Now that SB 5 has been signed into law... (Russia: attorneys, wages)

[Buckeye3]

I strongly oppose SB 5 but would like to start a thread with rationale, well thought out discussions of this law's various points that is open to both opponents and proponents. I too can rant when provoked but am hoping this thread will mostly avoid those types of posts. I am concerned that too many citizens listen to sound bites and slogans only without really understanding or exploring the full implications of the law. For example, one provision of the law would supposedly allow the voters the final say on whether or not a local union would receive a pay raise. When I watched Tim Grendell explain the almost impossible sequence of events that would have to occur before any such referendum could be placed before the voters I realized that something that on the surface may sound reasonable to many people in fact was not so reasonable. It bothers me a great deal that there is so class hatred in this country and so little civil discussion and reasonable examination of the facts. If this law is not struck down through referendum, I'd at least like to hope that those who support it truly know what they are voting for. Just as disclosure, I have worked in both the public and private sectors within the same profession. If there are any attorneys out there, I am also wondering about the legal challenges that this law may face apart from the referendum.

[buzzards27]

I'm going to jump in to monitor what type of response you get. Myself, I will be busy with the referendum. I am 58, "retired", a former union carpenter (Local 1365), UAW and union Sheet Metal worker. Never crosssed a picket line, even when it cost me a job.

Other than that, I have no dog in the fight. I don't like how the bill was introduced and pushed through without real "due process". It is too bad, state and federal legislators don't work like city councils with the multiple "reading" of the bills before they vote on them.

I do think a bill of this importance should be voted on by the public.

[Buckeye3]

I have to agree about the manner in which this bill was pushed through. I have issues with the fact that two committees were manipulated by having key members removed and replaced. If this had not happened, the bill would have died. This speaks volumes about the lengths certain politicians will go to to push their agenda. I hope that SB 5 proponents realize that, even if they agree with the outcome of this bill, they are not dealing with ethical people.

[buzzards27]

as i watched that happen, i was asking myself if this is America or Russia in the late 1950's. It would be like going to court and having a jury listen to the evidence and then have the judge replace part of the jury just before they begin deliberations. what did the new "jurors" base their vote on, the evidence, the committee testimony or the orders they were given from their dictator or what Koch Brothers told them to do? A really sad day...

Originally Posted by Buckeye3

I have to agree about the manner in which this bill was pushed through. I have issues with the fact that two committees were manipulated by having key members removed and replaced. If this had not happened, the bill would have died. This speaks volumes about the lengths certain politicians will go to to push their agenda. I hope that SB 5 proponents realize that, even if they agree with the outcome of this bill, they are not dealing with ethical people.

I hope the proponents realize at some point that the plan is to go after private unions next and that unions are one of the few things that have slowed the decay of middle class wages. That this is really about the middle class fighting over the scraps and crumbs that the uber wealthy dropped from their table. The middle class is infighting as the wealthy elite laugh all the way to the US Treasury.

[ZnGuy]

Originally Posted by buzzards27

as i watched that happen, i was asking myself if this is America or Russia in the late 1950's. It would be like going to court and having a jury listen to the evidence and then have the judge replace part of the jury just before they begin deliberations. what did the new "jurors" base their vote on, the evidence, the committee testimony or the orders they were given from their dictator or what Koch Brothers told them to do? A really sad day...

kinda reminds me how the Obamacare was rushed to get passed and I remember Pelosi's comment 'you are gonna have to pass it to see what's in it'.

[taxedtodeath]

Originally Posted by buzzards27

I hope the proponents realize at some point that the plan is to go after private unions next

What private unions?.......

[buzzards27]

Originally Posted by taxedtodeath

What private unions?.......

probably every one of them, they are already talking about SB5 being a good foundation for making Ohio a right to work state. http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2011/02/22/right-to-work-law-would-be-good-for-ohios-economy.html?sid=101 (http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2011/02/22/right-to-work-law-would-be-good-for-ohios-economy.html?sid=101 - broken link)

[taxedtodeath]

Originally Posted by Buckeye3

For example, one provision of the law would supposedly allow the voters the final say on whether or not a local union would receive a pay raise.

Moot point. Nobody (private or public) is going to get a real raise for a while. The current economy is still unsustainable. Take away public spending and debt creation and the economy and tax receipts will fall like a rock in a vacuum.

Real wages are going down, taxes are going up.

[EarthBound?]

Sorry, I'm all for SB5. But that's just me, so don't shoot me for it.

[rrtechno]

Having worked in education back in the 70s, before the time of collective bargaining agreements, and having seen colleagues dismissed with the only apparent reason being that they disagreed with the administration, I believe SB5 is going about it the wrong way. I'll admit that things have changed, but the perception of many people is that things have changed much more than they have. I don't see any reason to throw out the baby with the bath water. Work for revisions, don't scrap the whole thing. If this is about balancing budgets, why is the one thing that was left in as a topic eligible for bargaining ... wages. I thought those were what was causing the whole problem in the first place.

To the people who say that unions are no longer needed because there are laws to protect the workers against questionable management, there is currently a law that provides for public employees to negotiate with management about many things. That law is being eliminated. Couldn't the same thing happen to the other laws that you say protect workers now?