Wisconsin unions start feeding on each other

A Union laying off staff illegally

US News • September 2011 • Views: 1,252

If you want a good measure of how deeply the collective bargaining bill in Wisconsin has disrupted public sector unions, there is no better example than the Wisconsins Education Association Council (WEAC).

Last month WEAC announced that it was laying off 40% of its staff. With little over which to collectively bargain, and with dues no longer withheld from paychecks, the need for and sustainability of a union bureaucracy could not be justified.

Now WEAC is being boycotted by National Staff Organization (NSO), a union representing educational union employees.

Isn’t that great, education union employees have their own union? Is there a union for employees of education union employee unions?

legalinsurrection.com

-4

Recent Pages by Buck (Buck):
'Israeli Apartheid? I Know What Apartheid Really Is' Guess Who's Valedictorian at Israel's Top Medical School? The Most Racist/Misogynist Commercial In History

Jump to bottom

12 comments

Bob Levin Tue, Sep 13, 2011 5:29:52pm

I think you’re confusing ‘feeding on each other’ with ‘struggling to survive’. This isn’t a healthy economic sign in any way.

Lidane Tue, Sep 13, 2011 5:37:17pm

re: #1 Bob Levin

Buck doesn’t care. As long as he can post something against the unions, that’s all that matters.

Bob Levin Tue, Sep 13, 2011 6:15:07pm

re: #2 Lidane

I think he’s a softie right under the surface, or maybe it’s ‘left’ under the surface.

Buck Tue, Sep 13, 2011 6:52:55pm

re: #3 Bob Levin

I think he’s a softie right under the surface, or maybe it’s ‘left’ under the surface.

Your name calling isn’t going to change me…..heh.

The point is broader. Any business that finds itself in a position where it has to downsize in order to survive, should be able to. It is not a fun, or nice move, but it can be important.

Achilles Tang Tue, Sep 13, 2011 7:30:37pm

re: #4 Buck

Your name calling isn’t going to change me…heh.

The point is broader. Any business that finds itself in a position where it has to downsize in order to survive, should be able to. It is not a fun, or nice move, but it can be important.

The point is broader than that. Any organization that disagrees with something has a right to make that heard, and why shouldn’t people employed by a union (and not members of their employer) not be able to be represented by a union?

Buck Tue, Sep 13, 2011 7:51:18pm

re: #5 Naso Tang

The point is broader than that. Any organization that disagrees with something has a right to make that heard, and why shouldn’t people employed by a union (and not members of their employer) not be able to be represented by a union?

A bit of a straw man. No one is saying that people should not be allowed to belong, or be represented by a union. In fact just the opposite. No one should be forced to join a union.

Did you read the story? WEAC is laying off 40% of its staff. WEAC is then still hiring, and doesn’t like being forced to take back staff it just laid off. National Staff Organization is taking action against them.

Dark_Falcon Tue, Sep 13, 2011 8:06:48pm

re: #6 Buck

A bit of a straw man. No one is saying that people should not be allowed to belong, or be represented by a union. In fact just the opposite. No one should be forced to join a union.

Did you read the story? WEAC is laying off 40% of its staff. WEAC is then still hiring, and doesn’t like being forced to take back staff it just laid off. National Staff Organization is taking action against them.

Quite Concur. WEAC was a closed shop. and those employed as teachers had to pay dues. The change in the law means that membership is no longer compulsory and it is declining as a result. The union should be allowed to downsize its office staff t meet its changed circumstances.

researchok Tue, Sep 13, 2011 8:11:12pm

Nature will always takes it’s course.

If the unions have to reinvent themselves and adapt to changing realities, ultimately they will.

What worked at the turn of the century doesn’t necessarily work now.

OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin Wed, Sep 14, 2011 1:18:49am

re: #4 Buck

Your name calling isn’t going to change me…heh.

Personally I don’t want cons like you to change in the least. It’s not like you guys would be fooling anyone, anyway.

Achilles Tang Wed, Sep 14, 2011 7:36:18am

re: #6 Buck

No, I didn’t read the whole story, I commented on what you initially, broadly speaking, said about it.

MicheleR Fri, Sep 16, 2011 6:27:01pm

Ah, but there is a little tidbit that adds some flavor to this situation- yes the union employee vs union members facet is compelling, but on the big picture scope in Wisconsin, a former student of mine is trying to get his first teaching gig in Wisconsin and sent me this link

jsonline.com

It is “cheaper” to hire retired teachers back than to hire newbies…so how will the newbies get jobs?

Buck Sat, Sep 17, 2011 9:03:21pm

re: #11 MicheleR