More Good News for WI!

[bleedingpurple]

And the average government worker shows up for their job 37.5 hours a week, but actually only works 20 of those hours.

What's your point?

I am employed and have been employed at many NON UNION places where people are on salary. Where do you think some of those management people are on a nice sunny Minnesota/Wisconsin Friday are? Oh but I bet they are making it up on Saturday. :mj07:

You know another thing there are many people who work salaried job the common man not the management who are salaried based on a average 40 hour week who work 50 - 60 hours. You think they are happy about that? Think they talk highly about their position? You think they have a positive attitude? The way you talk, you think that is great.

 

[Mags]

I don't think we will ever agree and that is fine. Walker is protecting the middle class? Because of Unions? He just lined his friends pockets. His sponsors. That money he takes from the unions isn't helping anybody but the Kochs and the like.

I think it is amazing how easy the Walker errr I mean the Kochs can easily fool you guys. We will just have to disagree but I am still going to see what happens and if everything works out and Walker does fine then I will be the first to admit I am wrong, I just hope that if this does backfire and nothing changes that you can admit the same.

I understand. It looks like things have changed already. WI has moved from 41st to the 24th best state for private business since Walker has been in charge - the biggest move up the rankings in the history of the study (I posted it a few days ago).

That is pretty impressive. Private employers fuel the job market and economy. It is very important.

So far, so good!

 

[pd1]

:facepalm:
This is where I lose all respect for you in theory. What about equal opportunity?:shrug: This is just a stereo typical bunch of bullshit. If you think all government employees are lazy then what do you think about other kinds of people?

Walker and the Koch brothers told him this, and he believes them.

 

[Mags]

I am employed and have been employed at many NON UNION places where people are on salary. Where do you think some of those management people are on a nice sunny Minnesota/Wisconsin Friday are? Oh but I bet they are making it up on Saturday. :mj07:

You know another thing there are many people who work salaried job the common man not the management who are salaried based on a average 40 hour week who work 50 - 60 hours. You think they are happy about that? Think they talk highly about their position? You think they have a positive attitude? The way you talk, you think that is great.

Actually I know a ton of people (myself included) that routinely work 45-60 hours a week - weekends included. Pretty common for salaried professional folks out there. Doesn't bother most, as far as I can tell, as that is what it takes to succeed.

The nice thing in private business is that you are judged on your own efforts - and get rewarded for such. In the public sector, you are typically judged by the least common denominator - due to the union mentality.

I'm surprised that the better govt employees don't demand that they are judged on their own merits, rather than the colletive one. Their is no individual incentive in public unions to excel - since there is no reward for it. It is such a perverse system - just be average. That's what made America great all right - "just be average".

Get rid of unions, and let every worker be judged based on their own skills and work ethic. If a worker wants to work 50 hours a week to get ahead and be promoted and make more money, more power to them. If another employee wants to only work 37.5 hours a week, and leave early go golf or go to their kids soccer game - fine, but they shouldn't expect ratses, etc when others are working harder. That is how it works in the private sector, but in the public sector, those 2 employees are viewed exactly the same. And that isn't right and stifles productivity. And it doesn't take a genius to see that.

 

[bleedingpurple]

I understand. It looks like things have changed already. WI has moved from 41st to the 24th best state for private business since Walker has been in charge - the biggest move up the rankings in the history of the study (I posted it a few days ago).

That is pretty impressive. Private employers fuel the job market and economy. It is very important.

So far, so good!

What I got out of the graph is that Walker made WI 24th best state to succeed for business by issuing tax breaks. Doesn't mean that have already? The pieces are put in place. Just hope these businesses don't keep that money in their pockets. We need more businesses to come here, lets see what happens.

Being the 24th best state doesn't mean shit unless the businesses actually start coming here. So far it has made the Kochs richer that I know for sure

 

[bleedingpurple]

Actually I know a ton of people (myself included) that routinely work 45-60 hours a week - weekends included. Pretty common for salaried professional folks out there. Doesn't bother most, as far as I can tell, as that is what it takes to succeed.

What is there salary?? Many people who work 45 - 60 hours per week on salary are working for big doe with a lot of that salary factored in.

People are not working 45 - 60 hours a week getting a salary of 20000 and being happy about it.

For what I do I would work 45 - 60 hours a week to but for a bigger salary than a base.

 

[Mags]

What I got out of the graph is that Walker made WI 24th best state to succeed for business by issuing tax breaks. Doesn't mean that have already? The pieces are put in place. Just hope these businesses don't keep that money in their pockets. We need more businesses to come here, lets see what happens.

Being the 24th best state doesn't mean shit unless the businesses actually start coming here. So far it has made the Kochs richer that I know for sure

BP - it was the annual CEO survey. It is certainly more qualitative than quantitative. It is based on their view of the business environment - taxes, regulation, how the state is viewed in terms of attracting employees, etc.

It is a huge plus to see such a jump in such a short time. It is also interesting to see the bottom five being strong Democratic/Union states.

Moving up 17th places does mean something. But yes, we do need to see companies moving here. It doesn't help that WI taxes overall are still near the top nationally. We need to find a way to continue to lower taxes, so our good workers/recent grads don't move away.

WI has always been known as a Tax Hell. It is not as bad today as it used to be, but it is still worse than many, many states.

I love what Walker is doing for our state, and hope that the special interests see the benefits also in time, instead of only being focused on theirselves. I realize that is difficult to do, as everyone looks out for themselves and their family first, but in the long run, it hopefully will make the state stronger.

For a comparison, all you have to do is look at what Mitch Daniels has done in Indiana the last 6 years or so. Many of the same things, and now Indiana is in much better shape - AND Daniels is well liked in the state.

 

[bleedingpurple]

Get rid of unions, and let every worker be judged based on their own skills and work ethic. If a worker wants to work 50 hours a week to get ahead and be promoted and make more money, more power to them. If another employee wants to only work 37.5 hours a week, and leave early go golf or go to their kids soccer game - fine, but they shouldn't expect ratses, etc when others are working harder. That is how it works in the private sector, but in the public sector, those 2 employees are viewed exactly the same. And that isn't right and stifles productivity. And it doesn't take a genius to see that.

Who does the judging? What type of occupations are you talking about? You think a teacher who puts in 50 hours per week should be judged better than the teacher working 40?

You ever think that person working 50 hours a week could just be disorganized?

 

[Mags]

People are not working 45 - 60 hours a week getting a salary of 20000 and being happy about it.

Good point there - I tend to view things in terms of the average college graduate professional worker, since that is where my experience is, and that is what most of my friends are.

It is a different situation for an hourly worker making $15.00 an hour certainly.

I don't know of too many college educated salaried workers making $20K. In fact, I know of none.

Even teachers make $35-40K coming out of school for a 9 month job. Which means they are really making the equivalent of $46-53K - which is not bad pay coming out of college. I don't know of any teachers working 45+ hours a week and also going into the office on Saturdays and Sundays to put in extra time. In fact, most of them work 35 hours a week (7 hour days including lunch - only 6 hours of worktime) and spend another 3-5 a week grading papers for a total of 40.

Teaching is a great gig, money and benefits wise, if you have the right aptitude for dealing with kids these days (which I admit ain't easy). There are so many folks going for positions today, as demand far exceeds job supply.

 

[Mags]

Who does the judging? What type of occupations are you talking about? You think a teacher who puts in 50 hours per week should be judged better than the teacher working 40?

You ever think that person working 50 hours a week could just be disorganized?

All things being equal, I'll take the employee who will work extra time to get more things done over someone who is just looking to do the minimum necessary to get by, every time.

 

[bleedingpurple]

I guess we are comparing apples to oranges here. I can't really compare the public sector to private sector occupations because they are so much different.

Not many working people work on salary, but hourly.

 

[Mags]

You ever think that person working 50 hours a week could just be disorganized?

In private industry, those type of people don't stay employed very long. In the public world, they are impossible to get rid of, due to the union.

But that is one of the big differences - accountability. A good friend of mine works for one of the local counties - highway department - he is in charge (non-union). Has a number of union employees (everyone under him is union) that he can't get rid of - but it is impossible under union rules.

He is so frustrated, as there are so many other people out there that would do a better job - but he is handcuffed. Again, no accountability.

Which is one of the reasons that public union employees get such a bad rap. Everyone knows the above to be true. And yes, it is not fair, as many of the public union employees are good employees - but if you can't get rid of the bad ones, it makes them all look worse for the wear.

 

[Mags]

I guess we are comparing apples to oranges here. I can't really compare the public sector to private sector occupations because they are so much different.

Not many working people work on salary, but hourly.

And I thought most private people were salaried. I guess it is all what you are used to seeing, and the type of work each of us does.

Clearly there is a difference in expectations and pay between salaried and non-salaried folks. To be clear, I do support time and a half for hourly folks that are working overtime. But, obviously, not for salaried folks. And if someone is salaried, then they should be working 45 hours + a week - that is part of the expectation when you are salaried.

JMHO.

 

[bleedingpurple]

All things being equal, I'll take the employee who will work extra time to get more things done over someone who is just looking to do the minimum necessary to get by, every time.

Of course but what occupations are out there where this happens on a salaried basis. Salaried positions take the incentive away. Hell I would love to work more for my company but they are not going to pay me the overtime. They could pay me a salary and that would be great but the salary is going to be more than what I would make in a regular 40 hour work week. I am not going to work 50 hours a week for 40 hours pay. That is one reason why unions existed. Every business owner would love to get 50 hours of work out of someone for 30 - 40 hours pay. It's just not feasible for the working sector.

 

[bleedingpurple]

And I thought most private people were salaried. I guess it is all what you are used to seeing, and the type of work each of us does.

Clearly there is a difference in expectations and pay between salaried and non-salaried folks. To be clear, I do support time and a half for hourly folks that are working overtime. But, obviously, not for salaried folks. And if someone is salaried, then they should be working 45 hours + a week - that is part of the expectation when you are salaried.

JMHO.

I guess it all depends on what type of work you do. I use to be an assistant manager at a nursing home for a rehab unit. I was on salary, the hours worked that week would depend on business or what was going on. Some on other floors would work 60 hours per week and when I filled in for them for vacations I could easily get their job done in 40 hours. I can't help it that some people take a longer time to do their work. TO be fair many of those people I covered for were obese and working in a nursing home there is a lot of leg work. I can go up and down the hall in half the time. My walking speed probably shaved off a ton of time.

 

[Mags]

I am not going to work 50 hours a week for 40 hours pay. That is one reason why unions existed. Every business owner would love to get 50 hours of work out of someone for 30 - 40 hours pay. It's just not feasible for the working sector.

Well, I guess I can't relate to this way of thinking. It has always been about the job and career, not doing mental arithmetic about working x number of hours for $$$ pay.

But, I did have employers that recognized the extra effort and hours that I and other employees put in and were rewarded with promotions and pay increases. So, if you are saying the extra work while being salaried would never pay off in increased responsibilities and pay, then I do see your point.

But most (not all) private employers will recognize and reward the high performers in that way. Not sure if they do in public union shops. I know in teaching they do not - it is a little black book that defined salary, based entirely on length of service and amount of education (my mom had one and shared it with me). There was no quality piece to it at all.

 

[rusty]

Well, I guess I can't relate to this way of thinking. It has always been about the job and career, not doing mental arithmetic about working x number of hours for $$$ pay.

But, I did have employers that recognized the extra effort and hours that I and other employees put in and were rewarded with promotions and pay increases. So, if you are saying the extra work while being salaried would never pay off in increased responsibilities and pay, then I do see your point.

But most (not all) private employers will recognize and reward the high performers in that way. Not sure if they do in public union shops. I know in teaching they do not - it is a little black book that defined salary, based entirely on length of service and amount of education (my mom had one and shared it with me). There was no quality piece to it at all.

What about the non-union workers who are on salary that work 20 hrs. a week for a full weeks pay? According to your mad way of thinking this is acceptable?

 

[Mags]

What about the non-union workers who are on salary that work 20 hrs. a week for a full weeks pay? According to your mad way of thinking this is acceptable?

Rusty - clearly you are referring to either the postal service or teachers. Although I do believe they are union.

 

[rusty]

Rusty - clearly you are referring to either the postal service or teachers. Although I do believe they are union.

Wow,you can't be serious......:scared You shouldn't bowl so much :facepalm:

 

[bleedingpurple]

Rusty - clearly you are referring to either the postal service or teachers. Although I do believe they are union.

You don't know many teachers or postal service people do you?