21 Comments - Plutocrat03 - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 10:00 am: Take down the construction barriers, patch up things from a safety perspective and cancel the rest of the construction season. 150 has lost their collective minds. Let the stimulus money flow to other states and projects that do not involve this greedy and ungrateful union. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 10:20 am: Plutocrat03 said, “Let the stimulus money flow to other states and projects that do not involve this greedy and ungrateful union.” With Fair Pay requirements part of the Porkulus package, does such a thing exist? - dave - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 10:23 am: Ah yes… its the greedy unions’ faults and has nothing to do with the greedy contractors. You do know that the contracts are making millions, right? Yet they are still asking the union to essentially take concessions/compensation cuts? - dupage dan - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 10:42 am: dave, “making millions”. Is that net profits or what? - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 10:56 am: - dave - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 10:23 am: “Ah yes… its the greedy unions’ faults and has nothing to do with the greedy contractors.” It IS partially the fault of the unions. Union lobbyists pressure legislators to include “fair wage” contracting into government-funded projects. This boxes out some contractors from competing since they do not want the added wage burden imposed by “fair wage” on their non-”fair wage” projects which would make them uncompetitive in this area of their business. So when government bids are competed, the government does not get the lowest possible bids from otherwise qualified contractors to perform the task. This additional price burden is directly borne by the taxpayer. I reiterate my position I have repeated made, there should be no unionized government employees, and “fair wage” requirements should be dropped from all government contracting. - dave - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 11:04 am: So when government bids are competed, the government does not get the lowest possible bids from otherwise qualified contractors to perform the task. Well… being that 90-95% of the workforce is unionized in the region, this isn’t very relevant. All the folks bashing the union for trying to protect (not increase) their compensation while ignoring the contractors amuse me. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 11:15 am: dave said, “Well… being that 90-95% of the workforce is unionized in the region, this isn’t very relevant.” There are 1 million union workers in the state: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm There are about 5.7 million in the Illinois workforce: http://www.stateofworkingillinois.niu.edu/swil/pubs/SWIL08_low_wage_empl_in_il.pdf One could contend that since the union influence is extremely strong (among the 6 highest percentage of the workforce in the U.S.), and therefore have a great influence in Illinois politics, like what I described above, Illinois taxpayers may receive a benefit by eliminating “fair-wage” requirements. If that were to happen (I’m not holding my breath), one could anticipate that union membership (and its influence in politics) may decrease. - Todd - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 11:36 am: Cinci – We don’t fight for “fair” wages rate language. We/I fight for prevailing wage rates. That the wages are based upon what rate prevails in the area. It does differ from county to county in areas. It was established by a survey of the contractors and the wages/benifits they pay. How does this make non-union contractors non-comeptetive? if the hourly wage rate is equal across the board, then the bid relies on cost of materials, and how efficient they are at getting the job done. The bid isn’t won or lost on the back or paychecks of the guys doing the work from a bidding sense. Right now with current wage rates unchanged from last year, Government engineers are seeing bids come in at 30 - 40% lower than there estimates. That isn’t because of wages. The contractors are cutting each others throats and trying to get work just to pay their notes. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 11:46 am: Todd, Prevailing Wages it is. You don’t see any interference in the market for labor rates as a result of of fighting for those rates on all government contracts? And do you think it is possible that the strength of the union influence on politicians can be driving the labor rate higher than it should be in the area, setting up some sort of non-consumer driven feedback loop? True competition would say look only at the bottom line of the cost of a project without the government mandates for certain wage structures. If the contractor is qualified to do the project, why should he pay more than he has to for labor, concrete, steel or any part of his business model. This says nothing about whether unions should exist or not. I think unions definitely have a place in labor. What I object to is the fact that union lobbying of politicians puts in place arbitrary standards (remember I think the contractor must be qualified, and should also use certified materials that meet all the applicable specifications) that increase the cost of a project to the taxpayer. - Plutocrat03 - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 12:03 pm: This strike is just the tip of the iceberg. Work rules in the municipal environment force higher than needed staffing levels in all levels of government who have employees covered by this union. This results in financial drain on public treasuries throughout the state. Prevailing wage rates are one thing. Unfair enrichment is another. - dave - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 12:25 pm: There are 1 million union workers in the state … There are about 5.7 million in the Illinois workforce I meant of the construction workforce. The rest of the labor workforce in IL is irrelevant to this conversation. - Todd - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 12:35 pm: when work dies in other parts of the country we see non-union gyspies show up here looking for work. So we are suppose to allow them to come up here and depress wages just because? We don’t agree with that. local property taxes are not going to go down because the wages get depressed. Neither are the costs of durable goods, gas or anything thing else. So we will insist that Illinois wages be paid by governmental bodies using taxpayer dollars to ensure that the standard of living for Illinois workers and their families are not undermined. Like it or not. And as a matter of fact the original federal prevailing wage law Davis - Bacon was passed by two republicans to stop the exploitation of blacks in the south on construction projects. So while the maybe able to out source call centers to India for cheaper labor costs, we are not going to agree to importing cheap labor to ruin the jobs we have left here. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 12:49 pm: Todd, A principled stand. On behalf of the taxpayers, I make the opposite case about the influence and additional costs attributed to unions. This is a great debate and reinforces a long-held point of mine, we need such debates played out in public by our elected officials. With arguments like yours, and when somebody can come forward to explain my arguments in a similar elegant fashion, let the voters decide and the chips fall where they may! - Todd - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 12:56 pm: I’ll tel you what I told republicans before as a committeeman– I live in Dupage because I can afford to as a kid with nothing more than a high school diploma and a few community college courses. As a construction worker, I make enough to consider taxes, schools and other issues. If you screw with my job so I can’t provide for my family — that kicks over a honrnets nest I don’t think you want. Most of us trades guys are conservative at heart. Leave us alone we you get the Reagan democratic voter. And it works. I’m still the same kid with nothing more than a high school diploma. Just a little different job. But I still love to get on a machine and sometime really miss those days. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 1:42 pm: Cincy, if I recall from yesterday, one of your principled stands includes creating new federal law to allow states to file bankruptcy for the express purpose of shedding their contractual and pension obligations. There are principles, and then there’s principal. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 1:56 pm: wordslinger, If you remembered correctly, I didn’t say that the government should change the bankruptcy law, but put the concept out for debate in reply to a discussion on state insolvency. It’s a discussion, and a worthy one at that. Perhaps you would prefer the posters on Rich’s site to march in lock-step with your liberal philosophy? - Todd - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 2:23 pm: Cinci – On behalf of the taxpayers, I can point to studies where the work is done by union shops, there are fewer cost overruns and the job gets done right and on time or ahead of schedule. I think that is a boone for tax payers. I also think that when locals work, the eocnomy is better off than when travelers work and send all the money out of state except for some hotel taxes. After all construction work is not a tourist industry. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 8:27 pm: –We need a new Chapter of the U.S. Bankruptcy codes, similar to Chapter 9, that allows for state government reorganization.– You go on, Cincy, in a mealy-mouthed way, to talk about labor and pensions. We know what you want to do. It’s not conservative to be a oonman abusing the courts to walk away from your obligations, nor is it exclusively liberal to think you should live up to them when you have the ways and means. The state is not insolvent. It is choosing not to meet its obligations in a timely manner. What’s so hard to understand? - Todd - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 8:33 pm: Word – one thing people seem to miss is that our pension is privately funded and has nothing to do with the state making contributions. The pensions we get for our members fall under ERISA and are DBA plans. At the end of this filing period we expect to be 80% or better on our pension fund. - Judgment Day Is On The Way - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 8:46 pm: Re: Streator, IL Tornado. Rant: What The Hell Is Wrong With FEMA? And the rest of the federal government? We’ve got two of the poorer gateway communities in upper central Illinois in Dwight, IL and Streator, IL Streator (and Dwight, to a lesser degree) takes a big time hit (and I’ve seen it, up close)and has a serious swath of damage caused, much of it to middle/lower middle class homes in a pretty depressed area (even before our current economic crisis). These folks are all motivated consumers - all they need is a helping hand and they’ll get busy putting their community back together. They’re not too proud to accept assistance, but these are people who want to get back up on their feet and put their lives back together. Good people. And we’ve got a federal government who wants to spend $2 billion dollars on more wind towers (and supposedly create 5,100 jobs - yeah, right). Screw that! Give that money to FEMA for disaster assistance to the local residents across the USA, and those folks will be the most motivated consumers you’ll ever see. You want to put that $2 billion back into the economy quick - all these property owners and small business types will get that done - and quickly. It’s probably because all these “little folks” aren’t politically connected and don’t qualify as “Too Big To Fail”. - Amalia - Thursday, Jul 8, 10 @ 9:49 pm: Condolences to the friends and family of the fallen Chicago police officer. Rest in peace, hero. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.