Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
these days it is more likely to be a private employee getting laid off than a public employee.
That's pretty much always been the case. I don't get why we're supposed to feel all sorry now, over the reaction of a public employee, yet we ignore what's been going on with those in the private sector.
That's pretty much always been the case. I don't get why we're supposed to feel all sorry now, over the reaction of a public employee, yet we ignore what's been going on with those in the private sector.
Um... that's exactly what the public employee unions are doing, especially in Wisconsin: ignoring the fact that taxpayers are struggling while insisting on continuing to be able to make additional collectively bargained demands.
What happens when public employees are too costly? You scale down and become more efficient. Most likely they're going to follow the example of private companies who lay off the older, and more costly, employess and keep the younger and "cheaper" employees who will (happily) take on more work for the same low rate.
If the pensions, perks, and other promises given to now-retired persons is too costly to maintain, just stripping them from current employees is not going to solve the problem of a huge group of now-retiring individuals who are living longer than expected. I wouldn't be surprised to see overwhelmed cities and states filing for some sort of "bankruptcy" to rid themselves of their retirement/pension/health benefits obligations to people who are retired.
I wouldn't be surprised to see overwhelmed cities and states filing for some sort of "bankruptcy" to rid themselves of their retirement/pension/health benefits obligations to people who are retired.
Lets hope so. The fleecing of the taxpayers needs to come to a screeching halt.
What happens when public employees are too costly? You scale down and become more efficient. Most likely they're going to follow the example of private companies who lay off the older, and more costly, employess and keep the younger and "cheaper" employees who will (happily) take on more work for the same low rate.
Union contracts usually prohibit that. The last hired are the first to go.
For example, Wisconsin's Outstanding First Year Teacher award winner.
Quote:
In 2010, Megan Sampson was named an Outstanding First Year Teacher in Wisconsin. A week later, she got a layoff notice from the Milwaukee Public Schools. Why would one of the best new teachers in the state be one of the first let go? Because her collective-bargaining contract requires staffing decisions to be made based on seniority.
However, thisis the important part, and what will be happening all across the U.S. as more and more state and local governments are forced to grapple with public employee costs that are too high:
I dont see that as important at all. Companies all over america faced similiar situations and were forced to lay off employees..
There is a whole city, (I forget the name but I posted it somewhere here on cd) that laid of EVERYONE.. Yes... they laid off every single employee and contracted their services out because they found out it was cheaper and it was that or bankruptcy..
What are you suggesting is the alternative? We have Gov Walker cutting down on collective barganing so he doesnt have to lay anyone off, and the public goes bonkers, and then we have you here posting that if people do get laid off, they are justified in killing themsel.
What is the alternative if you cant lay people off or freeze their wages?
I dont see that as important at all. Companies all over america faced similiar situations and were forced to lay off employees..
There is a whole city, (I forget the name but I posted it somewhere here on cd) that laid off EVERYONE.. Yes... they laid off every single employee and contracted their services out because they found out it was cheaper and it was that or bankruptcy.
What are you suggesting is the alternative? We have Gov Walker cutting down on collective barganing so he doesnt have to lay anyone off, and the public goes bonkers, and then we have you here posting that if people do get laid off, they are justified in killing themsel.
I'm not justifying one's killing oneself. The point is that the out-of-control costs of public employee salaries and benefits are leading to massive state and local government employee layoffs.
The public unions aren't dealing in reality. They're unwilling to work with deficit-strapped governments to save their own jobs. There is no money. Unions' collective bargaining temper tantrums won't change that. Massive public employee layoffs will accelerate; this man's suicide will not stop the inevitable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
