Whats everyone's thoughts on the bill that just passed the house and senate today in regards to the collective bargaining and effecting teachers and local municipal workers ?

For all of the hard work that people have put in for the last few years to get the legislature set up this way, it's very tough to swallow and you may see these gains taken away in 2018.  The republican party single just attacked 120,000 lower to middle class employees and their families.  Yes I am a covered employee.  I along with a lot of the people I work with voted Republican to start to gain back our rights and reverse the course of where our state and country was going.  Removing something that has been in place for 40 years is not just a bad idea, it is a crusher.  I work a 24/7/365 job where our contracts provide protection and lay out how our jobs are supposed to go.  Seniority is a key component of how we operate.  It's how we pick vacation, it's how we pick shifts, it's how we assign overtime.  Gone.  Discipline procedures, gone.  Benefits that have been earned and worked for over the last 25 years, gone.  This to solve a problem that doesn't exist.  When all of the gun rights bills move forward and we see the gains we hope such as full access to NFA, stand your ground laws, etc.  2 years from now, Dems win back both sides and you would then know how this feels.  When you come back and say, it's your choice, move on if you don't like it.  Know that I will stay with it as I'm to far in and closer to retirement then somebody just out of school.  The problem is that the people just out of school don't want these jobs anymore and it's getting harder and harder to hire people, especially really good ones.  Add on the specter of what could happen and the poor treatment that employers can unleash is only going to make it exponentially worse.

Whether you agree with me or not, this truly is a sad day for our state.

Yeah, why piss away the majority with this and planned parenthood?!?

Well I saw that they decided to leave seniority alone.  I guess it's better to only take 9 of the full 10 inches of love.  I guess they must like us after all

Yes I am a effected employee, and being lowest man on the totem pole I am already on a reduced pay scale for 2+ years being new hire, I am againced unions but it was a necessary evil to secure my spot in line.
I work secondary roads and our benefits are voted on by a board of supervisors - where I am we have new supervisors that are all for cutting EVERYTHING so I worry about a pay cut, loss of family health insurance (newborn son) or even the slight possibility of staff reductions.

other side as more details come to light I do have a few people 1-2 years from retirement talked about maybe trying to retire early and may help myself and a few of the other lower in line guys out

I'm not sure we needed it. I don't think the GOP presented a strong case as to why they needed it and the left did a good job at raising the outrage and boots on the ground. I personally don't think it's worth it if this causes a flip in 18.

I haven't seen the numbers saved or benefits that justified it. It felt like the party was answering to someone and just drove it through. We shall see how this plays out, but I like cops, teachers, and firefighters being comfortable with the GOP, not this.

I agree it was rushed. I kept hearing "this will push out the bad teachers and make sure we keep good ones" I dont know how the hell it will help keep good teachers for a job with little long term benefits    

and I wish the boys in blue and our firefighters didn't have to worry about this kind of stuff either and can worry more about keeping safe

I'm an affected employee also. I just started working on the secondary road crew in Sept and don't know how this will affect things in my county. Our Engineer is all for the changes and from what I've heard from other employees we might be getting the shaft on some things.

I'm not eligible to join the union until my probation period is up(I have one month left to go)but after this bill got through I really don't see any need to join the union. I don't even get my full pay for 1.5yrs so I wonder if that'll change.

If things go to hell with our benefits this will be the second industry I got into that was made worse due to laws after I started. The only reason I stopped driving truck and took this job was because the benefits couldn't be beat by anything I could get on my own and I wanted to be home every night.

I'm 40 and planned on retiring at this job but if I get too much stuff taken away I don't really see myself sticking it out because the pay isn't really worth it for the hours I would have to put in during a bad winter. About half of the guys I work with are within 10yrs of retiring and I wonder how many of them will stay if things go south.

I just got off probation in July in my county but they still keep reduced pay for 2 years ya this will dissolve the union

Sounds like you got it worse than me. The 1.5yrs to full pay for me includes the 6 month probation. Probation with the old engineer used to only be 60 days so that changed for the worse when the new engineer started.

The League of Iowa communities has always been a big promoter of limiting Union negotiations with the Iowa Legislators.   It appears the Iowa school districts have also been waiting for this opportunity, as well.  The League of Iowa communities just had a meet and greet with the Iowa legislators on February 7th.  I'm sure this issue was talked about.  I know the issue with the schools has always been about firing teachers who could not make the grade.  Of course, it could also mean teachers who do not kiss ass toward their principal or administrator could also be at risk.  

I think this decision is going to cause the republicans to lose control of the House and Senate and maybe even the governors office in a future election since public employees are usually tuned into legislative issues.  I included a link to the Iowa League of cities.  I included their Legislative Commitment.  Read through it and draw your own conclusions.   The League of cities won this battle but I get the feeling the war has just started.

https://www.iowaleague.org/pages/WhoWeAre.aspx

https://www.iowaleague.org/Pages/LegislativeCommitment.aspx

I currently work in a public sector "management excluded" position and have for several years.  Prior to this, I was a union member of the same organization I now supervise.  My experience with unions has always been that they make things equal but not fair.  

Too many workers do the base minimum required to get by as there is no incentive to go above that.  I can praise them for their efforts but can not offer them any real tangible rewards.  This wears on people over time and before long most tend to settle into the same group mind set of doing just enough to fly under the radar of management.  Some push the limits even further and become a cancer on the organization.  The unions fight management tooth and nail to keep these people employed.  This negatively effects the morale of their fellow workers and again pushes down productively.

I think a great deal of the general public views many public sector employees as the stereo-typical image of people working the counter at the DOT.  Slow, uncaring services providers who hate their jobs and but won't leave because all the great benefits.  Private sector employees have had their insurance rates skyrocket with Obamacare and now they want the public sector to feel some of their pain.

I think some workers to need to step up and start demonstrating their worth to their organizations.  Maybe this legislation will encourage some people to do just that.

With that said, I think the current legislature went about this too quickly and should have found a more middle of the road approach.  I expressed just that in person to all the reps in my area but all are toeing the party line.  I sincerely hope this does not bite us in the ass come election time.

At the end of the day our various opinions on public sector unions is irrelevant.  Iowa GOP just cut it's nose off to spite it's fucking face.

This gentlemen, is what is known as a Pyrrhic victory.  We just haven't suffered our casualties yet, but we will.

Time to start suffering like the rest of us.

Now let's get some gun bills through before the republicans raise taxes and pass nanny state cell phone laws like they always do.

This is exactly what is going on where I work. It's the one thing that really bugs me because I wasn't brought up to be lazy. I try to stay busy all day but it can be difficult some times when I have to work with a group that has the "don't bust your butt" mindset.

My wife works for the State in management.  I know first hand on everything she has to deal with in getting her union employees to "work".  There are days where it's easier for her to do the required Union job then mess around to get someone else to do it. (Because that's not my job or Billy Bob should be offered the overtime because I've been here for 20 plus years)  

I also know what it took to fire one employee.   I cannot post what the person did to get fired but in the private sector  for example impersonating a police officer on the phone, threats of violence against other coworkers, thousands of personal emails on company property or just plain stealing would get you shit canned within the hour at a private job but at the State -nope

Unions and Government entities don't work when it's other people's money.  (United States Post Office for example)

I have ZERO say in health, dental or vacation time in private sector.  But I also know that if I work harder then my coworker I will be rewarded with higher pay, a bonus or time off.  I also know if my coworker is slacking then it's Right to Work and they may be fired vs getting the same mandated pre-arranged cost-of-living pay raise that a State workers gets.

Welcome to the Right to Work just like the rest of the private sector.  I hope the State workers who bust their ass in getting the job done gets a raise or promotion. And the coworker who just does the bare minimum just to take up space gets canned quicker then the months it currenty takes now.

I'm for extremely small government and I hate tax money wasted.  And no one is forcing any State worker to keep working if they now feel it's not fair.  That's the beauty of Right To Work   Don't like the job or offer you get , you can say no thanks.


Joe

Same here was not brought up to be that way. I am very fortunate as I am a heavy equipment mechanic but I quite regular fill in as equipment operator, Sign Maintenance , Truck driver. So I do quite a bit of every job I guess I feel lucky that they always seem to come to me when they need good work.

Yes I work with more of my fair share of slacks! I frequently here      I cant do that Im not a mechanic (changing lightbulbs and shit like that) so that aspect of being able to let shit go yep all for that but the aspect of losing my health insurance and other benefits sucks. or leaving and starting fresh at new job again is not what I am really looking forward to

All they needed to do was re-vamp health insurance and change the arbitration rules so that the people deciding contract disputes had more flexibility... that's all.  Nothing else was needed.

More than likely this won't change the mkeuo of the state legislature, but the effects of the Planned Parrenthood nonsense is yet to be felt.  Union workers voted overwhelmingly democratic in 2016 in state and local elections and always have.

Consider the Governor seat up for grabs.  I haven't met many people that have much nice to say about Lt Gov Reynolds, for no specific reason but people just don't associate much like ability or success with her.

If we don't start planning now there is a real risk we will have Rob Hogg as the Governor of Iowa.  THAT will be all 12 inches of the 10 inch insertion.

The only thing that blipped my needle was thinking that it's only going to hurt us at election time next go around.

.Gov  employee Healthcare and benefits are a drain on municipal, county, and state budgets. These employees do not create revenue, therefore, the more money we save, the better.

I understand you guys might have jobs that are affected, and feel that something is being taken from you, but your benefits are being stolen out of my pocket by bureaucrats that then buy your labor. You guys are also fear-mongering thinking your going to be hung out to dry with no insurance. I'd wager there's a 98% chance that won't happen because they won't be able to attract a mature, talented workforce if they went that route. I'd guarantee it'll still be better than the insurance i've had at other jobs in the private sector.

I'm biased though because I work in the private sector and am a taxpayer and I dislike unions (especially public sector). Yes, this is a loss for you guys, but it's not the end of the world like your union reps are telling you it is.

I love the argument that "I'm a taxpayer".  I pay taxes also FYI.  While there may be issues of worker apathy, where I'm at we don't see it.  Healthcare issues and coverage are huge and I don't disagree that change was needed.  The only issue ever presented was that the state wanted all governement works to purchase insurance from the same pot for economics of scale.  That created issues geographically for service providers.  The rest was a farce.  We have never arbitrated expect for one issue that was over a contract stipulation.  When the economy was bad, we took pay freezes and gave up raises to save jobs.  The flip side of the argument is that if you hate your jobs so much, why did you never try and change?  Giving up holidays and weekends and a normal life is not worth getting a paid holiday?  its a huge issue and it will be a major setback in two years as people are pissed especially police and fire who vote republican against there unions

In my opinion, at the end of the day the state jobs need to be competitive with the private sector or vice versa depending on your view point. In the grand scheme of things, employers have to offer competitive packages to attract good employees.  With some employers you give up salary in order for a better benefits package.  A previous employer did a nice job of laying out your annual total compensation package, which included, health benefits, retirement, and salary.

Right now the ax is swinging the other way.  Middle class America has been stagnant financially, and they are pretty pissed off.  Unfortunately, for state employees there are too many examples of waste.  I personally witnessed 2 state employees, at one of our esteemed universities, taking 1 full day to move a 110V outlet 10 feet.  It should have taken a couple of hours at the most.  I know there are some state employees here that are also pissed, but stop and do the math on what your total compensation package has been and compare to the private sector.  If you are making less than the going rate, ask yourself why you are settling for less, if you make more, please justify to your neighbor why they should pay you more.

I've always been pretty amazed the retirement packages some City, State, and Federal employees get! Even our legislators! I'm a retired Union worker from the private sector with a good retirement, and I don't get anything near as good as some of them get!

IPERS is decent, nothing more.  The federal system changed in 1986.

Government employees absolutely create revenue.  Every dime they spend at the grocery store, the car dealer, the gun shop creates revenue for that business.  That revenue circulates thru the local economy.

Yes, but to a lesser extent than others because their cash came from the pockets of everyone and every business they spend money with.

Everyone's cash came from someone else.  It's all just as green.

I agree.  Right now government employees are providing a service in exchange for compensation.  The highways need to be plowed in the winter, roads maintained, and the DMV, courthouses, schools all need to be staffed.

The Republicans may have over reached, but there is still a call from the public for some accountability with regards to the total compensation package government employees receive.  Are those packages comparable to what someone in the private sector receives for the same work?

The perception is that government employees are receiving more. If that is true their needs to be an explanation as to why.  If it is false the unions need to launch a campaign to change that perspective.

+1 Spot on!

Comparisons between public and private sector are very tricky and can be manipulated to "prove" whatever point of view you may have.  If you just take the average private wage vs average public it seems the public sector is doing better.  However when you break down the numbers the comparison starts to fall apart.  The composition of the two groups is very different.  Many of the lower end jobs in the private sector (food service, retail, etc) don't have a public sector equivalent or very few.  Certain public sector jobs (law enforcement for instance) don't have a private sector equivalent.  On average the public sector will have more college graduates, further skewing the numbers.

As a rule, at the lower end of the spectrum, clerks, custodians and the like, the public sector does a little better.  At the mid and upper levels they fall behind, sometimes dramatically so.  If you compare accountants to accountants, lawyers to lawyers, etc the public sector will usually come up short.

On the fringe benefit side, public does somewhat better  but not that much.  The fringe package is not greatly different than what most Fortune 500 companies offer, with some trade offs.  We tend to do better on vacation, but we don't get any profit sharing or stock options.  Bonuses are quite rare, at least with the Board of Regents (my home).   IPERS is an ok retirement plan, but only ok.  At the universities most of us are under TIAA/CREF, which is like a 401k.  Job security is not as good as you might think.  There have been numerous layoffs in the state system over the years.  

Also keep in mind not all public sector workers come under union contracts.  Here at ISU less than a third of employees are under the AFSCME contract.  Faculty and professional staff are not unionized here.  UNI faculty are unionized.  Some professional groups at UI are, but not the faculty or the bulk of the professional staff.

That is some of the information that needs to get out to people.  I don't think anyone is saying to pay public employees less, they just want to see equality in pay and some accountability.  Things in Iowa are probably better than average when it comes to fraud and waste, at least you don't see the stories of public workers getting paid an extra $100k + for overtime or ridiculous pensions like on the coasts.  

Which leads to why there was no pressing reason for the Republicans to make the collective bargaining change at the potential expense of losing control at the state house.  If this is truly a problem they could have taken the time to lay out a better argument and openly debate the opponents without the appearance of ramming the legislation through.

The reason is simple.  Branstad hates AFSCME with a white hot passion.  Almost as much as he hates the Teacher's Union.  And the feeling is mutual.  This was his one and only chance to beat them. Elections have consequences and this is one of them.  I'll give the Republicans credit.  They played this one well.  There wasn't a hint of this during the election; this one came out of left field.  

Having said that, I don't think the wage and benefit package will change all that much.  The state still has to compete in the marketplace for labor.  Gutting the benefit package will make it difficult to retain and attract talent. I could see a lot of changes to the grievance process and the entire seniority bumping thing going by the wayside along with some other work rule changes.  At least at the state level.  On the county and city level I think it's anyone's guess.  I could see some smaller jurisdictions trying to eliminate all benefits by saying we can't afford anything more than $10 an hour and no fringes.   Time will tell.

Whether your for or against this legislation, what most fail to take into account is the small number of public sector workers in Iowa when compared to all employed Iowans.   Public sector employees make up roughly 6% of the total Iowa work force according to the latest .gov stats.  

Sure there is a lot of news coverage right now.  Sure the left is hyperventilating and wringing their hands over the issue.  Heck, I'm surprised there hasn't been a riot yet.
But in IMHO, I doubt if this one issue will play a major factor in outcome the 2018 elections.    Time will tell.

Stuff like this is what worries myself and my co-workers the most. We are all secondary roads department. we maintain all the county blacktops and gravel roads we try to be out and have roads cleared before the public wakes up with snow we close and rebuild roads destroyed by flood waters, repairing road signs knocked off by joe blow when he and his buddies where drinking that 12 pack on the gravel roads so you and your family know that there is a stop sign at this intersection keeping you from getting hit.

at my county we are just starting to get into the younger class of workers myself included most of us have our family health insurance threw work, my county does not offer any vision or dental insurance for its employees

we do not get raises other than a 2% cost of living increase or like 10 cents after 10 or 15 years of employment.
I can say I think as truck drivers we get slightly less than private sector, as equipment operators ( maintainer, excavator, crane, wheeled excavator, Dozer ) we make less than any private sector

6% is easily enough to flip an election.  This is the kind of issue that can rev up the base and get voter turnout.  That said, most of the folks effected by this were probably voting Democratic anyway.  2018 will be interesting.

I like they did it, but I think it was a bad move politically.

I wish it covered me, but I work for the federal government.