54 Comments - Almost the Weekend - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 2:56 pm: So we won’t walk off the ledge, but we will get up and walk on the ledge. - Precinct Captain - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:02 pm: Expect Rauner’s next demand to be a supermajority for a strike authorization. - Stiffler - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:06 pm: Is the vote to strike open or closed? Will other members or leadership know how members vote? - Bobby Catalpa - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:06 pm: — Expect Rauner’s next demand to be a supermajority for a strike authorization. — Nope. Expect Rauner to declare the strike illegal. That’s all the cover he needs to fire each and every striker. That’s the endgame. - NIU Grad - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:07 pm: But how does the vote happen? Are there multiple sites throughout the state, or a mail ballot? - MAD MAX - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:10 pm: If the Court declares impasse and doesn’t grant a stay, then it’s a “legal” strike, no matter what the gov tries to put in the press. - BK Bro - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:13 pm: AFSCME won’t strike. (1) members can’t afford to (2) Governor would be granted opportunity to replace them (even if temporarily) (3) public generally won’t support them - Rich Miller - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:16 pm: NIU Grad, that info is at the link. - Give Me A Break - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:18 pm: I just don’t see a strike in the future. Once you get beyond the union cheerleaders in each agency, most state workers I’ve talked to realize a strike does nothing and may well turn the public against them. Maybe Roberta will lead a handful of green shirts to storm the Bastille with her, but the first time they miss a paycheck, pretty sure they will discover a new found level of love for their jobs and go back to work. - walker - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:19 pm: Kinda like a “war powers resolution” vote in Congress? - Shanks84 - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:21 pm: Rauner won’t come back to the table. There are labor laws that protect those who go on strike (not that those would stop Rauner), and a vote not to go on strike for a state employee…is a direct pay cut many can’t afford, as many have been without the promised step raise for two years now… Not sure how a strike would be declared illegal, pretty sure the courts have to declare that. - Anonymous - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:22 pm: A strike by AFSCME would be a disaster for most members. Most of these folks live paycheck to paycheck. Give them a month without a check and most would be unable to pay their rent,buy the basics. The cost for paying their insurance in total would be impossible for most. I predict the only strike will be in their leaders dreams. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:22 pm: ===Nope. Expect Rauner to declare the strike illegal. That’s all the cover he needs to fire each and every striker. That’s the endgame.=== Which won’t work because he can’t fire each and every striker that legally can strike. Ugh. This isn’t PATCO, no matter what Raunerites say. - Cubs in '16 - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:22 pm: The percentage of members who vote in favor of a strike authorization could determine how AFSCME will play this. If, say, only 53% of membership vote in favor there’s no way AFSCME authorizes a strike. If the percentage is around 90 then AFSCME holds more cards. I don’t think they’ll publicly state how the vote turned out; especially if support is low. If so, then AFSCME membership is pretty much at the mercy of the GA to force Rauner back to the bargaining table via the ‘grand bargain’ (if Rauner in fact wants one) or swallow the horrible last/best/final offer. - Mr.Black - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:32 pm: The only route that possibly leads to a better contract for state employees is going on strike (assuming the impasse holds and Rauner imposes his terms) Accepting Rauner’s terms = certainly a bad deal for state employees Going on strike = maybe get a better deal, maybe forced to accept Rauner’s terms - Nieva - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:36 pm: Back in the 70s when I worked in the mines we struck a lot. We had a strike fund that helped cover the cost of being off work for extended periods. That fund was money taken from our checks over an extended time. Most local banks allowed for missed payments. We were off for over 100 days in 1978 and when the strike was over we got a nice raise, better benefits and a pension raise. That being said most never recovered the money lost from being off that long. What kind of strike fund does AFSCME have and will the other unions honor the picket lines? - OpenYourEyes - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:39 pm: - BK Bro - (3) public generally won’t support them Why do people believe that State Workers care if there is support from the public? The State Workforce has been bad mouthed and demonized for the better part of 6 years or more. We already know that the public has made their choice, but public opinion doesn’t matter in this outcome. To those that don’t think members will vote for a strike I say, “Open your eyes”! It will not matter if the person next to me or the person behind me votes for a strike. Mark my words because this will be the statement… “An overwhelming majority of voters have approved the authorization of a strike.” Why do I say this? It is simple… the Union 1) will never disclose the “actual” vote totals and always say it was an overwhelming majority 2) the Union cannot allow the members to vote against a strike because that would make the Union look like a fool. That would make the Union look as if they have been fighting for something the membership does not want and Gov Rauner would be the winner in that scenario. - Anonymous - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:40 pm: “Getting a better deal” in this case means not losing as much as feared. - Steward As Well.... - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:44 pm: Not to worry Stiffler. No names on the ballot. - tired of politics - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:45 pm: Under Rauner’s proposal he would have the right to hire non-union workers to perform union work. Rauner would also have the option to keep the non-union worker and layoff the union worker. Under the old contract Rauner would need to show a financial savings for the state to keep the non-union worker. I would be more concerned about losing my job permanently versus temporarily while on strike. - MyNewName - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:48 pm: The PATCO (Federal Air Traffic Controller) strike (that President Reagan ended with a mass firing) does not apply to most public workers in Illinois. PATCO workers knew that they were barred from striking by Federal Law and they struck anyway. Reagan was acting within his authority when he fired them because they had been deemed “essential” prior to that strike. Almost all public union workers in Illinois are allowed to strike and employers are legally barred from firing them for striking. This brings up an important question for public workers in Illinois - just who is “essential” and who is “nonessential”? That’s a good question: 1) Public Union Workers who are “essential” are Policemen, Firemen and Prison guards. Basically it’s anyone whose absence would present a “clear and present danger” to the public. 2) All other Public Union Workers are “nonessential”. - ProU - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:53 pm: In the private sector, when the last and final offer is implemented the employer can stop the deduction of union dues through it’s payroll process. Any question has to if the state has ceased dues deduction for AFSCME members? - He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:53 pm: It is a Lose/Lose situation for the Union. They would be better keeping people at work and hope to negotiate better than what they (AFSCME) did this time. I have heard too many Union members say they do not trust the vote count. - Ahoy! - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:54 pm: From the link: “The wage freeze combined with such a steep health care hike would mean a $10,000 pay cut for the average state employee. That might not be much to Rauner, but it’s too much for the rest of us.” I would be interested to see how they calculated this. They of course did not give their math, but it’s most likely worded very poorly because not getting a future pay increase, is not the same as taking a pay cut. What pay increase percentages and step increases were they calculating and for how long to arrive at this large number they are promoting? - scott aster - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:55 pm: Rich…..is there a link to what the issues that both sides are in disagreement??? I’ve lost track. thanks - Numbers? - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:56 pm: I wouldn’t put much stock in strike vote authorization percentages, even at 90%. Most members may vote yes just to try and prove something to Rauner (like that will sway him), but the proof will be in their actions. I’m a retiree, sorry I mean annuitant, and I keep in touch with my former coworkers. The majority of them still have kids in college, mortgages, etc. and stated they cannot afford to strike. As for those who do strike if there is one, after missing several paychecks and bearing the cost of insurance premiums, they will be back to work and the effectiveness of the strike will be diminished. - Anon1234 - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 3:59 pm: As a union member, I see no choice but to strike. As to people living paycheck to paycheck, those are the exact people who can not afford Rauner’s contract. Due to the higher health insurance costs, I’m looking at about 3 weeks lost pay EVERY year due to this contract. As others have said, the ability to outsource is the real killer though. Once implemented, this Governor will privatize as many of our jobs as possible to either friends or the lowest bidder. I see striking as no more risky than quitting a job where I hate the boss and his terms. Most of my coworkers feel the same way. Many of us can and will find other temporary work during the strike. If the governor doesn’t change his mind, we’ll find work elsewhere. It is the people served by state services who suffer. - Honeybear - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:02 pm: My local is ready to do this. We expect a high voter turnout and an overwhelming majority to authorize a strike. Nobody wants a strike but Southwest Illinois has had enough. Spirits are high from our rallies and events in December and Thursdays membership meeting made me even more hopeful. Our planning is paying off and we are executing it on schedule. We are ready to rumble. I only speak for myself but I’m not going to be ruled by fear. It is Rauner and the legislature who should be afraid of what we do. Already two veteran caseworkers just today filed paperwork to retire. Go ahead with this crap and a God is my witness the workforce will collapse. - AC - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:04 pm: Union members who “can’t afford to strike” better get another job lined up before their current job is contracted out at a higher cost. - Cubs in '16 - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:11 pm: ===Rich…..is there a link to what the issues that both sides are in disagreement??? I’ve lost track. thanks=== They are in disagreement about basically everything. The only financial term AFSCME has agreed to is a wage freeze but only if it’s coupled with a much more modest increase in health ins. costs. - AC - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:12 pm: ==I have heard too many Union members say they do not trust the vote count.== Do you write for the Sangamon Sun? - Stiffler - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:27 pm: -Steward As Well- Thank you for the info. - RNUG - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:31 pm: == … will the other unions honor the picket lines? == Would like to think so, but they won’t KNOW until it happens. - Johnnie F. - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:33 pm: I’m keeping in mind that this is more about the next negotiations than the current contract that is half over. If you cave in now, where will you be 2 years from now when there will be another 100 percent increase in health and another salary freeze. I hope a court intervenes while the case is heard outside of Rauner’s appointed labor board. - Anonymous - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:34 pm: There is too much misinformation on this site regarding the legality of a strike,…please get informed. - The Dude Abides - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:40 pm: One of my in laws, who is VP of his Local, told me that if there was 55-60% voting for a strike, they likely wouldn’t authorize it. It would probably take something on the order of at least 70%. If they strike they would be out a month at the most, probably not quite that long. I’m just passing along what he told me last week when I talked to him. - Anonymous - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:41 pm: http://m.afscme31.org/get-the-facts?link_id=2&can_id=5f9c227774bae432e97cfcaaf20472ea&source=email-strike-authorization-vote-set&email_referrer=strike-authorization-vote-set&email_subject=strike-authorization-vote-set - Cubs in '16 - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:44 pm: ===If they strike they would be out a month at the most, probably not quite that long.=== Do you know why your in-law feels this way? Just curious. - Johnnie F. - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:46 pm: Honeybear is correct. The collapse has been occurring for the past few years…only the acceleration is increasing. We have lost many and if there was a strike with workers crossing the line the post strike workplace would be volatile. My workplace will vote strike b/c it is the only option. There certainly will be a death if my agency is out more than a couple of days. Even Rauner can’t survive a real press firestorm about what happens on his watch even with his resources and IPI. - Anonymous - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:53 pm: I suspect Rauner will call the strike illegal, even though it isn’t, and fire anyone who strikes, even though he legally can’t, and make the fired workers fight him in court to get their jobs back. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 4:59 pm: ===…and make the fired workers fight him in court to get their jobs back.=== At worst a TRO on the firing would be tried, then it would look worse as Rauner will be litigating against currently “working” state workers, and no grounds to fire them… as they are on strike. That’s not good for any governor. - DuPage Bard - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 5:05 pm: Rauner should avoid this- OW-Governor’s own! No budget for two years, failed to improve state’s credit rating, can’t cut a deal on anything, people fleeing the state, state employees on strike…….anything else? You can only blame so much on Mike Madigan- he isn’t the Governor. - kitty - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 5:39 pm: Where is the concern from the General Assembly over Gov Rauner eliminating the requirement to demonstrate cost effectiveness before outsourcing work being performed by State employees to the private sector? This will nullify the Rutan decision and result in large scale corporate patronage. - Honeybear - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 6:11 pm: EXACTLY KITTY!!!!! - Robert the 1st - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 6:45 pm: =There certainly will be a death if my agency is out more than a couple of days.= Wow. Maybe AFSCME can put out ads detailing it? I’m sure folks will rally to ensure you keep your current insurance and early overtime. - Former hillrod - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 7:06 pm: All this makes me wonder what the Velvet Hammer has up his sleeve. It’s curious how he has said next to nothing about the supposed grand bargain or the governors war against state employees. Could something be brewing? - Mama - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 7:36 pm: Which union members will not be able to strike, legally ? - Anonymous - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 7:40 pm: “What kind of strike fund does AFSCME have” The last time I checked, AFSCME does NOT have a strike fund. - Liberty - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 10:09 pm: I would not be surprised to see a strike fund through an agreement with another union. http://www.afscme31.org/news/illinois-labor-movement-supports-state-employees - Robert the 1st - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 10:21 pm: If I were a trade union member nothing could make me go fair-share faster than my dues going to a government union that never saw fit to prepare their own strike fund. - Anonymous - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 10:23 pm: ASFCME does have a strike fund, since it cashed-in most of its investments months ago. These funds will go to picketers and those most in need. All can strike except for the prison guards. - Johnnie F. - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 10:29 pm: The GA and the Governor establish, fund and administer the state work force who perform some very critical tasks in health and public safety. It is The Governor’s obligation to ensue critical services protecting our citizens are maintained. He’s spent two years trashing the staff who perform the tasks that make him successful as a Governor. What CEO spends the bulk of their time trying to sabotage their own company’s workforce? And yeah I’d like to keep that run of the mill state HMO I belong to, which I pay 20% of the premiums. It has almost identical coverage to what I had in the healthcare field in the private sector. It’s average…not platinum. - Anonymous - Monday, Jan 23, 17 @ 11:39 pm: As stated before, a strike is a loose/loose. If workers assured every policy was followed to the letter of the law, if every violation pointed out and in some cases the court administrator advised of the State’s violation, then add a slow down to the mix…. This should have happened months ago. Unfortunately it hasn’t happened. - Honeybear - Tuesday, Jan 24, 17 @ 9:00 am: As far as I know honestly we don’t have a strike fund. A year ago I was told there was but then found out that it wasn’t true. But the whole point anyway is to try to avoid a strike. Trust my earnestness and honesty. I have consistently said if we get that far the workforce will totally collapse. You can’t just contract out our work. Many if not most positions are very complex riddled with reems of policy and statute federal and state. In our diminished state we are already stopping way to much. Accountability no time no resources. Waste fraud and a use. With what people with what resources. Efficiency? Bite me really. We are now punishably behind. The Feds are barking up our behinds on so many things. Not kidding we are going down right now. Ask any front liner. You push this a fricking millimeter further It’s over regardless of strike or labor It’s over regardless of Rauner and management Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.