Illinois To Lay Off Thousands Of State Workers

[pspr]

The state doesn't have the money to keep the workers and will layoff thousands this week. So, what is the union's response?

The state's largest government employee union, AFSCME, promises to sue if the layoffs are made, much like they did over blocked pay raises.

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Quinn-to-Lay-off-Thousands-129290828.html#ixzz1XBa233RX

 

[Lucrum]

Sue the government/company for money that it doesn't have - for not having the money to employ you.


Makes sense to me.

 

[cstfx]

Knowing the system there, they would be successful if they sued, the state will be prevented from laying people off and you'll end up seeing higher taxes (again) to pay for this.

 

[wolfpack]

They sure know how to do math over in them Illinois unions don't they?

 

[CaptainObvious]

Guess that whole rule of law thing the repubs are so big on doesn't apply to union contracts.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

Guess that whole rule of law thing the repubs are so big on doesn't apply to union contracts.

So you're in favor of a financially broke employer keeping employees it cannot afford, especially if those overpaid employees and their absurd benefits/retirements are in part the reason the employer is broke in the first place?


Just so I'm clear.

 

[377OHMS]

People like to compare California and Illinois as bastions of liberal stupidity and beacons of insolvency.

But Illinois property taxes are around 5-times higher as a percentage of property value. My property tax in Illinois on a suburban Elmhurst home was around $12,000.00 per year. My property tax on an equivalent valued home in California is about $2,000.00 per year.

If Illinois continues to raise taxes something has to give. You can't just raise taxes forever and not control spending. Where is the business sense here? Illinois was the most socialist place I have ever seen outside of Europe. Taxes are monstrously high there already. How can they continue to raise taxes?

 

[Max E.]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

Guess that whole rule of law thing the repubs are so big on doesn't apply to union contracts.

I cant believe you would actually stick up for the monstrosity that government unions have become. I guess the state of Illinois can default for all they care, as long as they continue to get 5% raises amidst a horrible economy, and non existent inflation.

Private sector unions may have gotten screwed somewhat over the past 30 years, but there is no denying that public sector unions have rode the gravy train the entire time, and that they have basically gotten everything they wanted. Tell me how much better off we are today because of the public sector unions? Tenure for teachers sure seems to have worked wonders for the education sytem.

 

[Max E.]

Quote from Lucrum:

Sue the government/company for money that it doesn't have - for not having the money to employ you.


Makes sense to me.

This is actually a good thing that they are being this irrational, i would love for this to go to court right before Obamas election so we can show people just how irrational the government has become. You would have to either be on the payrole, or be a complete buffoon to vote for more of that.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Quote from Lucrum:

So you're in favor of a financially broke employer keeping employees it cannot afford, especially if those overpaid employees and their absurd benefits/retirements are in part the reason the employer is broke in the first place?


Just so I'm clear.

Either the rule of law means something or it doesn't, or do you just want to pick and choose where and when it applies as it's convenient to employer needs? Or political needs? Or whatever the bias of the day happens to be? If the employer can break the contract then so can the employees.
You guys get all twisted up about the rule of law, legislating from the bench, etc., when the left is pulling their shit, but when it suits the desire of the right...no problemo. Just so we're clear.