes away all functional collective bargaining ability. Public-sector unions in WI now have about the same bargaining rights that you do when shopping at the grocery store. This is true whether you support or oppose that change.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Served from: www.sundriesshack.com @ 2012-05-26 03:50:44 by W3 Total Cache -->
