Senate President John Cullerton, D-Chicago, has already said the Senate will vote this week on an override. Presumably, the chamber could succeed. The Senate voted 38-17 to approve the bill. It would take 36 votes to override.
The House is a different story. The vote there was 67-25 in May. It takes 71 votes in the House to override.
But 17 House members, all but two of them Republicans, took a walk. They didn’t vote on the bill. That includes most of the Republicans from the Springfield area, who represent large numbers of state workers. They can always take another walk on an override, but in the meantime, they’ll probably get pressure from constituents to support an override — just as they’re likely to get pressure from Republican leadership to support their governor and vote against it.
Unless something changes, there won’t be enough House votes for an override.
The ad is weak, and re-tells the same story from a union worker perspective without qualifying its statement about affecting other non-union workers.
I see an add produced that does the opposite…tell the story from a business or non-union worker perspective that tries to inform why contracting or privatizing various “government” functions is a bad thing (cronyism, hidden and/or higher costs, etc.) Follow up with another ad that reinforces why government should be the lead in various services and how unions have helped in training, safety, etc. (IBEW, and others.)
Keep in mind that I come from a long line of Republican voters and conservative roots…but I am really tired of hearing anyone say one thing then govern another…if your words mean nothing then nothing will be your reward.
The governor vetoed the bill to force a strike because, ultimately his best and final offer will be something that AFSCME couldn’t possibly agree to. Rauner doesn’t seem to care about the impact on the needy either, because he wants to hold the budget hostage for his anti union agenda. Given all of that, this ad is pretty weak, because it’s not like the governor hasn’t given AFSCME plenty of ammunition to use. The SEIU ads did a much better job of making the case against the governor.
Methinks those “Republicans from the Springfield area” will conveniently be out of town on family vacations when that override vote is called in the House.
==Rauner says the union demands an 11.5 percent pay increase over four years, while eliminating $500 million in health care savings. The union also wants a 37.5 hour workweek, five weeks of vacation and more expensive health benefits.==
These are all things that have been in every AFSCME state contracts over the last 30 years!
The ad barely ranks “pass” because it does clumsily try to get some information across. The constant segues are irritating. Flashing back to protests seems to contradict a bit what she’s saying. Worst of all, this one really, really drags. A pass, but a weak one.
Rauner is asking the AFSCME for massive givebacks that no one in their right mind would agree to. We can’t go back to the management practices of the early 20th century. Most union members are OK with modest givebacks as long as we don’t have to give too much. An arbitrator is the only way to avoid a strike in my opinion.
In normal circumstances a bill like this is not needed, and would be risky for AFSCME. However, when we have a Governor campaigned on having to shut down government to get cuts from state employees, and is standing firm on draconian cuts to health care insurance coverage to state and state university employees - and their dependents, and retirees, a bill like this is needed. A better ad and campaign is needed though - and AFSCME also needs to get the state university employees and retirees behind them since AFSCME is also negotiating health ins coverage for them.
He wants a strike, all right. I don’t think he understands just how fast things would unravel if he provoked one. I estimate two days of cleaning up the mess for each one day of strike. There are too many automated processes that need daily tending. You can’t just shut them all down and then start them all back up again without individual recovery plans.
To the House Republicans that have state employees in your district: think about the economic devastation your district will feel if state employees go on strike. It’s going to make reelection much more difficult regardless of Rauner money.
so a combination of social worker and paralegal is someone without social work degrees or paralegal certificate who is actually a clerk. Very weak, sure every employee wants a raise and no changes to costly and becoming more costly perks.
-You know the world has gone haywire when a large union campaigns to have its right to strike taken away-
Read between the lines. That should tell you something right there. Why would they do that unless the other side was completely on another planet with their negotiation offers.
BTW - The negotiations are so bad this time around that they are still on contract language and haven’t even reached the economic stage of negotiations yet.
Political implications aside, a strike or lockout would be devastating to those depending on benefits administered by the State. At DHS, 2 or 3 days of “catch up” will be required for every day a Human Services Caseworker is not processing applications for Medicaid, Food Stamps (SNAP) and TANF cash benefits. At least 2 days of “catch up” for every day a HFS Child Support Specialist isn’t processing a support order or establishment of paternity. The potential for civil unrest cannot be overlooked.
Will Mautino and M. Davis be around to vote? Gonna be tough to pass without all Dems in attendance and even then they’re still 2 votes short (Franks and Thapedi).
There is one very important aspect of SB1229 that fails to be mentioned. When binding arbitration is available it is rarely ever used. The threat of having someone from the outside come into your negotiations and pick one side or the other generally forces both sides to come together at the bargaining table and work toward a resolution. They tend to move away from the extremes. Arbitrators rarely will decide with the side that presents an extreme agenda or tries to initiate ground breaking new rules into a contract. If AFSCME is being unreasonable then why would they want the threat of binding arbitration? If Rauner thinks he’s being more than fair then why is he so set against SB1229?
This bill also has a sunset clause in it to end at the end of Rauner’s first term. It mirrors the law in Illinois that public union contracts can not be negotiated beyond the current governors term. The SJR editorial states that ‘Senate Bill 1229 would take collective bargaining for future contracts with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees out of the hands of the governor’s office and place the issue in the hands of binding arbitrators.’ They’re wrong.
Confirmation from the data entry side (local offices). Ask CMS for the current state of disaster-recovery plans for the (hundreds of) automated systems and you will get a blank stare. Civil unrest indeed!
I know this will come as a shock to most AFCSME workers, but most people drawing a paycheck in Illinois are working “at will” and can be fired, or leave, with on notice. When your employer is broke or having tough times, some years they don’t give raises even though many are deserved through increased quality and productivity. The solution of addressing this problem is simple; you find a new job that pays better. Ooops! I forgot. Having one of the worst business environments in the nation due to Dem policies in Chicago, Cook County and Springfield have pretty much dried up job growth, except for the last year aberration.
Time for an AFCSME reality check. the state is broke. They can’t afford raises. They can’t afford increasing benefit contributions. If you’re worth more than the taxpayers are willing to pay, find a private sector job that rewards you for your skills and work ethic. Throwing a tantrum and trying to damage the state is an unsustainable policy and wholly inappropriate under the current state financial conditions. The crooked pols in Illinois created this mess by giving you salaries, pensions and benefits that were unsustainable. You’ve known that for a long time. time for rebalancing for sustainability and balancing out past mistakes.
Joe M makes a statement I’ve been trying to understand and get more info about, and I’m not making much progress.
Quote… ” AFSCME also needs to get the state university employees and retirees behind them since AFSCME is also negotiating health ins coverage for them.”
Where in statute or regulation or Exec Order or anywhere else does it say AFSCME has authority to negotiate for retirees? Can anyone enlighten me?
This state worker comes off as sincere. The ad is a needed reminder that she and a lot of others do important work. If she’s locked out or on strike families that rely on the state are going to be hurting, that’s a fact. The override gives lawmakers their only opportunity to keep her and tens of thousands of others on the job.
@Arizona Bob
I have yet for you to find a solution to the problem instead of you always complaining about union workers. Like I said before, you complain about the environment here in Illinois but don’t currently work nor live in this state. Owning a piece of property doesn’t count. If you hate it here so bad, stay where your at already.
Has the sun gotten to Arizona Bob? Has he forgotten that AFSCME got no pay increase in the first year of its last contract and then received 2% increases in each of the two subsequent years, a 1.33% average increase over the term of the contract?
And they had to fight like hell to get it.
@Arizona Bob
Since you complain about Illinois so much, lets highlight the problems with Arizona currently.
1. A legislature that is against independent redistricting. The state lost in court on that one with the U.S. Supreme Court recently.
2. Can’t pay their pension bills- same boat as Illinois. The state lost in court on that one.
3. Underfunding the education system- the state lost in court on that one.
You talk about Cook County? Lets talk about the Maricopa County sheriff. You say Cook County? How about Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his civil rights lawsuits currently awaiting him?
As a retiree I’ve paid attention to the aspect of less coverage and extremely higher deductibles. As it’s been pointed out on past posts by astute folks there is probably a threshold of reduction at which time the ISC will revisit it’s ruling on retiree healthcare.
The override of the no strike bill is the best chance AFSCME has simply because it appears the other side is demanding, not negotiating. I’d spend my time and resources on pressuring the Springfield area house republicans and flush out their positions on an override. I would’n let them hide under their desks. This is a war for their existence not just a contract dispute.
I agree, the tv ad is not the best. But again, that veto override is the best shot they have.
- Common sense Steve - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:53 pm:
An override here seems like a no brainer for dems. Gives them a chance to show unity, power and support for middle class and fairness. Also makes the republicans in areas with lots of state workers look weak or non suppotive of their voter base if they disappear or vote no. That’s why it will get done.
Truthteller, the state couldn’t even afford what they gave to state workers. That’s the problem. Meantime local school districts are able to higher than COLA raises and can afford to give end of career spikes that drain money that COULD be used to give them even a portion of what public education gets. There’s a battle going on between the state workers and public education workers, but the state workers haven’t figured out how they’re being short changed.
Anonymous- yes, we have fiscal problems in Arizona, just not anywhere NEAR as severe as in Illinois. Now we have much less corrupt and more competent government than Illinois (term limits helps in that endeavor) and we understand the problem and we’ve got a number of proactive solutions to deal with it. We knew this was coming, and in the last election the options were discussed at length. That’s what responsible government does…and what Illinois government does NOT.
Regarding Sheriff Joe, he’s juts a victim of the most lawless POTUS and DOJ in US history. Everything he did was to protect the citizens of his state from enemies within and without, he did a much better job of that that Dart or Rahm. The fact that when state governments pass legislation mirroring Federal law for protection from dangerous illegal immigrants, they go after them big time. When cities like Chicago and San Fran pass laws to become “Sanctuary Cities”, essentially overriding the operant Federal law, Obama and his DOJ let it slide. So much for “equal protection under the law” in the Dem and Obama regime!
I have no statutory or other resources to point to that talk about AFSCME also negotiating health insurance coverage for non-union state employees, state university employees, retirees, etc. But in each contract that scenario comes up. It was in the news a lot last contract, because it was the first time the State began charging premiums for state university retirees who had put in 20 years of service. AFSCME said that was unconstitutional, but in case the courts ruled otherwise, AFSCME went ahead and negotiated the best deal they could for retirees. 1% of one’s pension if one was also covered by Medicare. 2% of one’s pension if one was not covered by Medicare. Of course the Illinois Supreme Court found those charges unconstitutional, and the State had to refund that money to retirees.
But the unions at state universities always state during these contracts, that whatever health ins coverage AFSCME negotiates, is what the state university employees also get, as both state and state university employees are under the same state health insurance plans and use the same benefits choice booklets.
Still going after the teachers I see. If we’d only “get them” the world would be great.
Oh, and that’s pretty rich to say Sheriff Joe is a victim. I’m sure he’d be interested to hear that. I’ve not seen that guy be a victim of anything except his goofy actions. Also (not that it matters because your entire conversation here is completely off topic) but I think the Supreme Court told the Sheriff where he could stick it also. But I wouldn’t want to interfere with your hyper partisan rhetoric.
==Throwing a tantrum and trying to damage the state is an unsustainable policy and wholly inappropriate under the current state financial conditions.==
I’ll take a 500% increase in healthcare contributions as soon as you do Bob. Until then go fly a kite. You seem to be keen on sticking it to people. Go pontificate your garbage somewhere else.
Re: AFSCME negotiating health ins for retirees, I did find this reference in an Illinois State Employment Association Retirees news letter, about 3/4s of the way down the page at: http://www.isearetirees.org/ It almost sounds like an Edgar executive order.
“During former Governor Edgar’s administration he gave all negotiating rights for health insurance to AFSCME because this union had more State employee members than the other unions. In addition, to keep from further complications (meaning reducing time spent with other State entities/departments) AFSCME health insurance negotiations would include everyone who worked for the State, including management, all other non-union employees, and in addition all State and university retirees.”
The ad stinks. AFSMCE’s PR campaign throughout this entire episode has been poor. There are plenty of things they could hit back on if they chose the right things instead of throwing everything at the wall. Nobody cares that people aren’t going to get a raise or that they are gonna get a couple less holidays. They should be pounding home the health insurance issue. That would be (or could be) effective if they want to continue their meme that the Governor is being extreme. To most people less holidays and a pay freeze isn’t extreme. A 500% increase to healthcare costs might get a little sympathy. I say might because I don’t think the public in general particularly cares what happens to state employees. But at least try with something legitimate.
@ AB
Quit wearing your tinfoil hat already. Arizona has a supermajority Republican legislature and they just lost at the U.S. Supreme Court with that case. Less corrupt and more competent government?
You want to talk about Sheriff Joe’s pre-trial detainees? Remember all of the reports about him serving moldy and expired food before the majority of people saw a judge?
Demo, a good ad is absolutely possible. The intent of this ad and all of their efforts seem to be internal. Maybe all of their members are nodding their heads gleefully at this ad and other efforts. I think you’re right. They need to focus their message externally to elicit some agreement that they’re not being cry babies.
Started weak, became progressively stronger. Incorporate more actual clips of the people these cuts would and are affecting. Toss the shots of the demonstrating workers. Most people could care less about government workers. And above all include nursing homes. The same nursing homes that many well healed kids dump their parents.
Started weak, became progressively stronger. Incorporate more actual clips of the people these cuts would and are affecting. Toss the shots of the demonstrating workers. Most people could care less about government workers. And above all include nursing homes. The same nursing homes that many well healed kids dump their parents.
- Leading InDecatur - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 3:08 pm:
Thanks to Anonymous (1:36)
Arizona Bob, and many others are prone to present opinion as fact, and to cherry-pick evidence. Perhaps it’s honest hyperbolic overreaching– I hope it’s not purposefully dishonest. But it’s great that on this blog posters are wellread and able to justify or challenge claims with evidence. Hat tip.
==Nobody cares that people aren’t going to get a raise or that they are gonna get a couple less holidays. They should be pounding home the health insurance issue.==
Agreed 100%. Should’ve used a worker (a mother with a sick dependent would work well.) just scraping by due to high medical costs and showed how she’ll be devastated by health care increases. At least use specific examples that hit home for many people. General complaints about how you’re fighting for workers because of the anti-union agenda isn’t likely to drum up much support.
I think you’re on to it. We never negotiated insurance because we always got what AFSMCE negotiated and I’m talking decades here. An executive order that nobody seems to be aware of would explain a lot..
Here is an example; I had a medical procedure last week that was pre-certified. I got a letter from the health insurance company today, stating pre-certification from the insurance company doesn’t mean the bill will be paid. WTH!
Who wrote that editorial? Sounds like a trib or civic committee Rauner lovefest. They fear a neutral arbitrator might actually be fair. Without that as a last resort Rauner will steamroll the unions and bring on the right to work longer and harder for less pay. Override time.
- My FiNgErS HuRt - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:01 am:
Well, that is certainly 61 seconds of my life I will never get back. zZzZzZzZzZz
- Captain Illini - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:13 am:
The ad is weak, and re-tells the same story from a union worker perspective without qualifying its statement about affecting other non-union workers.
I see an add produced that does the opposite…tell the story from a business or non-union worker perspective that tries to inform why contracting or privatizing various “government” functions is a bad thing (cronyism, hidden and/or higher costs, etc.) Follow up with another ad that reinforces why government should be the lead in various services and how unions have helped in training, safety, etc. (IBEW, and others.)
Keep in mind that I come from a long line of Republican voters and conservative roots…but I am really tired of hearing anyone say one thing then govern another…if your words mean nothing then nothing will be your reward.
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:15 am:
That may be a good thing. Try offering a solution for once.
- AC - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:17 am:
The governor vetoed the bill to force a strike because, ultimately his best and final offer will be something that AFSCME couldn’t possibly agree to. Rauner doesn’t seem to care about the impact on the needy either, because he wants to hold the budget hostage for his anti union agenda. Given all of that, this ad is pretty weak, because it’s not like the governor hasn’t given AFSCME plenty of ammunition to use. The SEIU ads did a much better job of making the case against the governor.
- Phil - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:17 am:
Methinks those “Republicans from the Springfield area” will conveniently be out of town on family vacations when that override vote is called in the House.
- Rufus - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:21 am:
4 out of 17 to get to 71… It’s possible. To be sure the lobbiests will be out in force.
- Shemp - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:21 am:
You know the world has gone haywire when a large union campaigns to have its right to strike taken away.
- Omega Man - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:23 am:
==Rauner says the union demands an 11.5 percent pay increase over four years, while eliminating $500 million in health care savings. The union also wants a 37.5 hour workweek, five weeks of vacation and more expensive health benefits.==
These are all things that have been in every AFSCME state contracts over the last 30 years!
- A guy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:33 am:
The ad barely ranks “pass” because it does clumsily try to get some information across. The constant segues are irritating. Flashing back to protests seems to contradict a bit what she’s saying. Worst of all, this one really, really drags. A pass, but a weak one.
- Omega Man - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:33 am:
Rauner is asking the AFSCME for massive givebacks that no one in their right mind would agree to. We can’t go back to the management practices of the early 20th century. Most union members are OK with modest givebacks as long as we don’t have to give too much. An arbitrator is the only way to avoid a strike in my opinion.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:35 am:
Sincere.
But half the bloggers here could pony up a sound bite with a lot more teeth that runs under ten seconds.
- Tournaround Agenda - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:38 am:
Omega, you’re assuming the governor wants to avoid a strike.
- Liberty - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:49 am:
Obviously most of you missed the target audience for the video.
- Joe M - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:51 am:
In normal circumstances a bill like this is not needed, and would be risky for AFSCME. However, when we have a Governor campaigned on having to shut down government to get cuts from state employees, and is standing firm on draconian cuts to health care insurance coverage to state and state university employees - and their dependents, and retirees, a bill like this is needed. A better ad and campaign is needed though - and AFSCME also needs to get the state university employees and retirees behind them since AFSCME is also negotiating health ins coverage for them.
- Omega Man - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:54 am:
He wants a strike, all right. I don’t think he understands just how fast things would unravel if he provoked one. I estimate two days of cleaning up the mess for each one day of strike. There are too many automated processes that need daily tending. You can’t just shut them all down and then start them all back up again without individual recovery plans.
- A Jack - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:54 am:
To the House Republicans that have state employees in your district: think about the economic devastation your district will feel if state employees go on strike. It’s going to make reelection much more difficult regardless of Rauner money.
- huh - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:04 am:
so a combination of social worker and paralegal is someone without social work degrees or paralegal certificate who is actually a clerk. Very weak, sure every employee wants a raise and no changes to costly and becoming more costly perks.
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:11 am:
-You know the world has gone haywire when a large union campaigns to have its right to strike taken away-
Read between the lines. That should tell you something right there. Why would they do that unless the other side was completely on another planet with their negotiation offers.
BTW - The negotiations are so bad this time around that they are still on contract language and haven’t even reached the economic stage of negotiations yet.
- Keyser Soze - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:14 am:
AFSCME has a difficult task if it intends to persuade anyone other than AFSCME members that it has the public’s interest in mind.
- kitty - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:18 am:
Political implications aside, a strike or lockout would be devastating to those depending on benefits administered by the State. At DHS, 2 or 3 days of “catch up” will be required for every day a Human Services Caseworker is not processing applications for Medicaid, Food Stamps (SNAP) and TANF cash benefits. At least 2 days of “catch up” for every day a HFS Child Support Specialist isn’t processing a support order or establishment of paternity. The potential for civil unrest cannot be overlooked.
- CrazyHorse - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:19 am:
Will Mautino and M. Davis be around to vote? Gonna be tough to pass without all Dems in attendance and even then they’re still 2 votes short (Franks and Thapedi).
- Bulldog58 - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:25 am:
There is one very important aspect of SB1229 that fails to be mentioned. When binding arbitration is available it is rarely ever used. The threat of having someone from the outside come into your negotiations and pick one side or the other generally forces both sides to come together at the bargaining table and work toward a resolution. They tend to move away from the extremes. Arbitrators rarely will decide with the side that presents an extreme agenda or tries to initiate ground breaking new rules into a contract. If AFSCME is being unreasonable then why would they want the threat of binding arbitration? If Rauner thinks he’s being more than fair then why is he so set against SB1229?
This bill also has a sunset clause in it to end at the end of Rauner’s first term. It mirrors the law in Illinois that public union contracts can not be negotiated beyond the current governors term. The SJR editorial states that ‘Senate Bill 1229 would take collective bargaining for future contracts with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees out of the hands of the governor’s office and place the issue in the hands of binding arbitrators.’ They’re wrong.
- Omega Man - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:27 am:
Confirmation from the data entry side (local offices). Ask CMS for the current state of disaster-recovery plans for the (hundreds of) automated systems and you will get a blank stare. Civil unrest indeed!
- Arizona Bob - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:32 am:
I know this will come as a shock to most AFCSME workers, but most people drawing a paycheck in Illinois are working “at will” and can be fired, or leave, with on notice. When your employer is broke or having tough times, some years they don’t give raises even though many are deserved through increased quality and productivity. The solution of addressing this problem is simple; you find a new job that pays better. Ooops! I forgot. Having one of the worst business environments in the nation due to Dem policies in Chicago, Cook County and Springfield have pretty much dried up job growth, except for the last year aberration.
Time for an AFCSME reality check. the state is broke. They can’t afford raises. They can’t afford increasing benefit contributions. If you’re worth more than the taxpayers are willing to pay, find a private sector job that rewards you for your skills and work ethic. Throwing a tantrum and trying to damage the state is an unsustainable policy and wholly inappropriate under the current state financial conditions. The crooked pols in Illinois created this mess by giving you salaries, pensions and benefits that were unsustainable. You’ve known that for a long time. time for rebalancing for sustainability and balancing out past mistakes.
- leeAzon - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:33 am:
Joe M makes a statement I’ve been trying to understand and get more info about, and I’m not making much progress.
Quote… ” AFSCME also needs to get the state university employees and retirees behind them since AFSCME is also negotiating health ins coverage for them.”
Where in statute or regulation or Exec Order or anywhere else does it say AFSCME has authority to negotiate for retirees? Can anyone enlighten me?
- Jeff Park Mom - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:43 am:
This state worker comes off as sincere. The ad is a needed reminder that she and a lot of others do important work. If she’s locked out or on strike families that rely on the state are going to be hurting, that’s a fact. The override gives lawmakers their only opportunity to keep her and tens of thousands of others on the job.
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:46 am:
@Arizona Bob
I have yet for you to find a solution to the problem instead of you always complaining about union workers. Like I said before, you complain about the environment here in Illinois but don’t currently work nor live in this state. Owning a piece of property doesn’t count. If you hate it here so bad, stay where your at already.
- Truthteller - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:49 am:
Has the sun gotten to Arizona Bob? Has he forgotten that AFSCME got no pay increase in the first year of its last contract and then received 2% increases in each of the two subsequent years, a 1.33% average increase over the term of the contract?
And they had to fight like hell to get it.
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:54 am:
@Arizona Bob
Since you complain about Illinois so much, lets highlight the problems with Arizona currently.
1. A legislature that is against independent redistricting. The state lost in court on that one with the U.S. Supreme Court recently.
2. Can’t pay their pension bills- same boat as Illinois. The state lost in court on that one.
3. Underfunding the education system- the state lost in court on that one.
You talk about Cook County? Lets talk about the Maricopa County sheriff. You say Cook County? How about Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his civil rights lawsuits currently awaiting him?
- Mouthy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:56 am:
As a retiree I’ve paid attention to the aspect of less coverage and extremely higher deductibles. As it’s been pointed out on past posts by astute folks there is probably a threshold of reduction at which time the ISC will revisit it’s ruling on retiree healthcare.
The override of the no strike bill is the best chance AFSCME has simply because it appears the other side is demanding, not negotiating. I’d spend my time and resources on pressuring the Springfield area house republicans and flush out their positions on an override. I would’n let them hide under their desks. This is a war for their existence not just a contract dispute.
- burbanite - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:14 pm:
The Ad is pretty mediocre, comes across a bit whiny.
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:19 pm:
I agree, the tv ad is not the best. But again, that veto override is the best shot they have.
- Common sense Steve - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:53 pm:
An override here seems like a no brainer for dems. Gives them a chance to show unity, power and support for middle class and fairness. Also makes the republicans in areas with lots of state workers look weak or non suppotive of their voter base if they disappear or vote no. That’s why it will get done.
- scott aster - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:09 pm:
So they got a small raise last time out……what is the 10 average & how do we compare in the midwest to gov and parivate sector????
- Arizona Bob - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:10 pm:
Truthteller, the state couldn’t even afford what they gave to state workers. That’s the problem. Meantime local school districts are able to higher than COLA raises and can afford to give end of career spikes that drain money that COULD be used to give them even a portion of what public education gets. There’s a battle going on between the state workers and public education workers, but the state workers haven’t figured out how they’re being short changed.
Anonymous- yes, we have fiscal problems in Arizona, just not anywhere NEAR as severe as in Illinois. Now we have much less corrupt and more competent government than Illinois (term limits helps in that endeavor) and we understand the problem and we’ve got a number of proactive solutions to deal with it. We knew this was coming, and in the last election the options were discussed at length. That’s what responsible government does…and what Illinois government does NOT.
Regarding Sheriff Joe, he’s juts a victim of the most lawless POTUS and DOJ in US history. Everything he did was to protect the citizens of his state from enemies within and without, he did a much better job of that that Dart or Rahm. The fact that when state governments pass legislation mirroring Federal law for protection from dangerous illegal immigrants, they go after them big time. When cities like Chicago and San Fran pass laws to become “Sanctuary Cities”, essentially overriding the operant Federal law, Obama and his DOJ let it slide. So much for “equal protection under the law” in the Dem and Obama regime!
- Joe M - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:10 pm:
I have no statutory or other resources to point to that talk about AFSCME also negotiating health insurance coverage for non-union state employees, state university employees, retirees, etc. But in each contract that scenario comes up. It was in the news a lot last contract, because it was the first time the State began charging premiums for state university retirees who had put in 20 years of service. AFSCME said that was unconstitutional, but in case the courts ruled otherwise, AFSCME went ahead and negotiated the best deal they could for retirees. 1% of one’s pension if one was also covered by Medicare. 2% of one’s pension if one was not covered by Medicare. Of course the Illinois Supreme Court found those charges unconstitutional, and the State had to refund that money to retirees.
It was also vaguely covered in a Feb 21st SJR article that AFSCME negotiates heath insurance coverage for all those groups.
http://www.sj-r.com/article/20150221/NEWS/150229852
But the unions at state universities always state during these contracts, that whatever health ins coverage AFSCME negotiates, is what the state university employees also get, as both state and state university employees are under the same state health insurance plans and use the same benefits choice booklets.
- Demoralized - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:20 pm:
AB:
Still going after the teachers I see. If we’d only “get them” the world would be great.
Oh, and that’s pretty rich to say Sheriff Joe is a victim. I’m sure he’d be interested to hear that. I’ve not seen that guy be a victim of anything except his goofy actions. Also (not that it matters because your entire conversation here is completely off topic) but I think the Supreme Court told the Sheriff where he could stick it also. But I wouldn’t want to interfere with your hyper partisan rhetoric.
- Wordslinger - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:21 pm:
AB, you’re back in AZ? A couple of weeks ago, weren’t you running hi-tech companies in Illinois, Kansas and other places?
To the video, it’s barely produced. Not worth posting on the Innertubes, much less adapting for TV.
If the idea is to persuade the persuadable, you might want to raise your game above home movies production values.
- Demoralized - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:22 pm:
==Throwing a tantrum and trying to damage the state is an unsustainable policy and wholly inappropriate under the current state financial conditions.==
I’ll take a 500% increase in healthcare contributions as soon as you do Bob. Until then go fly a kite. You seem to be keen on sticking it to people. Go pontificate your garbage somewhere else.
- Joe M - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:27 pm:
Re: AFSCME negotiating health ins for retirees, I did find this reference in an Illinois State Employment Association Retirees news letter, about 3/4s of the way down the page at: http://www.isearetirees.org/ It almost sounds like an Edgar executive order.
“During former Governor Edgar’s administration he gave all negotiating rights for health insurance to AFSCME because this union had more State employee members than the other unions. In addition, to keep from further complications (meaning reducing time spent with other State entities/departments) AFSCME health insurance negotiations would include everyone who worked for the State, including management, all other non-union employees, and in addition all State and university retirees.”
- Demoralized - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:35 pm:
To the post . . .
The ad stinks. AFSMCE’s PR campaign throughout this entire episode has been poor. There are plenty of things they could hit back on if they chose the right things instead of throwing everything at the wall. Nobody cares that people aren’t going to get a raise or that they are gonna get a couple less holidays. They should be pounding home the health insurance issue. That would be (or could be) effective if they want to continue their meme that the Governor is being extreme. To most people less holidays and a pay freeze isn’t extreme. A 500% increase to healthcare costs might get a little sympathy. I say might because I don’t think the public in general particularly cares what happens to state employees. But at least try with something legitimate.
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:38 pm:
@ AB
Quit wearing your tinfoil hat already. Arizona has a supermajority Republican legislature and they just lost at the U.S. Supreme Court with that case. Less corrupt and more competent government?
http://blogs.wsj.com/riskandcompliance/2014/12/04/study-names-arizona-as-most-corrupt-state/
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizonas-the-most-corrupt-state-in-america-according-to-survey-6633629
You want to talk about Sheriff Joe’s pre-trial detainees? Remember all of the reports about him serving moldy and expired food before the majority of people saw a judge?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio
Here, you read this and let me know what you think AB.
- A guy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:41 pm:
Demo, a good ad is absolutely possible. The intent of this ad and all of their efforts seem to be internal. Maybe all of their members are nodding their heads gleefully at this ad and other efforts. I think you’re right. They need to focus their message externally to elicit some agreement that they’re not being cry babies.
- West Side Willie - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 2:46 pm:
Started weak, became progressively stronger. Incorporate more actual clips of the people these cuts would and are affecting. Toss the shots of the demonstrating workers. Most people could care less about government workers. And above all include nursing homes. The same nursing homes that many well healed kids dump their parents.
- West Side Willie - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 2:46 pm:
Started weak, became progressively stronger. Incorporate more actual clips of the people these cuts would and are affecting. Toss the shots of the demonstrating workers. Most people could care less about government workers. And above all include nursing homes. The same nursing homes that many well healed kids dump their parents.
- Leading InDecatur - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 3:08 pm:
Thanks to Anonymous (1:36)
Arizona Bob, and many others are prone to present opinion as fact, and to cherry-pick evidence. Perhaps it’s honest hyperbolic overreaching– I hope it’s not purposefully dishonest. But it’s great that on this blog posters are wellread and able to justify or challenge claims with evidence. Hat tip.
- CrazyHorse - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 3:29 pm:
==Nobody cares that people aren’t going to get a raise or that they are gonna get a couple less holidays. They should be pounding home the health insurance issue.==
Agreed 100%. Should’ve used a worker (a mother with a sick dependent would work well.) just scraping by due to high medical costs and showed how she’ll be devastated by health care increases. At least use specific examples that hit home for many people. General complaints about how you’re fighting for workers because of the anti-union agenda isn’t likely to drum up much support.
- Mouthy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 4:39 pm:
- Joe M - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:27 pm:
I think you’re on to it. We never negotiated insurance because we always got what AFSMCE negotiated and I’m talking decades here. An executive order that nobody seems to be aware of would explain a lot..
- Politix - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 4:48 pm:
Finally the face of a typical AFSCME worker. Nice contrast to the overpaid lazy slob the governor has painted for the past six months.
- Mama - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 5:05 pm:
If this is the best ad they could come up with, AFSCME needs to hire a better PR company.
- Mama - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 5:20 pm:
Here is an example; I had a medical procedure last week that was pre-certified. I got a letter from the health insurance company today, stating pre-certification from the insurance company doesn’t mean the bill will be paid. WTH!
- Mama - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 5:22 pm:
This not only affects me, it also affects the doctor & his staff.
- Turnaroundthis - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 7:42 pm:
Who wrote that editorial? Sounds like a trib or civic committee Rauner lovefest. They fear a neutral arbitrator might actually be fair. Without that as a last resort Rauner will steamroll the unions and bring on the right to work longer and harder for less pay. Override time.