96 Comments - Echo The Bunnyman - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:23 am: The construction trade leaders did good by their members. - OpenYourEyes - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:26 am: I would like to see the comparison on “privatization” add to this spreadsheet. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:29 am: Or Echo the trades were allowed to do well so that Rauner could constantly pummel AFSCME for being difficult. Heck yeah we’re going to “fight like hell for the living ” to quote mother Jones. The other unions got a temporary reprieve. The assault on prevailing wage and PLA’s will rev up as soon as he’s fine with AFSCME. Divide and conquer. He erred by taking on all labor too soon. - A State Employee Guy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:29 am: Curious to see of those minority unions that didn’t have their health care 100%’d, what percent increase they did agree to? My quarter says it’s much more than the 3% that AFSCME is offering so late in the game. - sickntired - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:30 am: Can Afscme take my dues money and start buying ad time/space to spread the news? If people understood where we stand, what we’ll accept, and our issues, maybe someone might care. But then again, when it’s a race to the bottom driven by the 1%, maybe nobody cares. - kitty - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:30 am: No reference to comparisons pertaining to the outsourcing or privatization. - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:32 am: When you negotiate in good faith, you meet in the middle. When you try and force through an arbitration bill and stall for 12 months, you either win or accept you opponent’s terms. Doesn’t matter if that’s what Rauner wanted all along. Your leadership gave it to him. - PlayK8 - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:32 am: Strange, no mention of the elimination of the economic justification clause for outsourcing? That is the biggest issue for me and the one AFSCME should be harping on. - AC - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:36 am: Robert the 1st, let’s stop pretending that Rauner couldn’t return to the bargaining table. It’s a choice that he’d make if he actually wanted to reach an agreement with AFSCME. This “the labor board decided, there’s nothing Rauner can do” routine isn’t just inaccurate, it’s also getting tired. - FBVR - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:37 am: Yes, please get Lindall to get information about privatization. If the other unions dont have unlimited privatization in their contacts, that will put a big hole in Ruiner’s “substantially similar ” claim. - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:41 am: =Or Echo the trades were allowed to do well so that Rauner could constantly pummel AFSCME for being difficult.= I imagine that’s true to an extent. AFSCME has been the target since before day 1. - the shizle - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:42 am: - A State Employee Guy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:29 am: Curious to see of those minority unions that didn’t have their health care 100%’d, what percent increase they did agree to? My quarter says it’s much more than the 3% that AFSCME is offering so late in the game. Under Teamsters 916 if we agreed to switch to insurance provided by the union the state would pick up the employee share….so there’s that! - Echo The Bunnyman - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:48 am: If AFSCME was the target since before day one which we can agree now in hindsight. Should hey not have realized that sooner and negotiated accordingly earlier on? Maybe that’s when a PR blitz may have worked? When you are the target and don’t realize until it’s too late, this is the situation. They have to take what the Governor gives them. Not a good position. - Precinct Captain - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:55 am: Wait, so this data is telling me that Bruce and Rauner and his “superstars” are dishonest!? Next thing you’ll tell me there is gambling at Rick’s Cafe! - A State Employee Guy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:58 am: @FBVR I have to think if those unions also didn’t AFSCME would have been the first to let us know that. - Anotherretiree - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:01 pm: The agreements with the smaller unions were loss leaders. He gave them more than he would like in order to divide. He’ll come back after them on their next contract. - sharkette - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:06 pm: but, individual, private sector health care costs,,85% of people are small bus, fam bus, work for themselves, have 100% increase in healthcare costs.. and that’s ok for everyone but,, union people..does not seem rational - Consideration - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:06 pm: If Rauner believe that his proposal was truly fair and AFSCME’s requests were not - - he wouldn’t have vetoed those arbitration bills. He should have gladly accepted going to arbitration with the idea that his offer would be accepted by the arbitrator. Instead, he fought against it, heavily. Because he knew he wouldn’t win. - Spidad60 - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:13 pm: The “merit” system agreed to by Teamsters 916 is a total disaster. Grievances will still be processing almost a year after the evaluation period ended. There is NO consistency of scoring employees’ evaluations from Bureau to Bureau, even in the same Division. - Anon123 - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:18 pm: Teamsters contract does call for Health Care increases if employees do not choose the Teamster plan. This is the probleM - AFSCME does not clarify or tell whole picture. Teamsters offered its members a better plan than the state less cost to the state. - blakeer1 - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:19 pm: https://youtu.be/TGTKN0DaxzQ - working stiff - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:20 pm: much more of this needs to get out. stop playing by the old rules. rauner doesn’t follow them anyway. game plan should have changed long ago. - Louis G Atsaves - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:25 pm: So in the few rare instances where AFSCME and the State are in agreement, AFSCME continues to object to implementing those agreements? No explanation why. After spending roughly 18 months angrily saying NO to the highlighted issues and others, after several attempts at an end run around the Governor by demanding binding arbitration through bills passed in the House and Senate which were vetoed, and fighting tooth and nail to override those vetoes, they now want to “negotiate” further? Little trust problem? After losing before the State Labor Board on the “imass” issue, and then appealing that finding to the court system? What is AFSCME’s last and best offer at this time? Can the Governor legally return to the negotiating table without jeopardizing his position on the impass ruling? Will the future negotiations take place in the three ring circus atmosphere of the first 67 odd sessions? Putting aside the endless press releases of both sides, it is pretty clear that an impass exists when 20 out of 26 unions reached an agreement and one of the remaining unions not in agreement is busy splitting hairs that the 20 agreed to terms that weren’t EXACTLY the same as they are now facing. The difference is the 20 were more interested in reaching an agreement. And somehow they did. AFSCME needed to stop playing the victim. They called a strike vote because they were on high moral ground or because they painted themselves in a corner and are now desperate? They got on that plank and walked all the way to the edge. Either stop bluffing or jump. - Foster brooks - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:35 pm: Teamsters got 100% free health care if you enroll in the wellness program..We always had a 40 work week - Anon - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:35 pm: Interesting that some of the other unions took the deal but tied the insurance to what AFSCME gets, if it’s better. So it’s not exactly like they fully agreed on terms. - OpenYourEyes - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:38 pm: - Anon - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:35 pm: Interesting that some of the other unions took the deal but tied the insurance to what AFSCME gets, if it’s better. So it’s not exactly like they fully agreed on terms. Other Unions have done this for decades of contracts. They agree to something, but if the bigger AFSCME union gets a better deal then they also want that deal. - Ahoy! - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:54 pm: Correct me if I’m wrong but this chart does not necessarily show apples to apples comparison, especially since we don’t know some details (or at least I don’t). For instance, were the unions who did not agree to a 100% health insurance increase already paying more than AFSME members? One would have to do a lot more before and after comparison to get a better understanding. Also, on the overtime issues, the chart shoes 40 hours for overtime and we all know AFSME is at 37.5. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:08 pm: ===Instead of continuing to spread misinformation…=== Oh Governor’s Office.. Where is AFSCME wrong? “No, I’ll wait, thanks… “ - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:14 pm: =Robert the 1st, let’s stop pretending that Rauner couldn’t return to the bargaining table. Why would he? AFSCME took a risk by stalling negotiations and pushing for arbitration. It was a slap in the governor’s face in more ways than one. (Both bills sunset after Rauner’s 1st term for goodness sake.) They disrupted the normal process hoping for a big win. Well, they failed. These are the consequences. - Reality Check - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:15 pm: @Ahoy were the unions who did not agree to a 100% health insurance increase already paying more than AFSME members? Nope, the same. on the overtime issues, we all know AFSME is at 37.5 Nope again, AFSCME members work various different schedules. Current AFSCME contract provides for OT for all hours worked outside the schedule - and as the chart states, that’s what other unions with new agreements got. - Frank Ambrose - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:18 pm: Also regarding the Teamster’s (ISP Mater Sergeants) health care. Once a Master Sergeant retires he/she has to give up the teamster’s health care and take what is available to all state employees - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:22 pm: Every time the Rauner folks mentions 37.5 hrs it is to minimize the real issues AFSCME is fighting for. Just tell the truth! - Nick Name - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:24 pm: Rauner’s whole agenda has been to slay the big union first, thus the reason he got all the small ones finished. If he can knock out the biggest one, the rest will fall like dominos. - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:26 pm: =Every time the Rauner folks mentions 37.5 hrs it is to minimize the real issues AFSCME is fighting for.= That goes away the second the union agrees to no overtime before 40 hours. - Teach - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:28 pm: What do they mean when they refer to health care as platinum care? - August Spies - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:31 pm: To the update- no mention of the subcontracting language change. Wonder why? /s - Generic Drone - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:37 pm: @LouisGAgaves. Rauner eased up on those other union demands because he calculated how to devide the unions. This is a tried and true method of union busting. Having been in private unions as well as public unions I have seen this before. Rauner will return to dismantle any benefits he gave to those unions who have agreed to terms. Stop believing the talking points of your king. He has stated that ” I fully intend to take up the California teachers suit once I am finished with Afscme” only an idiot would not acknoledge Rauner true agenda. - burbanite - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:38 pm: No specifics in response to specifics. - Generic Drone - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:41 pm: Louis G Atsaves: Rauners plan all along was to divide the unions. That way he could sway public opinion. I cant believe the public is that naieve, but reading your comments ahows just how gullible some of you are. - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:47 pm: I agree Rauner’s targeted AFSCME from the get go. I don’t agree that this had to end this way. AFSCME turned this into an all-or-nothing match. Now that they lost they want to try the whole negotiating thing over again. - Anon - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:57 pm: CK too busy to respond today? - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:59 pm: @Robert the 1st - Rauner hasn’t heard from the people of Illinois who is dependent on the services workers provide. They will be the losers. - Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:59 pm: ===it would be helpful if AFSCME leadership would work with our Administration to implement these common sense proposals agreed to by other unions.=== So… does that mean the governor is coming back to the bargaining table??? - Gone, but not forgotten - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:04 pm: Teamsters 700, 330 and 916 are getting annual bonuses. I believe they’re in the range of $2,500. to $4,500. The bonuses are non-pensionable. Does AFSCME get this in lieu of wage freeze? I think not. - Consideration - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:04 pm: I think Robert makes good points. AFSCME bungled this…the bargaining crew and leadership did, anyway. They let down their members. They knew that Rauner wanted to destroy AFSCME. They put that out constantly in meetings. But, then they went and played hardball thinking they could find a way to get their wants. I attended one meeting in which an AFSCME person (not a union member) stated that they have a lot of strategies to keep Rauner coming back to the table. Those failed. Now that AFSCME leadership failed, what do the members do…do they just roll over and let AFSCME come to an end? Do they stand and fight despite the failures of their leadership? Do they insist that Rauner come back to the table. Rauner’s beef is with AFSCME - and it’s unfortunate that state worker’s are caught in the middle of these two egotistical brands that call themselves representatives of taxpayers. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:06 pm: ===CK too busy to respond today?=== We know “ck” was in the Call Sheet for today’s filming of the next episode of “Dad’s Home State”, she should be around later. To - Louis G Atsaves - We’ve had these discussions before. There’s nothing similar to the Teamsters’ and AFSCME’s negotiations when it comes to medical. The reason Rauner issued the statement they did was the simple fact same isn’t the same. Going deep into same will show that. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:11 pm: ==Rauner’s beef is with AFSCME == The thing about that is you can’t go after AFSCME without harming those who are members of AFSCME. It’s why I find the Governor’s proclamations of support for state workers a bit disingenuous. He is trying to make a distinction where there can be none. - Moby - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:17 pm: =Every time the Rauner folks mentions 37.5 hrs it is to minimize the real issues AFSCME is fighting for.= =That goes away the second the union agrees to no overtime before 40 hours.= It’s hard to agree to anything when one side has refused to negotiate for over a year. - Illinois O'Malley - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:19 pm: @Honeybear, or other knowledgeable person: Did Rauner propose to pay an extra 2.5 hours straight time to get to 40? If not then it appears to be a pay cut (based on an hourly scale) - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:22 pm: My understanding is the work week wouldn’t change. But under Rauner’s terms time-and-a-half doesn’t start until after 40. So first 2.5 extra hours are paid straight time. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:31 pm: Robert is probably right. First 2.5 are on you. Complete obfuscation since we work 37.5. - RNUG - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:33 pm: RE the update: you have to admire the Rauner PR team’s ability to stay on message and spin everything their way. - Jocko - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:45 pm: ==work with our Administration to implement these common sense proposals.== Weren’t Bruce & the Superstars fightin’ for the common man (against AG Madigan) only two weeks ago? How quickly things change. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:45 pm: I’m no metallurgist, but platinum, in Rauner’s universe means all state employees must shoulder 40% of healthcare costs. That alone can bankrupt ANYONE. Now deal with that during a 4-year wage freeze while we’re being furloughed. - Jolly1 - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:47 pm: It’s already in the AFSCME 370 Contract with SIU School of Medicine Section 12.3. Overtime/Compensatory Time for Unit 2 Employees. Upon prior approval of the immediate supervisor, non-exempt employees shall earn compensatory time at the rate of 1.0 times the hours worked in excess of 37.5 hours per week up to 40 hours per week. Upon prior approval of the immediate supervisor, non-exempt employees shall earn compensatory time at the rate of 1.5 times the hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:00 pm: Overtime wage theft plain and simple. With Trump in power the ID nothing to be done. I work s 37.5 hour week. It’s not like I chose to not work 40. It’s like a 40 hour a week worker being told your overtime doesn’t start till 42.5 hours. Wage theft - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:03 pm: Wouldn’t you prefer this model vs adding 30 minutes to each work day? Many employers expect employees to be in the office 8am to 5pm. - Guess Again - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:26 pm: The other unions are not facing the privatization threat proposal as AFSCME is facing. The strategy here is simple. Conquer the biggest and the rest can easily be crushed. This is all about selling the state to his highest bidding buddies and eliminating unions. - NotARobot - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:38 pm: The 37.5 schedule was regulatory or statutory and was incorporated into the Collective Bargaining Agreement during one of the fist statewide agreements. It may still be the rule for non-represented, but there are so few hourly employees who are, I could not find it. However the fact is this was a starting point for the Membership since the 80’s, and to lose it is a major loss, especially since they were “given it” they did not bargain it. Why would the members support an organization that got them less than when they were unrepresented? - Union proud - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:38 pm: Some more points when we compare other union contracts with contract offered to Afscme. 1. Conservation police got it in their contract that there will be no layoffs. 2. Only union to be offered terms similar to Afscme were nurses and they voted it down. They are now being sued. 3. State has promised a yearly increase into what it pays into teamster care. Those contracts were settled on the eve of the first arbitration bill vote. Rauner had to prove he was just so reasonable. 4. State troopers offered 8.5% increase to healthcare and declined merit pay. An arbitrator has agreed. Rauner’s governing body ordered the arbitrator to look at case again. He again agreed that the troopers offer on healthcare was more fair than the governor’s offer. The governor’s response is to now claim that bargaining over healthcare is permissive. - red raider - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:39 pm: The 37.5 hour work week was proposed by management many many years by management because it made it easier to equalize and distribute overtime. Prior to the change, management would pick and choose all overtime recipients and there was no way to equalize it. The problem now is that much like Obamacare, there is no replacement plan. For instance, lets say that an employee has an illness or a death in the family and misses a week. The very next day that they would report to work, then since they have not worked any hours and management has allowed staffing to reach critically low numbers, management could force that employee to 5 straight 16 hour days in lieu of paying and offering overtime to another. There was nothing offered by the Governor to prevent that from happening. Think about that for a minute and what it might create for an employee and their family. If you just did, then you thought more than the Governor did about the employee. - RNUG - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:42 pm: == This is all about selling the state to his highest bidding buddies and eliminating unions. == Don’t lose sight of the fact this has happened / is happening in other states. Approximately the same fight is going on in Iowa with AFSCME Council 61. http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/23/health-insurance-specifics-excluded-afscme-contract-talks/94350940/ http://www.kcrg.com/content/news/Union-workers-unhappy-following-negotiations-Gov-Branstads-master-proposal-402846806.html - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:44 pm: As far as the privatization issue, well there is nothing in the Governors proposal to protect an employee from being notified that his job has been privatized out and further , if you are a taxpayer, there is nothing in the agreement that makes them indicate a savings to the citizens of the State. Rauner could conceivably privatize jobs, get rid of the State employee, bid the job to a supporters company and charge the taxpayer even more for the services. I have been quiet for too long and am done with his lies. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:44 pm: I work 8:30-5:00. I don’t control my hours. That puts me at 37.5 hours. I can’t do a dam thing about it. But I will now have to work an extra 2.5 before overtime. Overtime if you’re being fair should start for hours after your regularly schedule work week. You guys are bending yourself into pretzels to seem like this is fair to me and other loyal state workers. And you wonder why we have lost 30% in two years We’re collapsing and you’ll only notice when the state workforce becomes non functional. Well you’ll find out soon - redraider - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:46 pm: sorry to anonymous the last comment pertaining to privatization was mine as well. apologies - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:48 pm: If you want to read the other contracts just go here. https://www.illinois.gov/cms/Employees/Personnel/Pages/PersonnelLaborRelations.aspx - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:57 pm: This really isn’t unusual to anyone outside of the state workforce. My college roommate would work 3 12 hour shifts as a forklift operator. If he wanted more money he’d pick up a 4th shift and get paid for an extra 16 hours (4 straight pay, 8 time-and-a-half). - Langhorne - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 3:59 pm: When the facts are against you, you cant argue facts. Only alternative—message, message, message. - Power House Prowler - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 4:05 pm: I dont think this chart is accurate. We agreed to the merit proposal and the chart says we didnt. Our insurance did not go up 100% either. - red raider - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 4:06 pm: Was he mandated to work it Robert? Did his family find out right before he was leaving? - redraider - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 4:18 pm: Let me give you another example, Robert. Lets assume that we aren’t talking about your college roommate, but an employee who works 3rd shift and is married with a working spouse and a child. When he gets off at 700 he goes home and the wife leaves for her job. What if he is off for a week and then upon returning to work, finds out each morning just a few minutes before the end of his scheduled shift that he is being mandated to work another 8 hours. Imagine the chaos that would create in his house and then it repeats itself over the next 4 days. Great for the family life and stability. This issue was never cleared up, because the Governor left bargaining before it could be. Then he ran with the big lie that employees were greedy and you bought it. why? - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 4:19 pm: I had mandated Saturday shifts at a place I worked in college. If I had called in sick that week it was for regular pay. Again, this is normal. - Anon123 - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 4:21 pm: -Gone, but not forgotten - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:04 pm: The bonuses are merit based (not everyone received)- same as offered by Rauner that AFSCME rejected. - red raider - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 4:40 pm: So about the merit bonus for AFSCME employees. If you take any time off and use authorized dock, which is common for union officials, in particular during bargaining, you will not qualify for the bonus. If it sounds like he is punishing union leadership, it is. - red raider - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 4:44 pm: Robert, I fear that this may be a lost cause, but you knew that you were going to be mandated to work every Saturday. You could plan ahead. These employees find out just before the end of their shift and have to call home and adjust in a matter of minutes. They never know ahead of time when they are going to be mandated and if they are on straight time due to taking a day off then they could be chosen by management without better language. Please tell me that I am not wasting my time with you. - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 4:50 pm: Of course management would assign extra work to employees with less than 40 hours. That’s how it works everywhere. It saves the employer money. Something the state definitely needs to do. - red raider - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 4:55 pm: Ok, as I suspected, you are either stuck in a mindset of “when I was in College” or assume that all State employees are college students. Either way, you are simply unable to comprehend or respect any opinion outside of your own. Best wishes to you - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 5:00 pm: What does that even mean? Find me any private employer in the state of IL tat pays time-and-a-half before 40 hours or counts sick/vacation time towards that. You can’t. - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 5:35 pm: Shoot, find me another government position that gets paid time-and-a-half before 40 or sick/vacation counts toward that 40. Local police don’t. Nurses don’t. Letter carriers for the USPS don’t. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 6:06 pm: Don’t feed the troll folks. - Footman - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 6:31 pm: The trolls took over this message board a long time ago. - Rabid - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 6:49 pm: You know what my trade union has time-and-half after ten hours every day - Cadillac - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:20 pm: For anyone new here - if you can’t (or won’t) debate the merits of an issue, simply call the opposition a “troll”. That’ll make you look real clever. - upstater - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:38 pm: Serious question: Why is AFSCME neglecting the privatization issue AGAIN? They should have been harping that over and over. That should have been their go-to PR bullet point for months, that was their best fighting shot. Every time I read something from 31 leadership without it, I’m astounded. It’s a disaster in union leadership. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:43 pm: I get it upstater. My guess is that it’s too complex for people. That’s all I can figure. But I’m not leadership. Just a front ranker. People in general don’t give a crap about us anyway. - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:44 pm: Maybe you guys are right and privatization is the ballgame. I just don’t see that though. There’s only so much that can be outsourced. I guess time will tell. - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:50 pm: Plus Rauner’s up for re-election next year. Is he really going to lay thousands of people off and disrupt state services even beyond a strike? - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 10:36 pm: Rauner doesn’t care. He just hates unions. AFSCME is first on his hit list. SEIU is next and the rest collapse after that. The citizens of Illinois should realize that once the unions are done the fat cats will run the state for their own benefit and the rest of us will fight each other to serve them. - Robert the 1st - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 10:39 pm: Believe it or not, Rauner isn’t a cartoon villain. And despite what he says he is a politician and running for re-election. IL already has the smallest state workforce per capita. Downsizing it further makes no sense. I’ll be the first to admit I was wrong if indeed I am. - (un)happy - Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 6:06 am: About the privatization issue. Here’s how it works now. When the State proposes any contract that includes services (not just goods) that include established bargaining unit duties & responsibilities, it must submit justification to AFSCME as to why it is being outsourced. This allows AFSCME to ask questions and agree with or dispute the proposed contract. It’s a check and balance measure to protect employees. There are valid reasons that AFSCME often agrees with either wholly or conditionally. But even if AFSCME disputes the contract, the State can proceed with the contract if they determine it’s in the best interest of the State and taxpayers. If AFSCME elects to pursue the dispute, they can take it to the courts. THIS is what the Rauner administration wants removed from the contract. They want Union members to agree to relinquish their legal right to challenge the State when a contract or temporary placement is made rather than promoting a deserving career employee. If AFSCME and it’s members were to agree to remove this requirement from the contract, what will likely happen is that as Union positions become vacant they will be filled with contract or temporary staff without any checks and balances and no Union member will have any recourse by either arbitration or through the courts. Yes, the State will save money both in wages and legal costs, but to what end? The result will be low-paid “workers”, rather than career employees, who won’t be invested in the programs they administer. The staff turnover rate will be very high as those people seek better paying jobs or jobs with less responsibilty that is more consistent with the wage they can earn, thereby resulting in poor service to the public. EVERYONE in the State will lose. The question I would ask of people who think the Union should cave to the Governor’s demands or simply go away; would you rather have fairly compensated employees who care about the work they do for the taxpayers of Illinois, or would you be satisfied with line-workers who are just pushing paper while they’re preoccupied with whether they can pay their mortgage and searching for a better job on their smart phones? Any honest business owner/CEO/Manager knows that to be successful one must invest in his/her workforce and treat them fairly and respectfully. - Honeybear - Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 7:24 am: Thank you (un)happy. So well said! - Honeybear - Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 7:27 am: –I’ll be the first to admit I was wrong if indeed I am.– hmmmmmm…I don’t know if I’ve experienced that. It’s why I finally got fed up and said something. - Honeybear - Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 7:39 am: –Rauner isn’t a cartoon villain.– Well what does one call a person who WOULD INTENTIONALLY COST the loss of thousands of jobs, millions to lose services they need, the non payment of contracts, the literal economic downfall of the state unless he gets union busting/ local government busting/ average worker busting concessions that will destroy the opposing party? “Smart” like Trump and his taxes? There is no name that fits anymore. It transcends Rich’s banned list. (although I like “malum in se” still) - Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 8:29 am: Of course a biased presentation by team Rauner, how do you negotiate when Team Rauner refuses to sit down at the table. The bleeding Rauner has caused, harming students, kids, elderly and municipalities across the state is unexplainable. Then we have Rauner’s absence dealing with Chicago’s violence. - Robert the 1st - Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:10 am: =It’s why I finally got fed up and said something.= Is that why the name calling happened or was it because you couldn’t provide the example I asked for? - Robert the 1st - Thursday, Mar 2, 17 @ 9:16 am: And what was I wrong about? I think I successfully demonstrated that nowhere outside of state government has such costly and unnecessary overtime rules. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.