Ohio Issue 2

[Hyperelastic]

@BobLibDem

I don’t recall anyone dying and making you king. It isn’t your place to decide if the teachers need a union. If they want to join one, it’s none of your fucking business. If they want to pay dues, it’s none of your fucking business. If the union wants to donate to politicians, it’s none of your fucking business. The question of the moment is do we want to destroy what has created the middle class? Do we want state governments to sabotage state revenue streams by cutting taxes for the fat cats and thus create a budget “crisis” to be balanced on the backs of the working class?

This is going down big time. By the actions of new Republican governors in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio, Obama can count on the electoral votes in these three states. Thanks a lot, rednecks!

Here comes the name-calling, because you don’t have a leg to stand on. Go ahead and let it all out. Have a nice little fit and then calm yourself down with some warm milk.

The middle class was created by capitalists, not unions. Unions produce nothing. They protect their members, a small minority, at the expense of everyone else. No, it’s worse than that. They protect a portion of their membership at the expense of the rest of their membership. Teachers who consider themselves professionals would never join OEA, but the law says they have to. It is not the state of Ohio stopping great teachers from making great money - it’s the OEA, which won’t let great teachers make great money unless shitty teachers can make great money too.

SB 5 will be repealed and the gravy train will steam on, gaining speed until it goes right off the cliff.

[Hyperelastic]

@BobLibDem

Teachers should be free to have a closed shop if they want to and pay dues if they want to and if the union wants to be active political that is their right.

God, I didn’t even see this one. Do you even know what a closed shop is? It is the opposite of freedom. It is compulsion. You probably think the North Koreans should be free to worship Kim Jong-Il, too.

[zamboniracer]

Today’s (11/6/11) Plain Dealer website has a good summary of Issue 2

Issue 2

What it does: Issue 2 lets voters decide whether to keep or repeal Senate Bill 5 - a historic rewrite of Ohio’s collective bargaining law, originally passed in 1983.

Issue 2:

• Reduces the collective bargaining power of about 360,000 public workers in Ohio. The current collective-bargaining law gives workers the right to negotiate on a broad scope of topics including wages, hours, working conditions and any provision from an expiring contract that an employer wants to change. Under SB 5, workers no longer have the right to bargain changes from a previous contract. Certain topics that have been central to negotiations, such as health care benefits, can’t be bargained anymore. Several other topics can be bargained only if management agrees. These topics, known as “management rights,” include the right to decide employee qualifications, starting and quitting times, work assignments, promotion rules and other topics.

• Bans public-worker strikes.

• Eliminates binding arbitration, a process allowing a third party to impose a settlement when a union and management reach an impasse, and replaces it with a process that gives a governing body, such as a city council, the final say on a union contract.

• Eliminates “fair-share fees” - required payments to unions from workers who choose not to join their union. Fair share fees currently can be included in a collective-bargaining agreement as a term of employment.

• Places caps on paid personal days (three), paid holidays (12) and the amount of unused sick and vacation time a worker can cash in upon retirement.

• Eliminates automatic pay raises based on seniority and establishes a performance-based pay system.

• Prohibits seniority from being the sole factor considered when workers are laid off.

• Requires public workers to pay at least 15 percent of their health care costs and to contribute at least 10 percent of their salary toward their pension.

Vote “yes” if . . . you believe the current collective bargaining law hamstrings public employers, forcing them to raise taxes and/or cut services to cope with rising personnel costs. If you want to set minimum standards for how much public workers pay for health care and retirement benefits. If you think public workers have too much collective bargaining power. If you want to weaken public unions.

Vote “no” if . . . you think public workers should retain the collective bargaining power given them in the current law. If you are concerned that public employers would recklessly cut services - Issue 2 opponents say claim there will be fewer safety forces on the job - with their new authority. If you consider of the changes listed above unacceptable.

Link

[Elendil_s_Heir]

CNN.com on the Issue 2 vote and next year’s presidential election: http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/07/opinion/sracic-ohio-first-skirmish/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

[That_Don_Guy]

@Hyperelastic

Nobody is saying teachers can’t have a union, only that the union can’t “collectively bargain” with, i.e. shake down, the state.

Pardon me for asking, but if the union can’t take measures as a unit, then what is its purpose? (BTW, the federal government tried limiting the amount of sick leave a retiring employee could “cash in” - namely, none - but when it discovered a correlation between closeness to retirement and sick leave usage, it changed its mind.)

Why do I have the feeling that…

(a) regardless of the result, the losing side is going to claim that it’s not really what the people wanted as the ballot was confusing (“does ‘yes’ mean ‘yes, I want to repeal the law’ or ‘yes, I want to keep it in place’?”) - and before you say, “It’s quite clearly marked as to what ‘yes’ and ‘no’ mean,” remember that nobody thought the “butterfly ballot” would be a problem in 2000 either;

(b) in fact, either side (if not both) is calling radio talk shows and trying to make it sound like a yes/no vote is the opposite of what it really means (although this can backfire, as if somebody says, “I want to repeal the bill, so I’m voting ‘yes’,” somebody who wants the bill kept in place might hear it and end up voting “no”)?

[Hyperelastic]

@That_Don_Guy

Pardon me for asking, but if the union can’t take measures as a unit, then what is its purpose?

Unions can still take measures as a unit without being able to hold the public hostage via a strike. The state would be unwise to completely ignore the demands of any large voluntary group of employees speaking with one voice. There are lots of interest groups that exercise lots of influence over lots of politicians without having a chokehold on a large part of the functioning of the state government.

Besides, teachers and other state employees who want to be treated as professionals should think twice about joining a union. They should call it a professional association and limit its activities to education advocacy instead of pocketbook issues.

(BTW, the federal government tried limiting the amount of sick leave a retiring employee could “cash in” - namely, none - but when it discovered a correlation between closeness to retirement and sick leave usage, it changed its mind.)

Maybe people are sicker the closer they are to retirement. If not, they ought to reduce the amount of sick leave people get. You can’t abuse it if you don’t have it.

This issue is going to fail absent some totally unexpected development in the next 12-24 hours, but even if it passes, the effects would depend greatly on which party was in control of the state government. Democrats would either overturn it or circumvent it, for instance by giving the unions raises to compensate for the increased insurance and pension contributions the law requires.

One thing I am not clear on is technically how, if the issue fails, this would result in the overturning of SB5. How can a failed issue result in an action being taken?

[Fear_Itself]

@Hyperelastic

Besides, teachers and other state employees who want to be treated as professionals should think twice about joining a union. They should call it a professional association and limit its activities to education advocacy instead of pocketbook issues.

How then should teachers address pocketbook issues, if not through a union or professional association?

[Chronos]

All power that unions have to do anything ultimately stems from the power to strike. If you take away the power to strike, then the union no longer exists.

Besides, it’s absurd to think that you can prohibit strikes, anyway. What do you do if all of the teachers (or at least, a big chunk of them) all decide to take sick days at the same time? Force them into the schools at gunpoint?

[Da_Mikster]

@Brandus

Of all things to rage against in this country, It’s disheartening that some have landed on teachers salary as the most egregious. The vast majority are severely underpaid for bearing the responsibility of preventing us from being a nation of idiots.

Sorry, we ARE a nation of idiots… with really screwed up values.

And it isn’t the teachers’ faults.

It’s everyone’s - the parent too busy to parent, or who tries to be their kids’ “friend”. The popular culture that glorifies the gangsta, the smartass, and the skank. Even the pollie who puts “keeping taxes low” ahead of paying teachers what they’re worth, or providing safe playgrounds.

And yes, the whole “You were screwed, so the best way to get even is to screw someone else” mentality being pushed by the Republicans IS really sleazy.

Unions are neither evil, nor a panacea. If employers were naturally fair, they wouldn’t exist. Google “Triangle Shirtwaist” and see what glorious golden era the union busters want to return us to.

[Da_Mikster]

I just wanted to add: the “Only works 180 days” thing is a red herring. They have CHILDREN IN CLASS 180 days, yes. They also have in service days, continuing education workshops, unpaid prep days, stuff to grade nearly EVERY night, conference nights, etc.

And the ‘average Joe’ only works 250 days, often gets overtime if he works more, doesn’t work off the clock at all, doesn’t have to keep paying for more college credits as a term of employment… and doesn’t have to put up with a bunch of mannerless turds, OR their half feral offspring.

IMHO it kind of balances out…

[candide]

@Hyperelastic

One thing I am not clear on is technically how, if the issue fails, this would result in the overturning of SB5. How can a failed issue result in an action being taken?

I’m voting no.

Referendum and recall, to answer Hyperelastics’ question occurred during the Progressive age of the 1920s and 1930s when voters began to realize that they had power and could change policy. They wrote into state constitutions the ability to change laws that were deemed detrimental to public good.

I’m going to vote against Issue 2 because I believe the Republicans who control Ohio, and will continue to control the state for years, want to gain control of the public pension funds of teachers, cops, firemen and everyone else they can.

With unions that have been sufficiently weakened, It will be easy to loot those pension funds, incorporate them into the general funds for the state and make themselves look like fine stewards of the public coffers. It will be a huge lie, though. Teachers and public employees will not be able to remove their funds.

Kasich doesn’t care. To him it’s about making the bottom line look good. To him, his constituents are not teachers, cops, workers in Ohio, his constituents are those guys who are going to bankroll his next election. They’re a hell of a lot richer than teachers.

Do any of you remember Tom Noe. It was under the oversight of the last Republican governor, the lovely Bob (only indicted once) Taft, that we saw a public pension fund looted. That was before the crash, by the way.

And, let’s stop talking about striking. According to state law, public unions can’t strike.

So vote No on this inane law. It hurts your friends.

[BobLibDem]

@Hyperelastic

Here comes the name-calling, because you don’t have a leg to stand on. Go ahead and let it all out. Have a nice little fit and then calm yourself down with some warm milk.

The middle class was created by capitalists, not unions. Unions produce nothing. They protect their members, a small minority, at the expense of everyone else. No, it’s worse than that. They protect a portion of their membership at the expense of the rest of their membership. Teachers who consider themselves professionals would never join OEA, but the law says they have to. It is not the state of Ohio stopping great teachers from making great money - it’s the OEA, which won’t let great teachers make great money unless shitty teachers can make great money too.

SB 5 will be repealed and the gravy train will steam on, gaining speed until it goes right off the cliff.

If you have health care, it’s because enough union people took the heat and went on strike and made it so. If it was not for unions, companies could dictate the terms of every employee at will. You can worship at the false altar of free market all you want, but the free market only works when two parties are on equal terms. Take away the union, and you’re at the mercy of people whose aim in life is to exploit the fruits of your labor. Capitalist didn’t give a flying fuck about creating a middle class, they were forced to stop paying slave wages because of unions.

[What_the]

Why didn’t SB5 treat the police and fireman dif than teachers and secretaries? The former have workplace and safety issues that the others don’t.

[Jman]

The lack of reality in this thread is astonishing. I do not know enough about firefighters and police to argue their points, but I’m the husband of a teacher, and the son and brother of teachers, so I know a fair bit about how public education works in this state.

Anyone who thinks that teachers are riding the gravy train has a seriously distorted view of reality. Teachers make far less than they should for the amount of work and amount of crap they have to put up with. The average teach works 7 hours in the classroom, two to three hours after school, and (in the case my my wife who is a band and chior director), many evenings and weekends. In fact, my wife works more days, and by FAR more hours than I do in my job as an engineer and makes significantly less money for doing so, despite having a masters degree.

Yup, with 11 years of experience, significant after school, weekend and summer responsibilities, and a masters degree (which she go no assistance for from her employer), she’s making $49K. While she wasn’t required to get her masters, she was required to pay for college credit every year to maintain her license, and it ended up being more economical for us to just have her enroll in a masters program to actually get something out of the thousands of dollars out of pocket we were required to spend just to keep her job. As an engineer, I have continuing education requirements as well, but my employer pays for these. With her? We’ve spent $16,000 out of pocket over the last 4 years in her education. About $10,000 was voluntary, so she could get her masters instead of just continuing on, but $6,000 would have been required anyway, and even though she has the degree now, we still need to pay for additional college credit out of pocket for her to maintain her license. Work wise, during a typical marching band season, she works on average 65 hours a week. Know what the marching band supplemental wage is? $1100 a season. For approximately 480 hours of extra work…that’s approximately $2.30 an hour.

And about those outrageous health benefits teachers are getting? Yeah, my wife’s health plan is awesome. We pay a little more than I would pay at my work for a far better plan. But the key here is that due to budget restrictions, the plan they have is a direct result of collective bargaining as an EXCHANGE for no pay raises. The district didn’t want to pay them more, not even enough to keep up with inflation, so they offered to increase benefits in exchange, all while giving administrators nice pay hikes each year. So, while the average teacher in the district is making the exact same salary as they did 5 years ago (which is effectively LESS due to inflation), the administrators have gotten raises. If SB5 stands, they will likely slash the health benefits, offer no pay raises (or reduce pay), continue to increase administrator pay, and the teachers will have absolutely NO recourse since they will be forbidden from striking. Also, health benefits for teachers are pretty much a necessity, as they are exposed in confined spaces to 200-400 people every day…they get sick a LOT more than the average worker.

The result? Over time, good teachers are going to get out of the profession and overall education is going to tank.

Now, I agree that it is far too difficult to fire incompetent teachers. I also am in favor of some sort of merit based pay scale. The problem is, I have yet to see a good way for a merit pay scale for teachers to be implemented. SB5’s provisions call for parents to help evaluate teachers. The result of this will be teachers giving parents everything they want in order to get good evaluations, which will result in garbage education. I have heard innumerable instances of complete garbage parenting in response to teachers. My wife actually had a parent e-mail the superintendent complaining about my wife because she had the audacity to mark her child down in class participation for not having a writing implement…for 5 consecutive days.

If parents decide who the good teachers are, it will destroy public education. Likewise, the reason it is hard to fire teachers is that every year, EVERY teacher has some parent (likely multiple) absolutely irate about something they ‘did to their child’ in the class. Breaking the union’s back will make it much easier for good teachers to get fired due to idiot parents who raise enough stink about their kid, even when the teacher did everything right. I’m OK for reform in this area, as there are too many incompetent teachers who get to keep their job as a result of the current system, but SB 5 is NOT the answer.

[Captain_Amazing]

@Chronos

All power that unions have to do anything ultimately stems from the power to strike. If you take away the power to strike, then the union no longer exists.

Federal unions can’t strike, and most of them can’t collectively bargain for pay or benefits. They, do, however, represent their members and their member’s interests.

[Hyperelastic]

@BobLibDem

If you have health care, it’s because enough union people took the heat and went on strike and made it so. If it was not for unions, companies could dictate the terms of every employee at will. You can worship at the false altar of free market all you want, but the free market only works when two parties are on equal terms. Take away the union, and you’re at the mercy of people whose aim in life is to exploit the fruits of your labor. Capitalist didn’t give a flying fuck about creating a middle class, they were forced to stop paying slave wages because of unions.

The only reason employers offer health insurance is that it was one of the few incentives they could give during WW II when wage controls were in place. When unions went through their truly militant phase in the 1890s-1930s, health insurance was hardly even on the table. It was all about wages and work rules.

Calling the wages resulting from a free labor market “slave wages” is rich, considering we have a history of actual slavery in this country. If you think your wages are too low, find another job. Unless employers are conspiring to hold down wages (and this does happen, through blacklists, no-compete contracts, etc.) there is no alternative for them but to pay a little more than the other guy if they want you.

[Hyperelastic]

@Fear_Itself

How then should teachers address pocketbook issues, if not through a union or professional association?

Well, in most jobs, you make more money by working harder and maintaining/improving your value to the company. Of course, that only works if you actually incentivize these things, which the unions have always blocked whenever possible.

[Hyperelastic]

@candide

I’m going to vote against Issue 2 because I believe the Republicans who control Ohio, and will continue to control the state for years, want to gain control of the public pension funds of teachers, cops, firemen and everyone else they can.

With unions that have been sufficiently weakened, It will be easy to loot those pension funds, incorporate them into the general funds for the state and make themselves look like fine stewards of the public coffers. It will be a huge lie, though. Teachers and public employees will not be able to remove their funds.

SB5 has nothing to do with any of this, and it is not the unions, but the law that prevents public funds from being “looted”. Tom Noe got a long prison sentence for what he did.

Kasich doesn’t care. To him it’s about making the bottom line look good.

For God’s sake, somebody has to.

And, let’s stop talking about striking. According to state law, public unions can’t strike.

Because SB5 banned it! No on Issue 2 will make strikes legal again.

[Jman]

@Hyperelastic

Well, in most jobs, you make more money by working harder and maintaining/improving your value to the company. Of course, that only works if you actually incentivize these things, which the unions have always blocked whenever possible.

Come up with a fair and reasonable way to implement merit based pay for teachers that won’t completely castrate them in the classroom, and I think most teachers would be on board. Unfortunately, SB5s method will reward teachers who coddle parents rather than actually teaching students and holding them to a standard.

[Ruby_Slippers]

It’s interesting to note that most of the people posting here who actually live in Ohio have said they will vote NO on Issue 2. And I’m proud to be counted among them. Especially after hearing that some Ohio legislators of the Republican variety have not only voted against cutting their own pay but have had the audacity to say they earn their pay – presumably implying that teachers, police, fire fighters and the rest do NOT earn theirs. These legislators need to remember that if the state is in such dire straits that public employees must take pay cuts, those legislators are also public employees. If they’re going to vote to cut the pay of their colleagues, they should step to the front of the line.