This idea that benefits are a "handout" or somehow "free"....

[MindPilot]

seems to be gaining a lot more momentum than a thought that stupid ever should.

"Teachers should have to contribute more toward their retirement." or "why should I pay for some snowplow driver's health care? I pay for my own." Or some such nonsense; I'm hearing comments like that all the time and here is the explanation I generally hand out.

Benefits are part of your pay. You are payed wages and benefits; the aggregate of the two is the currency for which you are exchanging your labor.

Benefits are not some hunks of unicorn shit falling from a rainbow. The teacher, the snowplow driver, and everybody else who works for a paycheck has earned their benefits just as they have earned their wages. And as such they are entitled to those benefits, which is why they are called "entitlements". So stop saying that like it was a bad thing.

[Avant Guardian]

1. Republicans want to steal your pension

Plain and simple

[Cleita]

16. Yes, they have stolen everything else and all that's

left are pensions and Social Security.

[old mark]

2. K&R- My retirement was set up in a seperate fund, with NO connection to

the state system...and it is the same fund the elected pols use fore their retirement...of course, they get more and sooner than tnyone else.

My benefits were part of my Union contract that was thrashed out with the State. They agreed to it, they signed it and it is a legal document.


mark

[gratuitous]

3. Exactly, these are negotiated terms of a contract

Try pulling that shit with your bank when you take a loan or a mortgage. "Why should I pay money on this loan? Nobody's paying me for a loan!" Long after the contract is signed, the terms continue to bind the parties. And these pension "contributions" were negotiated at an earlier time when Republicans had dicked over the economy. Teachers, DMV clerks, and all the rest gave up part of their salaries so that local governments could get over the hump in tight times. In exchange, they negotiated (there's that word again!) pension contributions for the present pay they could have demanded by rights, by their signed contracts.

Now, the Republicans have run through the money again, and instead of hitting up their fatcat pals, they're back to raid working people for their tatters and scraps. Well, fuck that shit.

[uppityperson]

4. People look at me, self employed and are amazed at what I charge

You must be rich! As if. What they miss is I have no benefits, all those benies that are included for employee's I have to pay. All my taxes, vacation/sick days, retirement, insurance, etc etc etc.

I've appreciated the benefits when I've been an employee, makes up for the wages and I'm just kicking and reccing this thread while rambling on.

[suston96]

5. GI Bills of rights.......They sure as hell earned them.....

http://www.ehow.com/list_7232871_benefits-gi-bill-rights.html

[hfojvt]

6. it's not a stupid thought

If some people are paid Wages + pension + insurance

and the rest of us, who are paying their salaries, are paid Wages - X% pension contribution (for me this is 4%) + pension - Y% insurance costs (for me this is 50% mostly because I work part-time) + insurance.

Then they are getting some benefits that the rest of us don't get, benefits that the rest of us pay out of our take home pay.

You want to make some semantic point that benefits can be included in the total salary, but all that does is make the salary of the state workers even higher. It puts you right back in the same spot.

Some people would rather cut the pay of somebody making $80,000 a year instead of paying more taxes. Others are heartbroken to see that poor working person face a salary cut, and others are mad about having their salaries cut.

Sometimes it would might be nice if there was a Democratic alternative. What's OUR plan to close the budget gap?

[SoCalDem]

7. The pension + benefits part is often the "bargaining chip" & gets carved OUT of the "wages" part

That's why they call it "bargaining".

People know going in, that they will not get the raise they hope for, and they end up DEFERRING large parts of it, in exchange for enhanced benefits that they may or may not use (health care), and pensions long into the future.

This is why Walker & pals are adamant about the collective bargaining, because people are getting wise to the scam, and may just want to start getting it ALL upfront (in wages), instead of deferring , only to see it snatched away.

[hfojvt]

9. except that most people do not bargain

even with unions the "bargaining" does not take place in a vacuum.

Once upon a time, every union worker did not have a job. They applied for a union job and were told what their salary and benefits would be. Their bargain at that point was either accept what is offered or walk away. Once they accept and win the job, then they get to be part of the bargaining unit. Which is typically going to work from a platform of - old deal + %increase.

One of the problems that every employer is facing is rising insurance costs. When the cost of the same insurance benefit goes up by 10% or more every year in the last half dozen years, then the employer feels squeezed. Yet the employee does not feel like that is a raise because they are only getting the same benefit that they did last year.

Also, many employers will shift some of that cost to the employee. They will only pay 50% of the increased cost and hit the employee with higher premiums. This gives them more money to spend on raises.

The expectation of a raise has always seemed kind of odd to me. Other than keeping up with the cost of living, why should a worker expect a raise?

I think part of the answer to that is The American Dream, which always says more, more, more.

But some of Walker's pals are looking at things and saying "we are paying these people too much money and too many benefits."

[spanone]

8. cut the salaries and benefits of politicians.

no teachers making 80k



All K-12 Teachers
Median Salary by Job


$0 $15K $30K $45K
High School Teacher $43,437
Elementary School Teacher $40,426
Middle School Teacher $42,290
Special Education Teacher, Preschool, Kindergarten, or Elementary School $41,025
Special Education Teacher, Secondary School $43,860
Secondary School Teacher $42,163
Special Education Teacher, Middle School $42,023

Country: United States | Currency: USD | Updated: 3 Mar 2011 | Individuals Reporting: 32,716


http://www.payscale.com/research/US/All_K-12_Teachers/Salary

[hfojvt]

11. but with those stats you are not including the benefits

which the OP insisted were really part of the salary. So take a $60,000 a year salary and throw in $10,000 for insurance and $5,000 for a pension and $5,000 for vacation and sick leave and you are at $80,000.

Also, your first statement is not proven by your statistics. You said "no teachers making 80k"

and then listed MEDIAN salaries. Well, half of teachers are above that median, sometimes way above it.

[TBF]

12. Are you serious? You've been on this site since 2004 and you need to ask

"what's our plan to close the budget gap"

Try letting the tax cuts for billionaires expire and cutting defense.

Ring any bells?

[hfojvt]

14. that's not gonna do much in Wisconsin

and our glorious leader from hope and change already punted on both of those http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/138

I hear that Wisconsin has a $3.5 billion shortfall projected for the next two years. Walker's plan is to fill that hole with the bodies of teachers and other state workers. What is the Senate Democrats plan? Do they even have a plan beyond moving to Chicago and becoming Bears fans or BIFs (which would be FIBs in reverse)*


* for non-Wisconsinites a FIB is a Focking Illinois Bastid, since some of the cheese eaters have some hostility for the hordes of people from Chicago who treck up north to buy property and vacation and hunt and fish in Wisconsin woods and lakes.

[TBF]

15. I know exactly what a FIB is - I was born in Ripon and grew up in the state -

and graduated from UW-Madison before I moved. Wisconsin has historically had a surplus and under Tommy Thompson, a republican, education was funded. Walker wouldn't have these problems if he hadn't already given away the money to his pro-business friends: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/21/scott-walker-wisconsin-budget-protests_n_826021.html

Maybe he'll have to think about actually serving the folks of the state rather than the whims of the Koch brothers.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

10. The phrase I use is "Compensation Package"

I provide the labor and in exchange the boss man provides a package of compensation, including wages and benefits. It's beside the point whether they give me all the money first then deduct an amount from my paycheck to pay toward the benefits or whether they pay all or part of the bennies directly.
It ain't a giveaway and IT AIN'T FUCKING SEMANTICS.

[underpants]

13. When did "benefits" start? World War II

Wages were frozen to prevent the deepest corporate profits from swooping in and taking all the "talent" so they added "benefits" to their compensation package. This is where employer related health care came from - and it just stayed that way after the war.

This is directly related to your excellent post but I thought I would mention it.

"hunks of unicorn shit falling from a rainbow" :rofl:

[kevinbgoode]

17. Ah..takes me back to the days when I worked for a utility

a private company. . .and every time our contract was up, we got the same sob story from the company that they could only afford 1-1.5% raises cuz the economy was tough. All through the 80's. So. . .they said they'd give us better benefits, but, of course, the health insurance started to rise anyway, along with having to cope with those outside companies contradicting your private doctor's diagnosis. Of course, the company was hurting soooooo badly that their stock split twice during those years, I think. . .and you can bet upper management never settled for some tiny 1-1.5% raises.

As usual, the GOP will shoot itself in the foot - along with the country. It hasn't been that long ago when we had an acute teacher shortage in this nation, and one of the primary reasons was that the pay and benefits was too low...in fact, the only profession that paid less with the college degree was a beginning newspaper reporter. How soon the public forgets that the government had to offer lots of incentives just to get the public to go into teaching, like student loan forgiveness, and better working conditions. Now what makes the GOP think that in a few years we won't face the same problem? I mean, when you pass legislation stripping them of collective bargaining rights, forcing them to return more of their income to the government (remember, public employees pay income taxes just like everyone else, and since the Right claims the taxpayers pay their salaries, public employees apparently have to return a percentage of their income in those taxes every year. . .something the private sector is not required to do. Can you imagine the private sector requiring employees to return a portion of their salary to the company every year just for the privilege of working there?

Anyway, when you pass a law which demands a public referendum for any raise beyond the cost of living - and anything below the cost of living must be negotiated, any Republican already understands that they are essentially destroying an incentive to enter the profession. Essentially, the GOP is telling public workers (especially teachers) that the government restricts them from making a profit in that career, and will gradually impoverish them over the course of that career. Receiving less than cost-of-living increases in pay, while subsequently requiring them to return more of their income by paying additionally for benefits packages, essentially reduces public employees to glorified indentured servants. You can bet no Republican is going to take a job that guarantees him/her a LOSS of income over the course of their career.