Skip to comments.Wisconsin teachers union decertified in latest blow to labor under Walker law
Posted on 09/15/2013 1:29:34 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
Teachers from one of Wisconsins largest unions have jumped ship -- voting overwhelmingly to abandon the group in the latest in a string of setbacks for the struggling labor movement following Gov. Scott Walkers union overhaul two years ago.
The decision this week to disband by members of the Kenosha Education Association came after the organization was stripped of its certification and told it had lost its power to bargain for base wages with the district. The group was decertified after missing a key deadline in the annual reapplication process.
When the group might actually disband was not clear and calls to the organization were not returned.
The development is in keeping with an overall downward spiral for Wisconsins public worker unions. The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported earlier this year that tens of thousands of teachers and other government workers have left their unions since the Walker-backed law took effect.
Known as Act 10, the set of reforms includes a provision that says unions wont be recognized by the state unless 51 percent of all potential members support them in annual elections.
These elections have contributed to their decline. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Couldn’t have happened to a more deserving group of despicable, useless, leftist, wanna-be communists.
It’s a feeble beginning, but it IS a beginning ........
I love it when somebody with guts smacks the pigs right across their snouts.
The rest of you states would be well served to find a Governor who will go to the mat for we taxpayers, as has our Governor, Scott Walker (R, WI).
I mean, it only took us FIFTY YEARS, LOL!
**Happy Dance** **Happy Dance** **Happy Dance**
Most folks don’t realize it, but if all the public employee unions went a way tomorrow, public employers would still have to provide packages that attract workers.
The only people who need unions are democrat politicians and union management.
[. . . public employers would still have to provide packages that attract workers.]
Without unions employers can provide these benefits at a lower cost, operate more efficiently minus shop rules, and more easily terminate unproductive employees. State and federal laws give public employees benefits and protections rarely found in the private sector.
Any politician that supports amnesty will not get my vote.
This is a help to labor, it is a blow to union communist thugs.
“The rest of you states would be well served to find a Governor who will go to the mat for we taxpayers, as has our Governor, Scott Walker (R, WI).”
Quietly competent, and absolutely unwaivering in his principles, that’s Scott Walker. And here we are looking at Fat Boy Christie for out next “it’s my turn presidential candidate.” Scott Walker has talked the talk and walked the walk with as little political fanfare as was possible. He is a “real” presidential candidate, and if he doesn’t take the job, let him come here to California and unseat the three-term turd (if it’s Brown, flush it) Jerry the Fairy Brown. We could sure use him.
How is it a BLOW to Labor?
Labor decided itself by vote not to re-certify its union.
It’s a blow to the Union bosses. It’s not a blow to Labor.
Excuse me while I have a sudden episode of Schadenfreude.
Lets find out just how concerned the "unions" are about the "rank and file" worker. Maybe I'm wrong, but I speculate "union activism" is directly in proportion to the salary of the top union officials.
And below average employees.
The "public employers" are the taxpayers who have allowed their employees to bargain with each other for the taxpayers money without any taxpayer input into the matter. That has to end.
Bravo! A slap in the mouth of the extortion criminals.
With regards to schools, this does keep boards from overpaying school management or preventing the empire-building typical of a central office. Our local school district in Texas whose student enrollment is 3000 pays its superintendent $160,000 a year. It would be higher, but her husband is also an employee of the district.