Ann Arbor area lawmakers react to Legislature's passage of hard cap on public employee health care costs
State Rep. Mark Ouimet, R-Scio Township, today praised the passage of legislation aimed at reining in the cost of public employee health care coverage in Michigan.
Meanwhile, state Rep. Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor, said he's disappointed with the GOP-backed legislation, which he thinks unfairly targets low-income workers.
"We're basically making decisions that should be made or have been made at the bargaining table," Irwin said this afternoon.
Mark Ouimet
The proposal limits the amount of money a public employer can pay toward workers' health coverage. The cap ranges from $5,500 annually for individual employees to $11,000 for married couples to $15,000 for family plans.
"The taxpayer dollars that our schools and local governments can save could be used to put more money in our classrooms or pay for essential services like police and fire protection," Ouimet said in a statement. "The majority of Michigan residents are paying more for their coverage and it's time to put public employees more in line with the private sector."
The legislation gives schools and local municipalities the alternate option of paying 80 percent of employee health care costs, while employees would pay 20 percent.
Ouimet said municipal governments could vote to opt out of both choices entirely. But if they ignore the new provisions, they could lose 10 percent of their state funding.
He noted even state representatives are included in the plan and will have to pay more for their health care coverage.
"Government needs to start getting leaner and do a better job of making effective use of taxpayer dollars," he said. "And state lawmakers shouldn't be exempt from these changes."
If the legislation is signed into law, Irwin said it will essentially pull the rug out from under union employees who have given up wage increases over the years in order to maintain good health benefits. He also thinks it will hurt low-income employees in schools and local governments.
Jeff Irwin
In addition to the health care benefits cap, Irwin said he's also concerned that nearly 13,000 families in Michigan will be thrown off cash assistance starting Oct. 1 if Snyder signs a 48-month cap on welfare passed in the House and Senate today.
Irwin and other Democrats are calling it yet another Republican attack on Michigan's struggling families at a time when public assistance is critical.
"We have learned from the recent Kids Count report that almost one in four children in Michigan is living in poverty," said House Democratic Leader Richard Hammel.
"Combined with the reduction in unemployment benefits, Michigan's struggling families are facing a countdown to destitution," he said.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's e-mail newsletters.
Comments
ypsiarborchica
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 5:50 p.m.
What I think Rep Irwin is reminding everyone of is not to forget that with negotiations there is both give and take, and we've already given. When I worked in the private sector, I was able to have direct contact with the people that were responsible for my benefits and in that type of environment I felt it was easier to look out for the interests of the individuals. Now that I work in the public sector I realize that in addition to advocating for the workers, the union has also made concessions that I wouldn't have voted for (such as adding two 15 min breaks so that we are paid for a 7.5 hour workday instead of an 8 hour workday for an 8.5 hour shift, also having 8 unpaid/furlough days over the year). There's no way around it, this was a reduction in pay...so now that state gets to order additional paycuts through legislation?!?! To all the people who say, "just get a new job"...really? No one should ever work in the public sector? At some point public employees will end up being the least qualified people for the job because everyone else will be working in the private sector if that's what they need to do in order to be ensured a living wage. Rick Snyder clearly understands that point, or he wouldn't have opposed capping the salary of his appointed emergency financial managers. So, with mediocre salary attracting mediocre employees, the quality of services offered by the cities and counties will then be reduced....but hey, why not just cut them out completely? We don't need anyone watching out for our safety or making sure people with mental illness and pose a danger to themselves or others have access to their medications. We want the services government provides, including programs to help the unemployed to get jobs, but have no effective programs to help people get off public assistance. Instead of calling out administration and addressing the problem structurally, we blame the greedy public servants and cut off services for those who need them most
BenWoodruff
Sun, Aug 28, 2011 : 4:24 a.m.
Braggslaw, state union workers pay taxes as well...so I guess they steal money from themselves?
braggslaw
Fri, Aug 26, 2011 : 3:14 a.m.
Give and Take? Really? Normal businesses......., normal employees, normal people leave jobs when they feel they are not paid market value. If you cannot find a job that pays you more then you don't deserve it. State workers unions are paid by taxpayers, I am a tax payer .... I want to reduce your benefits because I am sick of paying them. I am not an ATM. State services and workers are already mediocre and there are a thousands of people that would line up to take those jobs. Unions for state workers are an abomination because they steal money from tax payers.
dogpaddle
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 3:47 p.m.
Both sides here are just sounding like broken records. It's the same arguments every time this comes up. But as a public employee, I feel the need to correct those of you on here who are just spreading lies and your arguments would have a little more validity if you had your facts right. @gladtolivenorth: even in the early days before health care costs/insurance costs skyrocketed last decade under W, I paid well over your deceitful $250 a year for health care. By 2006, I was paying over $7000 as a public employee as an individual for my portion of health care. I watched bigger percentages of my pay go toward health care thus less toward a struggling Michigan economy (and my employer's costs, of course, went way up, too - thus our government and school districts having to make cuts year after year and not being able to balance a budget). @2wheelsgood: Unions don't protect bad teachers. They force administrators to do THEIR jobs and use due process (documenting bad practices) to justly get rid of ineffective teachers. And why are we the only industrial nation on earth that makes the majority of its citizens go into debt or be ill? Why aren't we all together on reigning in high health care and insurance costs? Or making sure everyone has health care. That's not socialism. It's good for an ailing economy. I'd much rather shop than spend my money at the doctor (which didn't cost your entire paycheck and more when I was growing up).
Carole
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 1:10 p.m.
Who pays for the state senate/representatives health insurance? And, does that end when they leave office? To my knowledge, these days most folks pay a portion of their health care insurance, and the percentage has changed frequently during the past several years. Sorry, but believe cuts in government officials should be first on the line -- then I would not feel so bad about paying more -- just tired of paying more while they get more.
Stephen Landes
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 1:58 p.m.
Per the article, Ouimet "noted even state representatives are included in the plan and will have to pay more for their health care coverage." Did you read the article or just respond in knee-jerk fashion?
BonoVox
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:52 p.m.
This is one more example where we can see the AAPS being way ahead of the curve. During the last contract negotiation the union agreed to cap the health care costs around 10.5k. All additional costs for "cadillac" health care are borne by the individual employee if that employee chooses an expensive plan. Perhaps this should be used as a model for other public employee health care plans. Additionally, the 10.5k number is well within the norm for private sector health care costs.
TheInfamousOne
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:12 p.m.
I work at a place that has great health benefits, I'm lucky. It appears that Mark Oulmet is aligning himself with the private sector for his own perpetuation. I don't buy into the whole line of how Mark implies If they can save tax payer money to go towards schools, police and fire departments, those are just words and more than likely is false. Since when does the current republican regime look out for kids, teachers and Education. The statement implied will never materialize, they'll find another way to get their hands on the money and pass it over to their private sector buddies and call it a grant.
braggslaw
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 11:48 a.m.
Jeff Irwin is ... what he is... Elected by special interests such as the union to protect their salary and benefits. I admire him for doing what he was elected to do. BUT I do not agree with him and he is no friend of the private sector or taxpayers.
braggslaw
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 1:25 p.m.
Ann Arbor where a majority of the people are employed by the state-i.e. the University of Michigan Of course he would be elected. Ann ARbor is 4 square miles surrounded by reality
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:37 p.m.
" . . . and he is no friend of the private sector or taxpayers." Speak for yourself. He won his seat by an overwhelming majority, and all of those voters are taxpayers. We understand that you don't like him. Last time I checked you were one person. But PLEASE get Chase Ingersoll to run against Irwin again. The contrast is stark and will give us a clear choice. Good Night and Good Luck
snapshot
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 3:42 a.m.
Jeff Irwin as a county commissioner voted for a property tax increase that used a 1919 antiquated law to circumvent the right to vote of property owners. He now stands firm against the Emergency financial Management powers because it circumvents the rights of "incompetent" local governence and union contracts. to recap, he's OK with circumventing an ordinary citizens right to vote but not government unions right to pay their fair share. What a dual standard. The current commissioners are using the same strategy to circumvent an electorate vote on another road tax while they condemn Gov Snyder for "emergency" policies. Hypocracy at it's best, or worst however you view it. These Democrats feel it's OK to continue miling the taxpayers anyway they can, including getting out of town to shirk their duties.
djacks24
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 5:16 p.m.
@Edward R Murrow's Ghost Wow! Snapshot really shut you down. Where is the usual "provide links or it didn't happen" statements that you usually come back with? Big government GOOD! Unions GOOD! Conservatives BAAAAAD!
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 11:31 a.m.
"He now stands firm against the Emergency financial Management powers because it circumvents the rights of "incompetent" local governence [sic]" After all, Mussolini made the trains run on time. Who cares about the nature of government so long as it works??? Good Night and Good Luck
15crown00
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 3 a.m.
this legislature should put a hard cap on ALL state wages and benefits most especially it's own and Snyders.while we're at it cut Govs. expense account by 75% and make him pay Total Cost associated with commuting every day between Pits township and Lansing.
DonBee
Fri, Aug 26, 2011 : 2:12 a.m.
15crown00 - The Gov Snyder renovated his home at his expense to meet the security demands of the Secret Service. He normally can be found driving in a vehicle he purchased. He saved the tax payers Tens of Thousands of dollars a year for staff at the Governor Mansion in Lansing. He refused most of his salary and all the benefits and takes $1 a year. Yes, he can afford it, but at least he is not taking advantage of his position to get more wealthy.
2WheelsGood
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 3:15 a.m.
Do you know how much Snyder makes? $1.00. Yeah, he should cut that to $0.75 probably. He sure is in this for the money, eh?
2WheelsGood
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 2:47 a.m.
First, my grammar unchecked and unedited is still more consistently correct than most articles on annarbor.com. Second, when people start correcting grammar mistakes in an internet discussion, you know they've run out of real arguments. Third, I'm a product of public education. Blame my union teacher who should have been fired but wasn't, because the union makes it impossible to get rid of the bad teachers.
sh1
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 3:38 a.m.
Your teachers should have been fired because you can't differentiate among homophones as an adult? I think your true agenda is showing.
Jeff Irwin
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 2:46 a.m.
@xmo: you're attributing a quotation to the wrong politician. I can get dramatic about the 13,000 people (2/3rd of whom are children) who are going to be cut off of welfare payments on October 1st, but that wasn't me. @Diogenes: Many school employees already pay 20% or more of their health care costs. For administrators and even a few teachers that make six figures, that 20% amounts to a small percentage of their income. However, for a starting teacher at $30,000/year or for a bus driver or custodian, that 20% of cost is going to eat up a huge portion of their check. What do I mean by huge? Well, to throw out some assumptions, let's assume that we're talking about a starting teacher who makes $30K/year. If their health plan for a family costs $15K/year, then 20% of those costs are 10% of their gross income. For a bus driver or a part time clerical staffer who only works for the access to benefits for their family, this is an even bigger hit. I don't think it's fair to pass a law that cuts pay for some employees by 10%-20%, but only cuts the very highest paid employees by 2-3%. That's why Democrats introduced amendments that would provide for a sliding scale. Under our amendments, an employee making over $100,000/year would pay a higher percentage of the health care costs than an employee making $10,000/year. The unfortunate result of all of this is that many districts and employees will find that it doesn't make sense for these positions to come with benefits. That's a trend that is unhealthy for our state and very costly to our Medicaid rolls. Of course, the Republicans also quietly approved a new 1% tax on your health care plan today. Therefore, if you're lucky enough to have a job that provides health care or if you're buying your health care now, it's going to go up even more next year to pay for this new tax and the millions of dollars necessary to administer it.
DonBee
Fri, Aug 26, 2011 : 2:09 a.m.
Mr Irwin - $10,000 a year/2000 hours in a full time year = $5 a hour <--- this is below minimum wage. To my knowledge almost no private company offers health care for part time employees. Your example of a $30K worker with a $15,000 health care plan is no issue, that is the cap for health care, so if the unit of government chooses the hard cap, then there is no payment due from the employee. The top plan at AAPS from MESSA (rumored the be the most expensive health care plan in the state) runs approximately $15,000 a year for a family. AAPS has capped their payments at $12,153 per employee, so if you want the top level plan you have to shell out just less than $3,000 a year. The answer that AAPS came up with (and many private employers) is tiered plans, that allow employees to pick the plan that they want from a menu, trading off coverage for cost. This is what capitalism does. I find your use of "HUGE" to be alarmist in every way. The State had a chance to move the hundreds of state health insurance programs into one program, it was an effort championed by Governor Granholm, it was the Democrats, that shot it down. Maybe you should rethink this as an option and gain the buying power of 400,000 state and local employees to get better prices. That would be a worthy goal for you in the coming year.
braggslaw
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 1:36 p.m.
snapshot It is all about special interests... state workers, unions versus taxpayers.
snapshot
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 5:24 a.m.
Mr. Irwin, I agree it is unfair and could be better but you still voted to use a 1919 antiquated law to increase my property tax without my vote when you were a county commissioner. You obviously thought that was fair, why? I have a hard time being sympathetic to folks with great healthcare plans when I struggle to just pay the taxes on my home that you had no problem increasing as a commissioner. People are in a survival mode wake up and look around at the inequity. You probably signed Snyder's recall petition because of the EFM issue but you increased my property taxes by circumventing my vote. Dual standard?
xmo
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 1:59 a.m.
It is pretty Obvious that Representative Irwin cares more about the States Union Employees than the State's Residents. Paying low wage Union workers with money taken from the low paid working families in the State. Why is Mr. Irwin always trying to scare us with lines like: "struggling families are facing a countdown to destitution," he said. Remember Mr. Irwin: I believe LOVE WINS!
Diagenes
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 1:20 a.m.
I am puzzled by Sen. Irwin's comment. Teachers make up the vast majority of school district employees. Are they considered low wage workers, when most make over $50,000 per year, and administrators make over $100,000? What about police and fire fighters, tough jobs, yes, low pay, I don't think so.
Basic Bob
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 2:19 p.m.
@sh1, Even at the starting salary, it would be a stretch to classify a new teacher as a low-wage employee. You seriously need to check your definition of low income.
sh1
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 3:36 a.m.
If the average teacher salary is about $52,000 and decreasing each year, I think it's a stretch to submit that "most make over $50,000 per year." <a href="http://www.teachersalaryinfo.com/average-teacher-salary-michigan.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.teachersalaryinfo.com/average-teacher-salary-michigan.html</a>
gladtolivenorth
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 11:56 p.m.
So, it's ok to have non-local laws that favor workers, like the state level 312 legislation, but it is an attack on democracy when a non-local law doesn't benefit a worker?
mmppcc
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 11:43 p.m.
...and BIG GOVERNMENT Republicans rescue us from ourselves. Govern our own communities? Silly Democracy!
average joe
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 11:34 p.m.
I'll ask the question that I haven't seen in these posts- Do we know how many people this will affect? "Those folks are going to get hit with a huge bill that's going to be a giant percentage of their income...." Mr. Irwin Giant...? Huge....?
gladtolivenorth
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 11:30 p.m.
Why is asking workers to pay their fair share of healthcare constantly portrayed as destroying the middle class or "balancing the budget on the back of the workers"? Hey sh1, where else would you like the money to come from? In many basic governmental units, like Police and Fire, worker costs are the only costs. If I remember correctly, the local Police and Fire employees pay only a small deductible ($250 I think) for their healthcare. If they retire, they get to keep that small deductible plan for the rest of their lives at the expense of the taxpayer. So, if asking a public worker to pay more than $250 per year for their healthcare is destroying the middle class or "balancing the budget on the backs of workers", count me in!
braggslaw
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 1:28 p.m.
elise, people make choices in their life. If public sector employees argue that they can make more money in the private sector, they should goto the private sector. I think it is puffery to justify stealing from the taxpayers.
sh1
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:08 p.m.
I think you misread the article. Employees would be paying much more than the $250 deductible (a number you guessed at and is delightfully low compared to what I pay). Something in the several-thousands is more accurate factoring in the caps.
elise
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 2:10 a.m.
Braggslaw: I definitely think you should find a public sector job so you can benefit from the good deal they have going on.
braggslaw
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:48 a.m.
Scott I suggest you quit and get a better job Problem solved
scott
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:11 a.m.
Teachers don't make a very high salary, some part time teachers get paychecks for $0.00 because of benefit pays. I'd make 10-15k more as a chemist than a teacher and I'd have the potential for a lot more down the road.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:56 p.m.
What an odd world we live in where people celebrate when other people lose or have to pay more for health care benefits. And I'm betting that the vast majority of the people who this law will impact wish that everyone, including the nattering nabobs of negativism here, had access to good health insurance. Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Fri, Aug 26, 2011 : 6:58 p.m.
Great reply. Exactly what I expected. You never disappoint; as predictable as the phases of the moon. Good Night and Good Luck
braggslaw
Fri, Aug 26, 2011 : 12:03 a.m.
cry me a river... the private sector is getting slammed and having to adjust to the economy, I see no reason why the people I pay money to.. cannot also adjust ... Entitlement with no personal responsibility is a recipe for failure
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 3:23 p.m.
"I am celebrating the efficient use of tax dollars." Yeah, we could tell. Because many low-end public sector workers (e.g., secretaries, custodial, entry-level teachers) who will have to pay 20% of their health insurance likely will forgo it and do what everyone else w/o health insurance does: wait until they have a true health emergency before they seek any medical care and, when they do, the will go to the emergency room and receive the most expensive health care on the planet, the cost of which will be paid for . . . . wait for it . . . . by the taxpayers either through the government or through increased costs of their health insurance. So, if you really are celebrating because of savings to the taxpayer, that celebration is, not surprisingly, based on ignorance. Good Night and Good Luck
braggslaw
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 1:26 p.m.
I am celebrating the efficient use of tax dollars. I pay for those health care benefits, as do other taxpayers. I want value, something that the present system does not provide.
snapshot
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 5:15 a.m.
Like when the other team scores a point?
sh1
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 3:33 a.m.
Agreed. And, once we've all reached some lowest common denominator, the Repubs and Libertarians can laugh their way to the proverbial bank.
Diagenes
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 1:06 a.m.
It is not celebrating that someone has to pay more. It is praising the restoration of balance to the public sector compensation plan that is paid for by tax dollars.
John B.
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:05 a.m.
...and you've hit on a trend with your comment. It's the "I'm suffering, so I want to see others suffer as well" syndrome. Very sad, that....
John B.
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:04 a.m.
Indeed!
snoopdog
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:40 p.m.
""The majority of Michigan residents are paying more for their coverage and it's time to put public employees more in line with the private sector." Amen " The cap ranges from $5,500 annually for individual employees to $11,000 for married couples to $15,000 for family plans." Still very generous, wish my benefits were this good and this is after the proposed cuts, wow, take it and run ! "If the legislation is signed into law, Irwin said it will essentially pull the rug out from under union employees who have given up wage increases over the years in order to maintain good health benefits." Pure rubbish and not true. Code for they didn't get the big fat raise they wanted but they still got a raise while the rest of us got higher taxes and had our incomes decline. Gosh dangit, I love Gov Snyder big time. Make my day and sign this bill right away ! Good Day
Jon Saalberg
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:27 p.m.
I'm sure Mr. Ouimet, as a multi-millionaire, doesn't think too much about his own health care costs, and I guess would not have much empathy for average workers. But then, we are now living in a red state, where the worker is the enemy and the owner is king.
Michigan Man
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:44 a.m.
Jon - Sorry to inform you but Mark Ouimet is very well informed about healthcare issues and associated costs. His wife is a prestigious and experienced physician, who is accustom to caring for patients of all backgrounds. She is viewed as a physician leader in the Ann Arbor and Washtenaw county healthcare communtiy. Mark is very well versed relative to healthcare issues.
DonBee
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:21 a.m.
Mr Saalberg - I suggest moving to China or Mexico and becoming a worker and telling me we have it bad here. Relative to the 1970s in the US, we do, but compared to much of the rest of the world, we do OK.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:37 p.m.
New name for Michigan: Snyder's Plantation. Good Night and Good Luck
Mike
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 9:44 p.m.
Excellent piece of legislation for the taxppayers. If you can't buy a cadillac plan for $15,000 per year then you don't have any business being an administrator of a business or school. I personally know families who have been on welfare their entire lives for multiple generations and they are perfectly able to work. I even offered work to one of them ($10.00/hr) and he didn't want to lose his food stamps and other benefits. In order to take a minimum wage job they would have to give up their state "entitlements" and if you think about it from their viewpoint it doesn't make sense to give up free money for forty hours of work and having to get out of bed in the morning. We aren't helping these folks out by teaching them to wait by the mailbox for a check vs. getting some skills and learning to make it on their own.
ypsiarborchica
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 2:51 p.m.
Mike, I just want to clarify that the article was primarily about the public employee healthcare cap and that your comments are regarding two very different issues. Yes, the entitlement programs were mentioned in the article, but they really shouldn't be lumped together.
Townie
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 9:24 p.m.
While they're at it -- how about a pay cut for the 2nd highest paid legislators in the country? -- some sacrifice from them for a change? Are they legislators going to do away with the lifetime after 2 terms healthcare coverage for the legislator and family? Race to the bottom... The Walmartization of our Middle Class so the rich can get richer.
sh1
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 8:53 p.m.
Balancing the budget on the backs of the workers.
braggslaw
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:14 p.m.
quit and get a better job
2WheelsGood
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 9:49 p.m.
I love statements like these... backs of the workers? So the only people who work are in unions? I suggest it might just be the opposite.
djacks24
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 9:46 p.m.
Nope, just sharing in the pain of what we in the private sector have been living with for many years now. Every year since I can remember my health insurance premiums have gone up for the same type of coverage, while my pay and taxes stayed the same. Welcome to reality!
David Briegel
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 8:53 p.m.
bragg, you are in favor of the "takers" who are gutting the middle class and demonstrating a real lack of "family values". Your takers are taking the future of the American Middle Class the goose that laid the golden eggs of American prosperity!
DonBee
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:19 a.m.
Mr. Briegel - I have to wonder sometimes at the use of "Takers", some people would say that public employees are "Takers", others would bristle at that tag. Since you did not specific who the takers are, I guess you left it open for each side of the issue to define the term their own way.
David Briegel
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:57 p.m.
We can "fail" because of an illness or accident. We can "fail" by choosing the wrong bunch of corporate criminals as an employer. And people can't choose another job. Haven't you heard about that terrible economy? And do you really believe that the disappearing American middle class bodes well for our future?
braggslaw
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:07 p.m.
America is such a great country.... we can benefit from our hard work and good decisions but we can also fail based upon laziness and poor decisions. Entitlements are a curious enigma.
braggslaw
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 8:41 p.m.
This is a fantastic result for the taxpayers. I applaud the legislature for having the guts to fight for the makers against the takers. If people don't like their jobs, they can quit and take a better job.
voter
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:43 p.m.
As a public employee I don't have a problem with paying for part of my health care and taxing my pension if it helps. The problem I have is our State Reps aren't doing it also. They still get it and that has to be changed by a constitutional amendment. That is the only problem Ihave with it and others should too.
djacks24
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 9:40 p.m.
Exactly! That's what it boils down to for us in the private sector. But for the public sector that's all of a sudden never to be mentioned as an option. They all cry that they could make twice what they make in the private sector, but they chose the public sector for the benefits. Let's see them go to the private sector and even come close to what they were making in the public sector. The public sector employees won't admit that they could not survive in the private sector.
2WheelsGood
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 8:37 p.m.
Jeff Irwin said: "We're basically making decisions that should be made or have been made at the bargaining table," 'made at the bargaining table' is union code for 'give us what we want or we'll stop working and beat the crap out of anyone who crosses the line'
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 11:28 a.m.
"Blame my union teacher who should have been fired but wasn't" Yes, because inattentive parents and lazy student have no responsibility whatsoever for the student's performance in school. And, of course, well in to adulthood, a person's manifest shortcomings remain the teacher's fault. Good Night and Good Luck
sh1
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 3:31 a.m.
I wrote the original question about teacher strikes. Because I was responding to 2Wheels' quote from a Michigan legislator, I thought it was obvious we were talking about Michigan. But, because no one could find a recent example, we got lots of confetti thrown about instead.
2WheelsGood
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 2:48 a.m.
First, my grammar unchecked and unedited is still more consistently correct than most articles on annarbor.com. Second, when people start correcting grammar mistakes in an internet discussion, you know they've run out of real arguments. Third, I'm a product of public education. Blame my union teacher who should have been fired but wasn't, because the union makes it impossible to get rid of the bad teachers.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 2:30 a.m.
"Some folks think they are smarter than the rest of us 2WheelGood but they don't look so smart when they try to correct you and you are correct ! " You guys crack me up. The two of you wrote: " . . . their pay is so inflated beyond their skill, their trapped." The last "their" ought be "they're" as in "they are trapped"--"they're" being a contraction for "they are". "Their" connotes ownership, as in "their pay". But glad to know that you guys are right on top of complex economic and political problems. Good Night and Good Luck
snoopdog
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 2:19 a.m.
"Most union folks can't go anywhere else because their pay is so inflated beyond their skill, their trapped." Would that skill set be the one that knows proper usage of the word they're versus their? " Some folks think they are smarter than the rest of us 2WheelGood but they don't look so smart when they try to correct you and you are correct ! Good Day
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:34 a.m.
DonBee wrote: "The UofM Nurses struck last week." Nope. It was an informational picket. Source: <a href="http://www.heritage.com/articles/2011/08/13/ann_arbor_journal/news/doc4e46dda3c4016522362301.txt" rel='nofollow'>http://www.heritage.com/articles/2011/08/13/ann_arbor_journal/news/doc4e46dda3c4016522362301.txt</a> DonBee wrote: "There are lots of 'slow downs' in the state right now at local governments over various issues, working exactly to the rule." Since there a "lots" of slowdowns, you can, of course, provide links? Given that there are 550 school districts in the state of Michigan, there must be AT LEAST 550 municipal governments. So, with a conservative estimate of 1100 governmental entities, do you think 10% might be a fair definition of "a lot"? If so, I'm certain you can find 110 examples of slowdowns in the state. Links please. DonBee wrote: "There were the high number of teachers in AAPS who called in sick last spring for one of the protests in Lansing. " Actually, as I recall, that was much ado about nothing--that that day's absence rate was little higher than what one would normally expect. But since you've made the claim, DonBee, feel free to go back to the link and run the numbers, and tell us what you find. Of course, given your track record with numbers . . . So, in the end, you have one example--a one day strike by the professors at CMU. Yes, the Snyder's Plantation (formerly known as the State of Michigan) clearly is a hotbed of strikes. Good Night and Good Luck
DonBee
Thu, Aug 25, 2011 : 12:17 a.m.
If you count colleges - CMU happened this week, and a court order was issued. The UofM Nurses struck last week. There are lots of "slow downs" in the state right now at local governments over various issues, working exactly to the rule. There were the high number of teachers in AAPS who called in sick last spring for one of the protests in Lansing. I am not surprised memory is so short.
johnnya2
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 11:37 p.m.
"Most union folks can't go anywhere else because their pay is so inflated beyond their skill, their trapped." Would that skill set be the one that knows proper usage of the word they're versus their? Where is your proof of this MOST? I have seen no study that even remotely proves your stupidity and hyperbole. There has been no teacher strike in the state of Michigan (since we are discussing a Michigan law you should stick to the jurisdiction that matters) in MANY years, you are just making stuff up. I know of many people who have been unionized teachers and can get other jobs outside of the union (as teachers AND in other jobs). As for what the rest of "us" think. DO NOT SPEAK FOR US. Speak for yourself ONLY. You can choose to be a corporate drone, but the fact is EVERY benefit you have EVER received was the result of union activity. Child labor laws, overtime pay, work place safety, health benefits, all as a result of unions. By the way, pay differential between the middle class and the highest income earners was closest when union membership was the highest. As membership decreases, the middle class has seen STAGNANT real wages since the Reagan administration, while corporate CEO and profits have continually soared.
2WheelsGood
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 11:14 p.m.
I've never hidden my agenda. In fact, I'll spell it out for you more clearly. I'm a Libertarian who realizes that this country can't sustain the mess we're in. And if this country continues with the 'something for nothing' mentality that is the foundation of every union, very soon there will be nothing left. You're selfishly worried about YOU. I'm worried about the COUNTRY. Is that plain enough for you? I could maybe make it even simpler, but I'm not so sure that would help.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 11:02 p.m.
Glad you got that off your chest. Reveals the true agenda. Snoop: Yeah. I agree. It's absolutely hilarious when people loses pay and benefits. That's why this nation became the world's largest comedy club under the Bush regime. Good Night and Good Luck
2WheelsGood
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:52 p.m.
Uganda... Wisconsin... practically the same thing. And why only concern ourselves with the most recent strike? The fact that the unions make it nearly impossible to get rid of bad teachers should be more than enough to make any sane person want to see the teacher's union's power limited. Well, unless you're a deadbeat teacher, of course. And why only limit this discussion to teachers? Unions all over the country abuse their power. Really, the only reason you're starting to see fewer strikes is that the unions are finally starting to realize that it's not just the rich who are tired of the unions. It's us, the rest of the middle class, who are sick to death of their incessant whining about fairness while we're tightening our belts and doing what's necessary to keep our families fed.
snoopdog
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:45 p.m.
Great post 2WheelsGood, I am laughing my rear off at the comments you got ! Good Day
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 10:36 p.m.
And I love how you read the question anyway you want. I guess you'd have found a teacher's strike in Uganda, had it been necessary, to "prove" your point. The link does not say which school district was on strike, how long that school district was on strike, or what the strike's settlement was. My point? What happened in Wisconsin was not a strike as defined under labor law. So try again. Good Night and Good Luck
2WheelsGood
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 9:57 p.m.
Nobody specified Michigan. sh1 just asked for an example. I love how I answered the question, you're not happy with the answer, so you narrow down the criteria. That's right, anything win, right? Here's your link: <a href="http://ballotnews.org/2011/02/18/14-democratic-senators-flee-wisconsin-teachers-strike-for-second-day-in-a-row/" rel='nofollow'>http://ballotnews.org/2011/02/18/14-democratic-senators-flee-wisconsin-teachers-strike-for-second-day-in-a-row/</a>
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 9:51 p.m.
2wheels: 1) Since the law applies to the Snyder's Plantation (aka Michigan), I think the question was about the plantation. 2) But I'll take the bait anyway. Name the school district, how long the strike lasted, and what the settlement consisted of. Oh, and web link about that school district's strike. Good Night and Good Luck
2WheelsGood
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 9:45 p.m.
@sh1: February of this year in Wisconsin. Is that recent enough? I think so.
2WheelsGood
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 9:42 p.m.
Interesting, David. I, and many others, don't work for a union yet my boss doesn't beat the crap out of me and I have plenty adequate benefits. And if I don't like my job or my boss, I can go somewhere else. Most union folks can't go anywhere else because their pay is so inflated beyond their skill, their trapped. I used to work for an automotive company as a non-union employee. Sometimes I'd have to literally wake up the union folks so that I could get my job done. You'll never sell your flavor of crazy to me.
sh1
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 8:53 p.m.
Could you provide a recent example of the kind of union behavior you describe? When's the last teacher strike you can remember, for example.
David Briegel
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 8:50 p.m.
And you prefer the corporate bosses "beat the crap out of anyone" who has benefits or union representatiion. You don't believe in those famous TeaPublican family values!
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Aug 24, 2011 : 8:33 p.m.
On the one hand, I have no problem with public employees paying more for their health care benefits. On the other hand, I guess this proves that Republicans' war on public employees trumps their oft-stated desire for local control of governmental affairs. Good Night and Good Luck