When times are good administrators and other non-union bureaucrats give themselves 10%, 20% or even 30% pay increases whereas unions get 2-3% every year. This keeps inflation on a more steady and stable pace. These contracts are negotiated in good faith and now they want to go back on them.

kiowamohican, I think if you really tried you could be more vague about unions. You sound like an absurd conservative catch phrase.

jvltransplant:
Good post. At one time unions were a very noble thing that helped the everyday Joe get better working conditions and wages. Now they are nothing more then a tool for political hacks to advance their self serving agenda all the while destroying business and enterprise.

It is good to see another union fail to look at the big picture. ALL companies are making cuts, freezing wages, and eliminating jobs (including my own this week). Somehow the concept of a union working for its members has changed to its members supporting the union. When will people learn?

Being a member of one of the public employee unions myself, it is interesting to see Jim Doyle stabbing his supporters in the back. He pandered something fierce for the union vote. I am proud to say that I voted against him every time. Oh you simpletons who voted for this worm, did you learn anything from this experience?

Pepster40 has hit on why the union will not agree to reopening the contract. If the contract is reopened, EVERYTHING is on the table, not just hourly pay. This includes the provisions for layoffs, seniority, grievances, etc.
IF the contract could be reopened with ONLY the 2% raise being discussed, there might be a chance the union would agree to consider it. But, that is not an option and as already pointed out, giving up the raise is no guarantee that layoffs will be prevented.

What some of you union bashing, scab workers don't understand is the union bargained for the raise. They gave up some other benefit or increase to get it. Maybe they gave up a vacation day for the raise. Should they give up the raise as well? No!!! We need to support unions so we can bring back the middle class.

How many DECADES has this state been in the "top 5" of highest taxers? At any point therein, these politicians that always claim to -- (1) Have our best interests at heart, and (2) Know better than us "boobs" how to run the government--could have (here's a novel concept) started governing/legislating responsibly! Now, the chickens "come home to roost", & it's everybody else' fault?

Those of you bashing the union should remember that many of the job and pay scale protections you enjoy were fought for by unions. You also may not know that state workers have for decades been accepting minimal pay increases, while legislators and other higher ups have been milking this state for all it is worth.

This is obvious by the number of newspaper articles about governmental waste, corruption, bad contracts and over spending by both parties for decades. Makes you wonder why candidates would spend millions of dollars to get a job that pays less than $150,000. Hummmm…

So much, for my ranting, just remember, once you reopen any contract EVERYTHING within that contract is negotiable. Meaning everything from pay, healthcare, retirement all the way down to simple things like job safety, as long as it is in the contract it can be removed and our government is way to good at taking things away from the people! Just think of all the programs / contracts the state can raid once they start.

I cannot believe all the union bashers out there. It must be just jealousy. If it wasn't for unions, EVERYBODY would be working for minimum wage.The union should stick to their guns. Look at Chrysler in Belvidere. A few weeks ago they agreed to concede many things in order to save jobs. What happened now? Many of them will be laid off anyway!

....so the next time the state's budget is OK, will they re-open the contract and give the workers an extra pay hike?

Also, last I heard, if the unions agree to give up the 2%, about 400 would be laid off, but if the union refuses to give in, it could be as high as 1,100 layoffs. This is obviously a sensitive subject as everyone in Wisconsin is struggling. Cutting on State workers won't accomplish anything, nor will cutting on private sector workers. I'm so tired of hearing of folks losing their jobs.
*
Remember, too, that Wisconsin was hit particularly hard last year from the flooding in the Dells. That flood almost single-handedly wiped out our tourism revenue. This budget problem isn't completely due to lack of fiscal responsibility and wasteful programs. I do agree, though, that many programs need to be reviewed and cut if deemed ineffective. No sense paying for something that isn't working to better our state.

I can't believe the people thinking unions are the root of all evil. There was a time in this country they were very much needed. Some of the issues the unions helped to correct have become law. Unions and employer agree to the terms of the contract. In a perfect world all employers will treat workers the same and compensate well for work well done. But we do not live in a perfect world. When business goes bankrupt, government has deficits, not all the blame goes to workers/unions. People in charge MAKE decisions. Management must share responsiblity.

sannio...if the State wanted to hire contractors to do the work its employees do, there is no way they could do it for half what State employees make. Pull your head out of the sand and think before you speak. An IT professional in the private sector makes almost triple that of an IT professional in State service. When you find someone who can fix your computer for $15 - $17 an hour, you let me know so I can call them. The GOP worshipers in this state are so clouded by their hatred of Gov. Doyle and the Dems that intelligent statements are becoming more and more scarce.

I am by no means a union supporter, actually quite the opposite. BUT, a contract is a contract and they should get their raise as they bargained for in their contract. They should however, not be surprised if a number of their "brothers" and "sisters" suddenly find themselves cooling their heels in the unemployment line as a result. Everything has consequences, unintended and otherwise - especially ELECTIONS.

Diamond Jim Doyle? Nice. I definitely don't think Doyle will be reelected & unfortunately, I think Scott Walker will be the republican's choice.

We still won't be able to dump Diamond Jim Doyle if the Republicans run a lame candidate. Sad to say, there are too many sheep in the electorate who will still vote their party, even if it re-elects a crooked or incompetent (or both) candidate. It would take an exceptionally good independent candidate (plus a video of the Republican candidate having consensual extramarital relations with the Governor in a foreign-made SUV parked on top of a baby outside a crack house) to break the Democratic/Republican hold on the Governor's office.

Wi wants to cut 5%-6% for next years budget. Mike Sheridan is on board. Don't know about Judy Robson. Contact your Senator or rep and let them know. The options are 5-6% cut or raise them taxes. Everyone should share the pain.

Good Point AmishBob. I can tell you that I do work for the state and, while I don't know the in's and out's of funding for all state employee positions, I promise you that, while the proposals of laying people off are still up in the air, the Governor's proposition of laying off state workers will not be as beneficial to the deficit as he indicates. However, I do agree with you regarding your point about trimming some of the state workforce.

Judy22: What I propose is instead of decrying about the contractors (which they obviously have no control) that they negotiate with the state on the things they can control. Now if I take the facts in the article at face value. It would appear that the union did not try to negotiate. If they did and the state said no way, then I would view this differently. As to other moneies involved, if the state were to trim their work force, I would think that would lead to the possibility of a reduction of funding. Since I don't work for the state, I do not know how these positions are funded. It would be nice if the Gazette were to provide a more in-depth breakdown of this and if there were any negotiations with the state.

Why not lay off 400 of the people they are contracting out of state?

AmishBob, no disrespect intended, but, what do you propose? If there was any way they could come up w/ some proposal that would save all of its members state jobs, I'm sure they would jump at the opportunity.

If you are a Union representative and are faced with the decision of giving up a 2% raise and MAYBE that will prevent state workers from being laid off; or, keeping the 2% raise, and people might be laid off or, they might not. What are you going to do? On the surface, the idea of laying off state workers sounds like a wonderful idea, but, remember that the majority of state workers are not solely funded on state dollars alone. There is a good deal of federal money that contributes to their pay. Even w/ laying state workers off, the effect it will have upon the state budget deficit is EXTREMELY minimal.

Judy22: Instead of just saying they won't refuse the pay raise unilaterally, the union could have negotiated that very thing to save all of their members jobs. That is the purpose of a union is it not?

It looks like Doyle simply phrased things the wrong way. He should have said, “Sorry, but we’re cutting the payroll for your state union workers by 2%. You can forgo the 2% raise, or I can lay off enough workers to recap the 2% cost. You pick.” The union might have considered a different answer then. rexkramer has a good point, the state does owe the union that raise, having negotiated in good faith. But it doesn’t owe anybody a job, and the union might want to go with the lesser evil here.

AmishBob, if only were that simple. Union reps. have no guarantee that jobs will be saved if they forego the 2% raise.

Let's see.... Accept not getting a 2% raise and everyone still has a job. Take the 2% pay raise and 400 people are without jobs. Sounds like a NO BRAINER to me......

While I consider myself a fiscal conservative I cannot blame the union on this one. These raises were bargained in good faith and the state should honor them. If and when the state's economy turns around would the unions be able to come back in mid-contract and demand a pay increase? Answer, no. The time to take this matter up is during the next contract negotiations. But, our Governor hasn't had to keep his word on one thing that he's said the past 6+ years so why should this be any different. Also, I seem to remember the state legislators being "forced" to take their last pay raise, but when it comes to the state workers, they should just give theirs back. I'm sorry, but this is a small part of the big economic picture in this state. Perhaps the Gov and all the spend first democrats and republicans in the legislature should have thought ahead a little bit when they were (and still are for that matter) spending like drunken sailors.

Unions may want to keep an eye on California.

Union workers: If I were King, you'd be laid off in a heartbeat! What makes you so damn special?

Diamond Jim your days are numbered.......see even the democratic unions don't like you anymore...........HA Ha Ha I can't wait till election day...........then your sorry hinder will be gone. (looks under the rock to make sure his wallet is still there) LOL

STAY SAFE!!!!!

Fire them all, then hire them through contractors for half the pay and benefits.

All computer IT staff, auditors, financial specialists, etc. are considered "white-collar" workers. The state has tons of IT contractors doing work that could and should be done by highly qualified state employees. Why? For the simple reason that higher ups believe that contractors that charge more than state employees earn MUST be better.