The problem with this issue 2...way too many things were crammed into one bill. I can see why it failed. For example, had the bill honed in on the public sector having to pony up more for their retirement and that employees should be paid on merit instead of just tenure, the bill would have easily passed.

But when you include the broad brush of "the workers cannot bargain collectively", well the bill was doomed to fail.

No matter what your take is on unions, collective bargaining has been around for more than 100 years.

Footwedge;968970 wrote:The problem with this issue 2...way too many things were crammed into one bill. I can see why it failed. For example, had the bill honed in on the public sector having to pony up more for their retirement and that employees should be paid on merit instead of just tenure, the bill would have easily passed.

But when you include the broad brush of "the workers cannot bargain collectively", well the bill was doomed to fail.

No matter what your take is on unions, collective bargaining has been around for more than 100 years.

Agree there was too much attempted in one bill, but I think you're naive to believe unions wouldn't have opposed this just as vigorously if merit pay were to be the primary way of paying individuals. Simply mandating that would have invalidated a lot of what unions leverage during negotiations. I could easily see them using nearly the same theme of: they're taking away our right to negotiate as a group for wages, so wages will drop and hurt the middle class, blah, blah, blah. Very similar to the message used in the ads.

Writerbuckeye;968974 wrote:Agree there was too much attempted in one bill, but I think you're naive to believe unions wouldn't have opposed this just as vigorously if merit pay were to be the primary way of paying individuals. Simply mandating that would have invalidated a lot of what unions leverage during negotiations. I could easily see them using nearly the same theme of: they're taking away our right to negotiate as a group for wages, so wages will drop and hurt the middle class, blah, blah, blah. Very similar to the message used in the ads.

Then how do you explain that there are already lots of union contracts that already use merit based evaluations?

Footwedge;968970 wrote:The problem with this issue 2...way too many things were crammed into one bill. I can see why it failed. For example, had the bill honed in on the public sector having to pony up more for their retirement and that employees should be paid on merit instead of just tenure, the bill would have easily passed.

But when you include the broad brush of "the workers cannot bargain collectively", well the bill was doomed to fail.

No matter what your take is on unions, collective bargaining has been around for more than 100 years.

Uh...it didn't eliminate collective bargaining.

Bigdogg;968949 wrote:Watched a lot and still missed it. Enlighten me with a link from an ad that your house will burn down if it doesn't pass..

This ran hourly every day in SWO for a month. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Kc0F_yQrp0

The line states that Issue 2 "could be the difference between life and death," said over the backdrop of a house engulfed in flames. It's almost as good as the nurses insinuating that people would drop dead in ERs all over the state, when only 4% of the nurses in the state are in public unions.

Bigdogg;969063 wrote:Then how do you explain that there are already lots of union contracts that already use merit based evaluations?

There are 360,000 public employees in Ohio. How many is "lots?"

Writerbuckeye;968974 wrote:Agree there was too much attempted in one bill, but I think you're naive to believe unions wouldn't have opposed this just as vigorously if merit pay were to be the primary way of paying individuals. Simply mandating that would have invalidated a lot of what unions leverage during negotiations. I could easily see them using nearly the same theme of: they're taking away our right to negotiate as a group for wages, so wages will drop and hurt the middle class, blah, blah, blah. Very similar to the message used in the ads.

Sure unions would have opposed it. But it was not just the union people that defeated this bill. Nos voted a whopping 61%. I hardly think 61% of Ohioans are huge union fans....especially government unions.

Really, Dog? Please give me who these folks are, that are getting both merit raises and are in the union.

I was a state employee and didn't get merit increases, even being a supervisor. Everything was tied to the same contract and step increases everyone else got.

Footwedge: Are you going to let Writerbuckeye get away with saying that you are "naive"?

BRF;969857 wrote:Footwedge: Are you going to let Writerbuckeye get away with saying that you are "naive"?

Yup. Writer's called me far worse in the past

Footwedge;970498 wrote:Yup. Writer's called me far worse in the past

I thought LJ was the spelling police on here. God knows he is perfect or maybe he is God.

Bigdogg;970696 wrote:I thought LJ was the spelling police on here. God knows he is perfect or maybe he is God.

Wat?!

Writerbuckeye;969839 wrote:Really, Dog? Please give me who these folks are, that are getting both merit raises and are in the union.

I was a state employee and didn't get merit increases, even being a supervisor. Everything was tied to the same contract and step increases everyone else got.

Read House Bill 153. Starting with the 2013 2014 school year every public school teacher has to have a merit based evaluation. You can look up the number of school districts already doing it now on your own. Also the community I live in now the city uses merit based evaluations.

So which is it were you a government employee or a journalist? Your story changes all the time. I suspect you are full of something very foul smelling. :thumbup:

LJ;970704 wrote:Wat?!

Just pulling your chain again You are way to easy!

[h=1]Kasich sounds as if he learned a lesson on Election Night[/h]
[url]http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2011/11/13/kasich-sounds-as-if-he-learned-a-lesson-on-election-night.html

We have been conditioned over the past 10 months not to be surprised when Gov. John Kasich acts superciliously, to bluster about this or that.
And so if he had lashed out at voters as “idiots” after the biggest defeat of his political career on Tuesday night, we might have been insulted but not shocked. We’ve already heard such derisiveness from him.
Kasich said no such thing. Not even close. In his Election Night news conference at the Statehouse, he couldn’t have been more gracious or more appropriately contrite.
Voters resoundingly rejected State Issue 2, the signature legislative proposal by Kasich and Republicans controlling state government. Chastened, Kasich said he heard the message: Senate Bill 5, the landmark law to curtail public-employee collective bargaining, was at best an overreach and at worst an assault on fundamental fairness.
More important — and the coming days will reveal if this is true — Kasich appeared to learn a lesson from the stinging defeat he was handed by voters.
“They might have said it was too much too soon. Maybe that was it. I don’t really know, but I know this: When you try to move big things, you must do a good job of preparing the ground for people to understand what the issue is.”
In the case of Senate Bill 5, Kasich and Republicans prepared the ground by poisoning it. The elements of a bill needed by local governments to help them get control of their costs for public-employee wages, health care and pensions were engulfed by provisions — pushed by Kasich — to kill off the unions by crippling their funding mechanisms.
A lot of nonsense is being written in the national press about the meaning of the landslide defeat of State Issue 2, with the results being projected forward onto the 2012 presidential race and even Kasich’s re-election in 2014. Some speculate that a mighty labor-Democratic coalition that came together Tuesday night will stay together and carry President Barack Obama to victory next year in Ohio. Others say the outcome is a political death knell for the already-unpopular Kasich.
My instincts suggest that on Election Day 2012, nobody will remember Nov. 8, 2011. The labor-Democratic coalition that won the day was a one-time movement with a primal motivation: survival. If Obama wins next year, it mostly will be because the GOP nominated an unacceptable candidate from a terrible field. And if you can predict the state of Ohio’s economy on Election Day 2014, then you’ll know whether Kasich will be re-elected.
Many pundits are missing a key factor in their analyses of Tuesday’s vote: A whole lot of Republicans voted against Issue 2. It lost by more than 22 percentage points, winning in only six of the 88 counties. In Ohio’s staunchest GOP regions, the southwest and western counties, Issue 2 lost by 11 and 14 percentage points, respectively.
“Republicans joined our coalition,” said Ohio Democratic Party Chairman Chris Redfern. “It’s our job ... to reach out to them so they’ll stay part of the coalition.”
Fat chance. In 2012, GOP voters are not going to back Obama. And the vast majority will support Kasich in 2014, although he probably has lost forever the backing of Republican public employees.
Across Ohio, Republicans opposed Issue 2 because of its fundamental unfairness to members of their own families, to their neighbors, to people they know and respect: cops, firefighters, schoolteachers and others who serve them. GOP voters, like other Ohioans, want public employees to have a seat at the table.
If Kasich’s Election Night contriteness was genuine, there is hope that he learned a lesson going forward: Ohioans want a collaborative government, not one in which the controlling party shoves its agenda down their throats.
“We are one Ohio,” Kasich said. “We had a disagreement on (Issue 2). The public has spoken. Now it’s important we take a breath and we get back together as Ohioans and build a stronger Ohio.”
The governor has three years left to walk the talk.
[/URL]

imex99;972814 wrote: “Republicans joined our coalition,” said Ohio Democratic Party Chairman Chris Redfern. “It’s our job ... to reach out to them so they’ll stay part of the coalition.”

Fat chance. In 2012, GOP voters are not going to back Obama. And the vast majority will support Kasich in 2014, although he probably has lost forever the backing of Republican public employees.

Across Ohio, Republicans opposed Issue 2 because of its fundamental unfairness to members of their own families, to their neighbors, to people they know and respect: cops, firefighters, schoolteachers and others who serve them. GOP voters, like other Ohioans, want public employees to have a seat at the table.

If Kasich’s Election Night contriteness was genuine, there is hope that he learned a lesson going forward: Ohioans want a collaborative government, not one in which the controlling party shoves its agenda down their throats.

“We are one Ohio,” Kasich said. “We had a disagreement on (Issue 2). The public has spoken. Now it’s important we take a breath and we get back together as Ohioans and build a stronger Ohio.”

The governor has three years left to walk the talk.

I think the highlighted part depends upon how Kasich responsds to his spanking. If he continues his rhetoric about "being on the bus or getting run over by it", he will lose in a landslide. If he has learned how to deal with people...real people....he may be elected again.

Footwedge;969838 wrote:Sure unions would have opposed it. But it was not just the union people that defeated this bill. Nos voted a whopping 61%. I hardly think 61% of Ohioans are huge union fans....especially government unions.

As alluded to previously, the 61% came from the 400,000 workers themselves, their spouse, their parents, and one friend. Add it up and there is the 2 million votes. Everyone else who was not directly or indirectly feeding at the public trough voted almost 100% to keep SB5. Sorry to interject the math behind the numbers.

The deck was, and remains, stacked against Ohio.

If you don't include the people who voted against SB5, 100% of the population (who voted), are FOR SB5!

QuakerOats;972844 wrote:As alluded to previously, the 61% came from the 400,000 workers themselves, their spouse, their parents, and one friend. Add it up and there is the 2 million votes. Everyone else who was not directly or indirectly feeding at the public trough voted almost 100% to keep SB5. Sorry to interject the math behind the numbers.

The deck was, and remains, stacked against Ohio.

so pro SB5 people have no familiy or friends? maybe i was wrong, but i was under the impression most police and fireman are republicans?

QuakerOats;972844 wrote:As alluded to previously, the 61% came from the 400,000 workers themselves, their spouse, their parents, and one friend. Add it up and there is the 2 million votes. Everyone else who was not directly or indirectly feeding at the public trough voted almost 100% to keep SB5. Sorry to interject the math behind the numbers.

The deck was, and remains, stacked against Ohio.

You are either a moron or delusional, or both. Your myopic opinion on this subject will not allow you to see any of the gray, but just the black and white fo it. You are no better than the union backers who vote for an issue or candidate because the union tells you to.

I voted 'No' on Issue 2 as did my wife.

My parents are dead, as is my father-in-law. My kids voted 'Yes'. Your 'math' falls apart already as there are many, many 'family units' in the same situation as mine.

You continue to espouse that this is a 'union' vs. 'non-union' issue only. That is simply not true. Sure, there are morons that vote along union lines, which to me is akin to voting along party lines. However, Kasich pissed so many people off with his rhetoric and with his approach to this issue that they simply would not approve it in its curent form.

Just so you know...many of us who voted 'No' on Issue 2 think that there is merit in some parts of SB5. However the entire package, just like Obamacare, is just bad legislation. Broken up, there are provisions (such as inability to strike, merit pay) that should be implemented and some that should be shot down (such as the arbitration provisions).