In layman's terms: The public employee’s compensation package is way above the market rate. Concessions by the Unions would remedy a symptom. Leveling the playing field would treat the problem. The government is trying to level the playing field while the workers are trying to treat a symptom.

What these numbers ultimately prove is the excessive power of collective bargaining.

It's worse than that: the unions bargin, and get bought off by politicans using public funds. The unions collect dues, and then support favored politicans (those who bought the unions off) in their next election cycle with donations, buying ads, or in-kind donations, like "volunteers" to work for the campaign.

Most people call that corruption.

Amy -

First, they don't give a fuck. The unions are behind a lot of these state tax increases. They lobby for tax increases for their employees because it increases the union's income, prestige, and power.

Second, they think that everything can be solved by simply taxing the "rich" more. The unions of today are nothing like the unions of 1910. Now they are nothing but marxist organizations hell bent on destroying capitalism.

If I was Walker, I'd be pushing the Republicans to outlaw public sector unions. And the Republicans in Washington should be pushing that in every bill they write. Simply outlaw them.

The single biggest problem with public sector unions (and even FDR knew it) is that they are using their members' dues to lobby one political party (guess which one) to give them more money and power. Which comes with larger donations to said politicians. You have a positive feedback loop, which will always blow up in your face.

Actually, the showdown in Wisconsin in not over specific numbers. The unions have already agreed to the cuts that have been asked for. The real showdown is over collective bargaining itself. The unions are willing to take the short term financial hit because they know that they can bargain it right back up again.

The protesters are exhibiting herd mentality in Wisconsin. Studies have shown that as little as 5% of a group of people can set the direction for the entire "herd". Guess who the 5% are in this case (the union leaders.)

Jim Manzi, who I find credible on these issues, makes the point that it's hard to know if the overall compensation of the unions is too high or not relative to comparable private sector workers. Here's a piece he wrote responding to liberal bloggers who are claiming they are underpaid:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/260337/are-wisconsin-public-employees-underpaid-jim-manzi

One should note, however, that the unions and Democrats in Wisconsin have agreed to all of the cuts in their compensation Walker requested in the budget. That debate is over.

The only remaining point of contention is whether the unions have their collective bargaining rights removed – except for police and firefighters, who supported Walker in his election. This makes me think that at least part of Walker's motivation is not fiscal austerity, but political – weakening groups who support Democrats. That part of his motivation is political doesn't make him wrong on the merits. I think there is a good case to be made that public employees should not be able to collectively bargain. But if that's what you believe, then you should apply it even-handedly. No public unions get to collectively bargain, not even your political supporters.

I live in Wisconsin, and this issue is about all I hear about.. and from what I've heard, it's not actually about the money. People seem to agree that in order to solve the budget problem, what Walker is asking isn't unreasonable. I've seen some people upset at the dollar amount it's going to cost them moving forward, but for the most part they seem to understand that they're in the same boat as everyone else who has had to cut back.

What I hear everyone bitching about is the union thing. Everyone keeps ranting about their "rights" being taken away. It's really infuriating for me to see how many people, who don't seem to understand how corrupt the unions are, supporting the protesters.

There are a lot of idiots at our capitol right now, and I hope they're the first pickings when it comes time to lay folks off if this thing doesn't go through. I know some of the people "supporting teachers" don't understand that this is going to be better for the teachers who actually deserve to be paid based on merit. I just wish some of these people would step back and actually think about the big picture.

I really believe this is a step in the right direction, and I hope that if it does pass, I get to say "see, I told you so" to all the ding dongs around me.

The fact that the law exempts unions that contributed to Walker's campain soils his credibility at best. I'm not a big Union guy, but I like this type of obvious political move even less!

There are a lot of idiots at our capitol right now

There weren't enough idiots in Wisconsin to start with, so Obama's little buddies started bussing them in by the thousands.

nuzltr2 comment is not true.

except for police and firefighters, who supported Walker in his election.

A lie. Four local of some (forget exactly, 300 or 3000) total fire and police unions supported him, and the overall state ones supported his opponent.

If we don't strip public unions of their power, they will continue to get Democrats elected so we can be robbed to enrich their leadership.

And of course, the Wisconsin Senate Democrats are hiding out here in Illinois. But they are in for a rude shock. They have admitted, publicly that they are in contact with each other, and are working on the problem. So now, they get to pay Illinois Income tax for the whole time they are here.

The fact that they are pulling this (along with the ones from Indiana), show just how juvenile these people are. I'd be pushing for recall, if I was in any of their districts.

The thing is, they will still be able to collectively bargain on salaries, so there really won't be any change in dues and the donations to politicians. It's just on benefits that this covers.

Thanks Brian. The Goveneror has pointed out this lie several times in interviews. It just won't go away - surprise surprise. Liars lie - quote from Jim Rohn.

Steve -

All but one of the Democratic senators in Wisconsin is the subject of recall petition drives.

Dave -

Of course it won't go away. Doesn't fit the narrative.

There weren't enough idiots in Wisconsin to start with, so Obama's little buddies started bussing them in by the thousands.

The tea party started busing in their idiots too. Several of my family members were on those buses.

I grew up in Wisconsin, and this issue has made Facebook a pretty nasty place for the past week. Certain members of my family are no longer speaking, my cousin's baby shower (she's a teacher and union supporter) is being boycotted. One way or the other, it'll be over soon. *sigh*

The WI teachers union really really sucks. In many ways. It reduces innovation and results in layoffs of many of my young teacher friends b/c of the "seniority rules" thing.

...thing is, I don't get why (and nobody has been able to explain this to me without foaming at the mouth)Walker's proposal couldn't simply get rid of unions' ability to bargain over benefits/pensions -- and continue to allow them to bargain over things like class size, discipline, school start/end times, curriculum and the like.

And keep in mind, this measure affects public hospital workers too -- they will no longer be able to bargain over things like setting a maximum for how many patients nurses can oversee at a time.

If you think collective bargaining rights for public employees is the problem, then why not eliminate them for ALL public employees and not just cherry-picked ones (teachers, child care workers, and hospital workers)? And why eliminate bargaining rights that don't have any real budgetary implications?

@sofar -

I think Walker was trying to split the baby, so to speak. He was aiming for a partial cutback in collective bargaining figuring that if he went for the whole enchilada he'd get jack squat.

Here's the question that nobody wants to ask the teacher's union: "Why is it that you are paid more than almost all other teachers in the United States, yet 66% of eighth-graders cannot read at an acceptable level of proficiency?"

The followup question would be "Can you give us a good reason why we ought not fire the lot of you and start over?"

That's the main reason the rank and file are on board with this, it protects the incompetent and the malicious, and prevents anyone from being truly exceptional.

Remember, the typical public school teacher graduated in the bottom quintile of their college class.

Recall all of the missing Dem Senators, file malpractice lawsuits against all of the Doctors who wrote bogus sick slips, pass the bill in the Senate, eliminate the collective bargaining agreement, and kick all of those punks out of the Capitol building. Hippies smell.

This reminds me of a little child throwing a tantrum because he does not get his way. What a bunch of worthless losers all of the Dem Senate members are...if you don't get your way way just take your ball and go home.

I didn't see any republicans leaving when Obamacare was being shoved down their throats...

Too bad liberals, you just have to shut up and take it. You caused it so you can accept the consequences of your actions.

And why eliminate bargaining rights that don't have any real budgetary implications?

Those things do have budgetary implications.

If class size is limited to, say, 25 students, then a school of 1000 students needs to be staffed with a minimum of 40 teachers (with salaries, benefits, and administrative overhead costs).

In addition, a sufficient number of classrooms must be available for smaller-sized classes (and those rooms must be lighted, heated/cooled, and equipped). Does the school need to be built out? Do portable classrooms need to be rented or purchased? What about parking?

And any, even temporary, increase in class sizes, say, due to new students moving into the area, shifts in school boundaries, etc. will be met with a union grievance - so excess capacity must be built into the system to handle new students, transfers, etc.

All of these factors influence budgeting.

Same thing with the nurse-to-patient ratio, caseloads for social workers, child-to-worker ratios in childcare facilities.

Work rules have budgetary implications.

And of course, the Wisconsin Senate Democrats are hiding out here in Illinois.

Which is such horseshit. If I stopped showing up to work for a couple of weeks just because I didn't want to do my job, I'd be fired (with proper cause) and replaced.

Sofar, I'm sorry the issue has gotten so personal for your family. Your idea is an interesting one. On one hand I don't believe collective bargaining should be allowed for public sector workers - everyone else has already covered this pretty well in their posts. But I think your idea about allowing them a common voice with issues like class size, discipline, and so on is worth considering.

Pirate Jo, I'm actually finding it pretty funny -- this is even better than the time my cousin brought Obama's Audacity of Hope book to the family gift exchange.

Conan, I see how these things do have budgetary implications, and thanks for explaining -- I was not thinking of it from that angle. Given the importance of reasonable class sizes/patient loads, I do actually think those who deal with them directly (teachers, health care providers) should have some clout in influencing them. In my old district, I recall our class size limit being 40 (and, really, if a class gets bigger than that, there's really no way to learn effectively).

I think it would be interesting if Walker compromised by allowing bargaining on the class size/patient load/curriculum stuff, while prohibiting it for benefits/pensions --because almost all teachers I've talked to have said that the former are *truly* the things they care about, not their own benefits. If such changes were made, anyone still protesting would show their true colors -- by showing it's all about the money, not the students. The public would no longer sympathize with the unions, and Walker would come off looking pretty good.

...that said, I do think some of the "perks" that teachers get are necessary to entice qualified people into thankless (and very necessary) jobs with a low pay ceiling.

Some reform is coming to NY. Otherwise, it's out the door with the least senior and lowest paid teachers, because the pension costs are unsustainable. The question is not if, it is how many will be cut, and who will they be?

That ten billion dollar budget shortfall has to come from somewhere. Rush and Tom Galisano have already left the state. They aren't paying it. I don't have it. NY can't just print its own money.

Sofar, HA! That's awesome that you have a sense of humor about it. Yeah, I don't think Obama's book would go over very well in any of my family gift exchanges, either.

One of my friends is an 8th-grade teacher, and I think one of her biggest frustrations has to do with school administrators. That, and having to spend so much time teaching students to take all those federal standardized tests. I don't think she has a choice about whether to belong to the union or not - or at least about whether she has to pay dues. I'll ask her the next time we talk.

...or at least about whether she has to pay dues.

Usually non-union workers in a union workplace usually have to pay the union something, though not full dues.

The Wisconsin Democrat senators who ran away -- they are doomed in the next election cycle. They might have lost the Senate vote regardless. But all the Republican opponents have to do is run the TV ads -- "Where was Senator "smith" during the vote? In Illinois of course."

As far as Walker being for a smaller government -- Bullshit!! He isn't cutting the number of employees. There will still be 300K employees. Just the teachers (and maybe some others) will have to cough up slightly more of their pay.

Why are these people whining about paying for their own insurance like the rest of the country does? I live very close to three Chrysler transmission assembly plants and I was shocked to discover during the company's restructuring, that their employees did not pay one red cent for the health benefits they receive for themselves and their families. I didn't know such companies existed, actually. I'm only 28, but every place I have worked since I was 16 has required an employee contribution to their healthcare plan. I am fortunate to work where my premiums are rather low, but it's still money out of my pocket. My uncle works at Chrysler and I can remember practically seeing red when she griped to me about my uncle having to give up $30 a week for health and $5 a week for dental and vision. This man makes $32.50 an hour (trust me, he doesn't mind telling how much he makes to anyone who will listen), and his house is paid for. Keep in mind their life insurance was still free and so is the pension. I'll never forget her lament: "I guess we have to put off getting the boat this year..." Boo fucking hoo as far as I'm concerned.