Union Activity in Wisconsin What Year is This

Union Activity in Wisconsin: What year is this?©

Mark Monroe

March 3, 2011

I was listening to the news the other night and I had to wonder what year I was living in, 2011 or 1803. I was caught in this time warp because in 1803, in the city of Brotherly Love (Philadelphia), there was a group of journeymen who were arrested, convicted, and fined for gathering together to influence their wages and working conditions (Cordwainers case). At the time the United States was operating off the English Common Law standard which stated that it was illegal for two or more people to meeting for the purposes of changing their station at work. When that practice was struck down in 1842, by the case of Commonwealth v. Hunt, the mechanism for blocking workers for expressing their situation was the Civil Conspiracy Doctrine. These tactics did not stop workers; it only leads to violent clash between labor and corporations. One of the most famous is the Homestead Incident, where the National Guard had to be called to secure the town, because of the explosive reaction of the strikers to the use of violence by the company.

Now the Governor of Wisconsin is using the threat of violence, by calling in the Wisconsin Army National Guard if anyone protests his plan to fix the State’s budget. In contrast, here is what the Chief of Police had to say about the protesters in Madison, “On behalf of all the law enforcement agencies that helped keep the peace on the Capitol Square Saturday, a very sincere thank you to all of those who showed up to exercise their First Amendment rights. You conducted yourselves with great decorum and civility, and if the eyes of the nation were upon Wisconsin, then you have shown how democracy can flourish even amongst those who passionately disagree.[1]” With no threat of violence looming, the Governor’s first statement is to use the National Guard against his employees and citizens of the state.

It is ironic that the public unions have their roots in Wisconsin. The following is from the American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees (AFSCME) web site. “The history of AFSCME began in 1932, as the country suffered through a severe economic depression, when a small group of white-collar professional state employees met in Madison, Wisconsin, and formed what would later become Wisconsin State Employees Union/Council 24. The reason for the group’s creation was simple: to promote, defend and enhance the civil service system. They also were determined to help spread the civil service system across the country.[2]” 79 years of history of working together is being washed away. It is unrealistic to place all the blame of the state’s financial trouble on the backs of the workers. There exists a long history of poor economic decisions, by Republican, Democrat, and Independent politicians that has wasted more money or prevented the state from collecting revenue then the salary and benefits of employees.

Union history is one of pushing existing power structure for fair treatment of workers. Historically, union leadership came from the members of the working class who did not or could not stand to be treated poorly anymore. The relationship took on a David verse Goliath persona. David was the worker and the Goliath was the corporation. The Corporation held all the resources while the Union’s cause was righteous, or that is how the myth goes. What the Union had on their side and still does today is the worker. Controlling the worker means that they control the flow of production. However, that history is being replaced with a new image of unions. The image is that the need is gone, due in part to the labor laws in place. There are some who believe that all Unions are capable of doing is taking money. The following is an entry to the web site promoting the Unionization of Starbucks’ employees. “Starbucks does not need a union. The only thing unions do now is take money out of your paycheck. They have outlived their usefulness. With the difficulty management has finding employees to fill positions, that in itself is power. Don’t let some Union rep make you think they can do anything for you. They not only can’t, most of the time they won’t. The only thing they will do is take your dues out of your paycheck.[3]” This is a popular agreement that does not have any factual data to support the claim, the proclamation is designed to place doubt in the minds of employee. In tough economic times, the question of where money is being spent is an effective tool.

There is a perception that labor unions, like civil rights legislation, have outlived its usefulness. The following is an announcement made by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) on union participation. “In 2008, union members accounted for 12.4 percent of employed wage and salary workers, up from 12.1 percent a year earlier, the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of workers belonging to a union rose by 428,000 to 16.1 million. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent, and there were 17.7 million union workers.[4]” Web sites like unionfacts.com claim that this drop in membership is proof that the workers no longer want to be represented by unions.

It is interesting that this site does not present any arguments why there is no longer a need for unions, only that unions are corrupt. Throughout anti-union propaganda, union leadership has gained the reputation of being corrupt and self-serving. This comes at the expense of the union members. The following is also off the unionfacts.com web site, which is addressing the number of Unfair Labor Practices (ULP), filled with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

“The vast majority of allegations said that members were the ones hurt by the union officials that are supposed to protect them.

The NLRB reported in 2005 that:

· Unions faced a total of 6,381 allegations

· 82% of charges against unions alleged illegal restraint and coercion of employees (by comparison, the leading allegation against employers — at 53% — was for refusal to bargain)

· 594 charges were for illegal union discrimination against employees[5]”

The author of that article would have people believe that “the vast majority” of the Unfair Labor Practices (ULP) complainants filed were against unions. The conclusion they want the reader to draw from this information, is that union representation is actively working against the union population. However, a review of the 2005 National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Annual reveals something different. “Alleged violations of the Act by employers were filed in 18,304 cases, a decrease of 8 percent from the 19,946 of 2004. Charges against unions decreased 8 percent to 6381 from 6917 in 2004.[6]” While the information presented on the unionsfacts.com site is technically true, the manner in which the information is presented is misleading. Of all the complainants with the NLRB only 25.8% were against unions and the majority of those complaints were filed by businesses not individuals and only 2.4% of all claims filed were done by union members against union. “For the year, the NLRB awarded backpay of $83.8 million. Reimbursement for unlawfully exacted fees, dues, and fines added about another $475,929. Backpay is lost wages caused by unlawful discharge and other discriminatory action detrimental to employees, offset by earnings elsewhere after the discrimination.[7]”

The other popular myth that has been promoted is that the only people who want to join a union are doing so to get out of work. They waste their time filing grievances or tying up management’s hand with insane work rules. Here is what one protester in favor of the Governor’s plan had to say about State Employees. In response to a Chicago Tribune article a reader writes, “We, the people, are paying your wages and we are getting ripped off by fat, lazy union workers who only keep their jobs because the ridiculous pensions they get.[8]” The tacit is to vilify the state employee. There is no doubt that some employees take advantage of the rules in the CBA, but these same employees would stretch the rules that no matter what system of controls were in place. The fact of the matter is management and labor both have to sign the agreement, so management had a say in the design of the working rules to be enforced. The vast majority of people want to come to work, do their job to the best of their ability and go home.

 

Here are some facts about the State of Wisconsin Employees; the chart [9] is showing a comparison of workers in the state of Wisconsin by educational attainment. As the educational level increases, the disparity between private and public employee also increases. “The figure below shows that when comparing the total compensation (which includes non-wage benefits such as health care and pensions) of workers with similar education, public-sector workers consistently make less than their private–sector peers. Workers with a bachelor’s degree or more—which constitute nearly 60% of the state and local workforce in Wisconsin—are compensated between $20,000 less (if they just have a bachelor’s degree) to over $82,000 a year less (if they have a professional degree, such as in law or medicine).[10]” There have been a couple of challenges thrown at the information provided by EPI. Most of them are easily explained by reading the information, how one cannot, which is the job security that comes with being a state employee. The argument goes that a tangible part of being a state employee is that is hard to fire them. There is no quantitative data that has been produced to support or discredit this claim.

What is really at stake here? “On Friday, union leaders in Wisconsin agreed to the part of Walker's bill that would require public employees to double their health insurance contributions and contribute 5.8 percent of their salary to their pensions. Walker has argued that concessions by public workers are necessary in order to help the state's financial situation.[11]” Since the Unions were willing to make concessions, why does the Governor continue to insist on breaking the Union? In a taped conversation with Governor Walker, he demonstrates his unwillingness to talk about compromise. “Legally, we believe once they’ve gone into session, they don’t physically have to be there. They just have to be in session for that day and take a recess, and the 19 Senate Republicans could go into action and they’d have a quorum because they started out that way,[12]” said Walker in the call. It is clear that he does not want to give the Democrats the opportunity to debate the issue.


In the same phone call, “Walker said he expected the anti-union movement to spread across the country and he had spoken with the governors of Ohio and Nevada. The man pretending to be Koch seemed to agree, telling Walker, "You're the first domino." "Yep, this is our moment," Walker responded.[13]” This would indicate his motivation is to weaken the Union. He tried to justify his action by comparing himself to another Republican, “Walker compared his stand to that taken by President Ronald Reagan when he fired the nation's air-traffic controllers during a labor dispute in 1981. "That was the first crack in the Berlin Wall and led to the fall of the Soviets," Walker said on the recording.[14]” Governor Walker needs to have a better understanding of history, a look at what happened with the air traffic controller’s strike shows that President Reagan was not successful in getting rid of a Union.

“Aug. 5, 1981: Most striking air-traffic controllers are fired. Reagan bans them from ever being rehired by the FAA. They are initially replaced by controllers, supervisors and staff personnel not participating in the strike and in some cases, by military controllers.

Aug. 17, 1981: The FAA begins accepting applications for new air-traffic controllers.

Oct. 22, 1981: The Federal Labor Relations Authority de-certifies PATCO. Later, new air-traffic controllers, hired in the wake of the strike, organize a new union to represent them, the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.

June 19, 1987: NATCA is certified as the sole bargaining unit for air-traffic controllers employed by the FAA.[15]”

Note that even though President Reagan was successful in breaking the PATCO, within his administration PATCO was replaced with NATCA. In addition, the situation was very different between releasing striking air-traffic controllers and the breaking all government unions.

The moral of this story is not simple. But, keep in mind from the late 1800’s to the Great Depression marked a period in this country where the greatest disparity between the rich and poor existed and for all intents and purposes there was no middleclass. At the time there was no significant labor movement to challenge the treatment of employees. When unions were able to influence the working condition and wages of employee, we saw the creation of the middleclass and the greatest period of industrial growth in this country, creating wealth for both industry and the workers. Today with the decline of union membership, we are seeing a historical increase in the disparity between the rich and poor, with a decline of the middle class that we have not seen since the Great Depression. As a country, whether we want to admit it or not, there are two groups that significantly and consistently influence our political process, they are big business and labor. With the constant attacks and reduction of labor’s influence, the laws which are created to protect workers are also starting to erode. The misconception that labor unions have no place in today’s high tech workplace is wrong. Labor’s influence is not just regulated to industrial type job; labor role is to speak for the worker when there are abuses of power and disparities in the workplace.

Nevertheless, unions in public service have been here for over 79 years, and they are not going away. The union has to continue to work with the government for the betterment of the people of Wisconsin and the Governor needs to understand that strong-arm tactics will have short-term effects, but will not balance the budget.



End Notes

 

[1] City of Madison News Release: SATURDAY'S CAPITOL SQUARE DEMONSTRATIONS: Law Enforcement Praises Protesters' Conduct. http://www.cityofmadison.com/news/view.cfm?news_id=2512. (accessed February 21, 2011)

[2] AFSCME: 75 Years of History. http://www.afscme.org/about/1028.cfm. (Accessed February 20, 2011)

[3] No need for union. http://www.starbucksunion.org/node/926

[4] UNION MEMBERS IN 2008. BLS. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm. January 28, 2009

[5] Unfair labor practices. http://unionfacts.com/articles/laborPractices.cfm

[6] Seventieth Annual Report of the National Labor Relations Broad: For the Fiscal Year ended September 30, 2005. Page 7

[7] IBID page 12

[8] Mayer, Jeff. Thousands of Wisconsin union workers protest budget plan. http://discussions.chicagotribune.com/20/chinews/sns-rt-usreport-us-wisconsitre71e7by-20110215/10. (Accessed February 26, 2011)

[9] Graph Source: http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/wisconsin_public_servants_already_face_a_compensation_penalty/. (accessed February 26, 2011)

[10] IBID

[11] Terkel, Amanda. Wisconsin Democratic Senators: We're Staying In Illinois Until Gov. Walker Agrees To Negotiate. The Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/20/wisconsin-democratic-senators-illinois_n_825748.html#107_gov-scott-walker-rejects-collective-bargaining-compromise. (accessed February 22, 2011)

[12] Democrats Wary Of Meeting Walker After Prank Call. http://www.channel3000.com/news/26995293/detail.html. (Accessed February 26, 2011)

[13]Associated Press. On Prank Call, Wisconsin Governor Discusses Strategy. Posted February 23, 2011 at 9:26 a.m., updated February 23, 2011 at 2:22 p.m. http://www.courierpress.com/news/2011/feb/23/wisconsin-democrats-filibuster-delay-anti-union-bi/. (Accessed February 26, 2011)

[14] IBID

[15] Timeline: America's Air-Traffic Controllers Strike. August 3, 2006. NPR. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5599271. (Accessed February 23, 2011)

 

© 2011 Mark Monroe

More by this Author


Comments 32 comments

HSchneider 5 years ago from Parsippany, New Jersey

Thank you Mark for this awesome history and analysis of the labor movement and its effects. It is obvious to most everyone that the Republicans want to break the back of the unions. They compose a large amount of the Democratic campaign contributions and this is an attack on that. My belief is that those conclaves the Koch brothers throw of conservative business and political leaders has formulated this strategy. They want to both break the unions to ease regulations on business and to hurt the Democrats. Unfortunately collective bargaining just went down in Ohio. I am proud of the Wisconsin union members standing up to Gov. Walker. His attack on them must be stopped or the middle class will disappear.


Mark Monroe profile image

Mark Monroe 5 years ago from Dover De Author

Thank you for taking the time to read my hub

Mark


Iraqvet32 5 years ago

Very good read Mark but I have to disagree. I am not one that defends a union very often and I am not now. When unions started forming in the 1800's, they had some very valid reasons. I cannot deny that fact. Unions today have evolved into massive money making machines, and not for the middle class worker. Our country is in a tough time right now as we are very close to bankruptcy. Cuts have to be made in all area's and we must tighten the belts. Instead of worrying about ourselves for once, we need to think of our country and how we can get it back on track. In it current state, we will wake up one morning and wonder where the USA has gone.


crystolite profile image

crystolite 5 years ago from Houston TX

Nice documentary,i enjoyed it.thanks


Jane 5 years ago

Iraqvet 32 I agree that during tough economic times we all have to do our share. However I do not see how denying the employee's the right to bargain, when the union has already agreed to the terms that the Governor wants. There is no savings for the State of Wisconsin.


Tom 5 years ago

Hi Mark,

Have you ever considered writing a history book on the origin of Union's? You can call it "American's struggles with the underclass." You'd make a mint and I'd be your first delighted customer. I profoundly enjoy your straight forward historical view of events and how you associate them with the past. It's quite impressive! Althought I've been following the events of Wisconsin, I had no idea how the ramifications of that Governor's actions might change history!

Thank-you very much!


Joe 5 years ago

The actions of Gov Wilson yesterday, proves that his actions were motivated by union busting verses buget concerns.

Good article you have touched on several important issues.


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 5 years ago from usa

Mark Monroe

GOOD HUB AGAIN

Just have to wonder who's busting who? THE LAWS FOR THE GOVERNMENT and the states regarding collective bargining are different.If the state was a private sector business,it would go out of business. The state (taxpayers ) are not a deep well for the unions to drain it dry.The state should not be referred as ''big business''.In reality the unions are fighting the taxpayers of Wisconsin, they pay the bills.


Huntgoddess profile image

Huntgoddess 5 years ago from Midwest U.S.A.

Union members ARE taxpayers.

Great hub, Mark. Up, awesome, useful, beautiful.


Mark Monroe profile image

Mark Monroe 5 years ago from Dover De Author

Huntgoddess

Thank you for reading my hub


Mark Monroe profile image

Mark Monroe 5 years ago from Dover De Author

Jon

Good to hear from you again.

I make my living off of arguing with Unions, and I am very good at my job. I have negotiated contracts and defended management in grievance hearings. Early in my career in Labor Relations I learned a very important word, “no”. When a request makes little or no business sense then I can say no, which is a part of negotiating. The state of Wisconsin’s financial troubles do not lie solely with the employees, years of bad decisions have created the problems. All you need to do is look at other states to see that placing the burden of recovering on the backs of state employees does not work.

Mark


Huntgoddess profile image

Huntgoddess 5 years ago from Midwest U.S.A.

Np, Mark. Great hub.


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 5 years ago from usa

Mark Monroe

''The state of Wisconsin’s financial troubles do not lie solely with the employees, years of bad decisions have created ''

THE BAD DECISIONS were made by corrupt politicians bought by the unions and the public sector unions. What’s happening today because of the economy ,the unions are being exposed for who and what they are today. The union members have not been told the truth of what the issues are all about. When public sector employees are making 25% more than the private sector ( the people who foot the bill), something is wrong. Politicians/ public servants have a fiduciary responsibility to spend the taxpayers money in a prudent, honest way for the benefit of the people

Every state in the union is experiencing the same problems, deficits partially caused by union pension funds. Billions of Stimulus Funds were spent on union pension funds and public sector job retainage.

Federal laws prohibit ‘’ featherbedding’’,in New York there are teachers being paid for not teaching in classes, they are on standby?

Apparently the union wouldn't except NO for an answer after 15 months of negotiating.


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 5 years ago from usa

MARK

I enjoy your hubs.

have a great day


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 5 years ago from usa

Mark Monroe

there is a problem in all cities with the unions.i wrote some time ago this response.

THE PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS

The average PAY IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR is $50,000+ $9,000 in fringe benefits = $59,000

The average pay in the PUBLIC SECTOR is $70,000+ $40,000 in fringe benefits = $110,000

The private sector unemployment is 9.7%+,the public sector unemployment is 3%. Something is wrong with the equations, can you agree.

Government is growing at a rapid pace, the private sector is going broke


Mark Monroe profile image

Mark Monroe 5 years ago from Dover De Author

Jon

Interesting statistics where did you get them?

Mark


Josak profile image

Josak 4 years ago from variable

"The union makes us strong!"


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 4 years ago from usa

Mark Monroe

''Interesting statistics where did you get them?''IT'S BEEN SO LONG AGO ,I wrote a reply '' the private sector jobs'' on 5/21/11.

The average PAY IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR is $50,000+ $9,000 in fringe benefits = $59,000

The average pay in the PUBLIC SECTOR is $70,000+ $40,000 in fringe benefits = $110,000

The private sector unemployment is 9.7%+,the public sector unemployment is 3%. Something is wrong with the equations, can you agree.

Government is growing at a rapid pace, the private sector is going broke.

In your report , can you get the amount of pension and social security dollars paid by employer ( public ), healthcare, insurance, vacations sick day benefits and other fringe benefits cost should be included when you quote the gross income of any person

Keeping in mind that the teachers pay is for approximately 9 months. In consideration, divide the full payment amount by 9 to get a monthly average than multiply that number by 12 to arrive at the average monthly pay amount.

The burden to keep the pension funds within government requires is what is causing cities, towns and states to go broke. The public sector relies on tax income, if income is down, layoffs or salaries need to be cut to provide basic services.

The government has not done anything to support private sector businesses that President Barak Obama promised. Congress calls extending unemployment benefits a job bill. they don't get it, people need jobs and all congress does is spend money with a false premise that they are saving jobs. the money is actually going to states to pay for public employees pay and benefits.

there is a major problem in Washington that must be corrected in the next election.


cfin profile image

cfin 2 years ago from The World we live in

Two degrees, public servant in Wisconsin and life is extremely difficult. Everywhere I go people have ridiculous misconceptions about my "benefits". It has gotten to the point where I can no longer serve the public and will be forced (as any decent employee is) to sell my soul and work for a bank or Law firm instead. They will pay me twice the amount at the very least (if I take my public service off of my resume)with the same benefits. It's just a shame to leave behind the position I have worked so hard for. A position that has nothing got to do with Unions, yet the unions seem to be all people see or think of once they hear where I work.

I CANNOT possibly receive a promotion. That is what current legislation has achieved. Instead, I would have to job hop and work with silly "classifications" to ever move up and achieve something in the public sector. Maybe if people took a step back and stop blabbing about Unions, they would see that no young graduate wants to work for the state anymore because there is now a huge stigma attached. No matter how hard I work, I cannot move up. Everywhere I look, their are false impressions and people spouting lies. Well, those lies affect real people and real families like mine(i.e Jon Ewall above).

And thanks to Act 10 and Act 32. I now have terrible compensation, average benefits, no possibility for promotion, no raise possibility, am forced to contribute over 6% of my paycheck to my retirement when I don't want to and am treated like trash for serving the public. And my exit strategy? Oh that's right, everyone hates me for serving the public so no one will hire me in the Public sector. The US has become so full of jealousy and hate for everyone and everything that it's disgusting.


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 2 years ago from usa

cfin

'' Everywhere I look, their are false impressions and people spouting lies. Well, those lies affect real people and real families like mine(i.e Jon Ewall above).''

Can you be more specific in what I have posted were lies I would like to respond to your accusations

There is a difference in public service and the private sector as I attempted to show.


cfin profile image

cfin 2 years ago from The World we live in

Go ahead and address these issues:

1. You said, "The average PAY IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR is $50,000+ $9,000 in fringe benefits = $59,000

The average pay in the PUBLIC SECTOR is $70,000+ $40,000 in fringe benefits = $110,000"

This is nonsense and a huge generalization. Is this state and federal combined? Does this include LTE's and student hourly workers at $8.00/hr or just full time employees V part time and full time in the private sector. Let me guess, it suits you so you don't know.

2. "The private sector unemployment is 9.7%+,the public sector unemployment is 3%. Something is wrong with the equations, can you agree."

I'm not sure how this statistic is even possible. 3% unemployment in the public sector? What? The unemployment rate is a percentage of the public out of work. This cannot possibly just apply to public or private as the public are not split into public or private workers at large. Hateful nonsense statement at its best.

It's always amazing how someone can get in someone's face with nonsense statistics that they made up.

3."Government is growing at a rapid pace, the private sector is going broke." Really? Is that why private company profits are at an all time high, as are the stock exchanges in all western countries.

4. When you say "government", do you mean the public sector? If so, the public sector has shrank in the US considerably in size over the last decade.

5. Do you also include those of the public sector putting their lives on the line to protect people like you?

6. "can you get the amount of pension and social security dollars paid by employer ( public ), healthcare, insurance,".

I pay $227 a month on health insurance which slightly makes up for my terrible pay. It was $211 in the private sector for the same coverage. It's mandatory that I have to pay over 6% of my income into my retirement every pay check. My social security contributed by my employer is the same as any other private sector employer would contribute (what a stupid question). You can go online and look up every employee working for my state, their income and then compare it to a private sector employee. Facts are facts.

7.''The state of Wisconsin’s financial troubles do not lie solely with the employees, years of bad decisions have created '', More nonsense. As a financial professional I can tell you that without as healthy amount of debt, which Wisconsin had, your credit rating won't look too hot. This is true for states and countries too. Further, Wisconsin is currently running a surplus (fact). The retirement fund is the 2nd most profitable in the US (fact) and has been for quite some time. It is actually recognized internationally as a respectable fund. The governer, who is republican, looked into the possibility of privatizing said fund. The committee determined that the current system was more cost effective.

Should I go on or are you an embarrassed troll?

Do I like unions? Heck no. Are you fighting against the wrong people? Yes, in fact you are just trashing the hard workers who keep the country together. People like me and my family. So before you go shooting your mouth off and copying and pasting trash, go educate yourself and target unions, not hard workers, who wanted to serve the people, but it's made impossible because of people like you hating on us.

Next time you see a teacher, a cop, a University professor, Navy Seal, nurse, doctor or some guy fixing the potholes on your road, go ahead and spout your nonsense at him face to face.


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 2 years ago from usa

cfin

The economy 2 years ago is much different from today. Attacking me won't solve your personal problems and situation

Wisconsin politics is of no concern to me as my greatest concern is the way the country is heading with the present administration and Congress's inability to work for the betterment of the people they serve.

there should be no question as to who are private sector workers. The public sector workers are workers who are paid by the people. Federal, state and cities are the public sector.

The figures are correct for the time written.


Mark 2 years ago

Cfn

Please remember the stated rules of engagement for this writer. Debate the ideas not attacks on the person.

Mark


cfin profile image

cfin 2 years ago from The World we live in

Mark, Quote my personal attack? I stated facts. I asked questions and made statements. So take your condescending, biased tone and order someone else around. Don't thread on me. Thanks.

Jon, your figures are nonsense and have no source. A law degree and years of professional research have left me with the ability to research deeply into these figures and your other claims. I guarantee they are nonsense. You are also free to answer my questions, or is that a one way street? And "attack"? Come down off your high horse, the air must be light up there.


Mark 2 years ago

Calling Jon an "embarrassed troll"

Mark


cfin profile image

cfin 2 years ago from The World we live in

The definition of a "troll" in 2014 is someone who copies and pastes false or misleading information across the internet to pick on a certain group of people or to generally annoy individuals. Calling someone a troll when there is proof of their copying and pasting misstatements of fact, dozens of times across many articles is hardly a personal attack. If you can find a more appropriate term for someone who carries out such actions, please feel free to let me know.

Definition:

troll

trōl/

verb

verb: troll; 3rd person present: trolls; past tense: trolled; past participle: trolled; gerund or present participle: trolling

1.

informal

To make a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.

Jon continues to spread and/or defend a ridiculous comment on the unemployment rate being different in the public and private sector.


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 2 years ago from usa

Mark Monroe

I reviewed my post above (2 yrs ago ) the figures were for federal government worker in relation to the private sector and never intended to meet all public sector entities. Sometime ago I did write a hub about the governor and unions attach on the capitol building

http://hubpages.com/politics/WisconsinGovernorWalk...

for past references

11/7/10Rand Paul federal worker pay questioned

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements...

8/13/10 USA Today federal workers earning double their private counterparts http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/economy/incom...

2014 I have used these figures (not mine pulled out of a hat ) Average federal worker $108,000 compared to $69,000 private sector. fringe benefits federal gets $40,000 private $9,000 PAY INEQUALITY ??


cfin profile image

cfin 2 years ago from The World we live in

You said nothing about federal government workers here. This article is about the State of Wisconsin and it's employees and as such, your "quotes" were aimed at those people. Either that or you are writing irrelevant comments on an article and spamming.

Even in regard to your comparison for Federal employees V Private employees it's ludicrous. Most Federal employees are skilled laborers or have a college education. Public sector, as I stated before includes fast food workers, part time retail employees and numerous others who are not eligible for fringe benefits. Your figures also take fringe benefits into account which again, is ludicrous because, as I stated above, many in the private sector work in jobs that don't qualify for fringe benefits i.e Walmart , McDonalds, Abrecrombie. You're comparing apples and oranges, cars and airplanes.

And an FYI, not only is Rand Paul a known plagiarizer, but a politician. His speech counts for nothing and anyone can see that it has to be one sided as he works for one side. \

And Jon, it might help to not generalize on millions of workers, especially seeing as your "public sector" generalization covers millions of employees in the public sector and armed forces who are not or choose not to be covered by a union. I'm one of them. So before you go spouting off stats, again, that you don't understand, don't categorize me and millions of my colleagues. We have no union. Just like some republicans are racist, some public sector employees have unions. It doesn't mean we are all racist now, does it Jon? Just like not all Public employees have unions. But see, you don't really differentiate. Instead you generalize and offend a great number of people.

This article is even about union abuse of employees. But again, your attacks are also against us. Thanks Jon.


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 2 years ago from usa

Cfin

who is us? Are you a member of the armed forces of the US?

Settle down, maybe one day you will wake up to reality?

The USA article had a graph showing federal state and private average wage comparisons, did you see it?


cfin profile image

cfin 2 years ago from The World we live in

Us, as in republicans. Let me guess, I am not allowed to be conservative because I work as an accountant for the State of Wisconsin. Or were you questioning my use of "us" as in, public employees which encompasses many, many people including.

And Again, Jon, You're not my boss, so try to stop bossing me around. Settle down? Good grief.

I see a graph showing FEDERAL wages which you are quoting on an article entitled "Union Activity in Wisconsin What Year is This", and which you are using to compare ALL public employees to ALL private workers (again apples and oranges). It seems like your mind is made up and you wish to continue your massive and unfounded generalizations and Tags. I am wasting my time even talking to someone who, even they have the ability to understand, keeps repeating themselves in a vein effort to assert a statistic into a topic that has no relevance.

My place as a conservative does not make me one sided. Yours clearly does. I take the other side of an argument, that clearly needs to be taken here.


JON EWALL profile image

JON EWALL 2 years ago from usa

Cfin

Sir, you apparently have a clouded opinion of what I have posted on this hub

IS the debate about unions? I do have experience with unions and their representatives

For your fine reading:

Special links

JOB STEWARD HNC Chicago CLAIM http://hubpages.com/business/UnionBusinessAgentRes...

JOB STEWART dismissal NNH NAPERVILLE http://hubpages.com/business/AUnionJobStewardDismi...

Union BUSINESS AGENTS STOR St Charles http://hubpages.com/business/UnionBusinessAgentsso...

UNION B A SOLVES FAA OFFICE Chicago http://hubpages.com/business/UnionBusinessAgentSol...

FAA GENERAL CONTRACTOR DISPUTE OFFICE EXPANSION Chicago http://hubpages.com/business/FAAGeneralContractorD...

For your information I am a fair man not a racist or a bigot. I hate no one and if I need to decide one way or the other, I will ,after looking at issues, make decisions based on HONESTY and Integrity of the issues at hand

If you are a conservative , as you say, you are one of a few who speaks of racism and hate in the manner you express yourself.

Have a great day. Wishing you the very best in the forthcoming days. Consider giving M M an apology for your postings


cfin profile image

cfin 2 years ago from The World we live in

Jon, I previously worked for the Department of Employee Trust Funds and am aware of what unions are capable of. I am anti union as I stated. Your arguments are not against unions but against all public workers. I never spoke of racism, instead used it as an example from something I had experiences earlier in the day and something you could relate to i.e a friend of mine running for assembly was called a racist because he is a republican and I argued on his behalf. It's a fair comparison to your generalization of all "public sector" employees. I could easily have given any other example.

As I stated, I don't expect you to change your mind on anything. I just wanted to point out that your statistics do not apply to me, as a public employee. I never claimed that you were a racist or a bigot. Why you question my political beliefs is beyond me though. More generalizations I guess. And an apology to the writer of an article on an open forum who made an attempt to censor my opinion and my factual defense of my position as a public employee against claims that I earn twice what my private counterparts earn. Apologize for correcting someone who claims that the private sector and public sector unemployment rate are different? And then states that they do so with integrity and honesty, even though I have proven this to be impossible.

Your arguments, even if they were true, represent a race to the bottom for all.

And you have a good day too.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working