Advice to Wisconsin protesters (and everyone else): Instead of protesting change, adjust your own career

My favorite place for pizza in Madison is Ian's. My kids go there in the summer for macaroni and cheese pizza. They order it because it sounds so fun, but then they don't eat it.

Ian's is located right on the Wisconsin State Capitol, where 70,000 people are protesting that Governor Walker is repealing almost all collective bargaining rights of public workers. For the last six days of protests, Ian's has been taking orders from all over the world — Korea, Egypt, New Zealand, and 51 states — to deliver pizzas to the protesters. Ian's keeps track of worldwide pizza support on a blackboard:

It's a nice story. But the issue in Wisconsin is more fundamental than pro-labor or anti-labor. The issue is that the workforce is changing. Some of the groups having the hardest time dealing with this change are the unions, and protesting change is not going to help.

1. Recognize when you're in a dead sector, and shift.
I don't think we need unions anymore. I think they are leftover from a different type of workplace and a different type of economy. I am not revolutionary in saying that we don't need unions.

In general, I'd have to say that the non-union part of the work world is sick of unions wielding insane powers that are anachronistic and unrealistic. Maybe I could understand this if it was 1880 and we had children working in factories. Maybe I could understand this if all government work were as unappealing as being a garbage collector. But in fact, government jobs are so insanely cushy, for their stability, that it's one of Gen Y's favorite sectors to work.

So many people are frantically reacting to a shifting job market — journalists, travel agents, lawyers, all these sectors are changing rapidly right now, and careers are being destroyed. But other opportunities are growing. Instead of lamenting that your job is changing for the worst, find out what new jobs are emerging because of the change, and make a change yourself.

2. Create stability for yourself with new career tools.
A sustainable career today involves constant job changes, lots of career changes, and an entrepreneurial spirit. For example, the average Gen Y-er starts looking for a job on the third day of their current job. Not because they are disloyal, but because they are realistic in that no job lasts forever, and few last even two years. Career changes used to be something saved for mid-life crises, but today, people can expect to change careers five times, which means that the idea of a pension is off the radar. Finally entrepreneurship is so popular today because it's a safety net for an unreliable workplace.

Unions are not part of this equation. Unions trade on their ability to protect peoples' jobs over the long-term. But this assurance is ananchronistic and not appropriate for the reality of today's workforce.

3. Stop focusing on the meta. Just fix your life.
So many people say they can't get a job because it's a bad economy. But you know what? There are enough jobs. You can't get a job because you're bad at job hunting. You're bad at marketing yourself and you're bad at shifting as the economy shifts.

No career was ever saved by blaming someone else for your troubles. So look, it's true that Scott Walker was selective in the unions he's trouncing. He's picking on teachers and leaving police alone. So, yes, it's conniving, but so what? Of course he has to be conniving to disband government unions.

But it doesn't matter, because the demise of government benefits is inevitable. It's inevitable that unions would be killed — either by lack of interest or government action. Their time has come. Stop blaming people and just move on.

4. Stop picking jobs based on long-term benefits.
This is a worldwide problem, not a Wisconsin problem. So if you think it's not gonna happen to you, you're wrong. The era of benefits is over, so stop picking your jobs based on the benefits.

Here's the math: Baby boomers are huge, Gen X is relatively tiny, which means demographically speaking, there are not enough people in this country to support the generation that is retiring.

(I will now quote tons of economist things from my brother, Marc, who has a PhD from University of Chicago in economics and he's smart enough to go into hedge funds instead of teaching, but not so smart that he doesn't stop talking to me even though he thinks every time I write about him on my blog I misquote him.)

Anyway, he says this demographics thing is a worldwide problem, and it is worst for countries like Japan, France, and China, where the birth rate is tiny compared to the earlier generation. (The developed economies that do not have this problem are the Middle East and Israel.

“What? I said to my brother. We don't put Israel in the Middle East?”

“Economist consider Israel's economy to be tied to Europe's.” )

The only way to fix this problem is to renege on the benefits that states have promised government workers. The US economy simply cannot grow enough to solve the problem any other way.

5. Getting fired is a gift.
It is absolutely insane that teachers in unions cannot be fired. One of the first things Michael Bloomberg, mayor of NYC, did when he got control of the public schools is that he started firing teachers who did not perform well. He had a knock-down drag-out fight with the union and he won.

Because how else can schools improve if teachers can't lose their jobs? You know what? Some of those tenured teachers suck. We all know that. And it's not helping anyone — the teachers or the kids — to keep teachers who can't teach. One of the best part of a fluid workforce is that you have to find where you fit well in order to get some security.

Wisconsin public schools are among the lowest performing in the country. So it makes sense to me that this is one of the first teacher's unions to get dissolved. And, this is a great example of how a union has outlasted its usefulness to the community.

6. Change is exciting. It opens new doors.
Look at Ian's. They watched changed and they figured out where they fit in, and they actually did well by embracing change. You can do that, too. Don't blame other people for your problems. Don't try to stop the path of change. Each of us has gifts that we can use in any type of workforce. We just need to be flexible enough to see our own potential.

324 replies
« Older CommentsNewer Comments »
  1. Rebecca
    Rebecca says:

    I loved reading these comments. And I mostly agree with what you had to say, Penelope. All of the protests haven’t been sitting right with me, and while I don’t think either side is entirely right, and certainly believe Scott Walker is out of his mind, I just keep wondering why there aren’t 60,000 protesters to improve education. I’m not so sure these same teachers would show up for such a march, even though it’s what they’ve chosen to do with their lives. To me, that just shows how horribly the political system is broken (always politics, never actual issues), and how our basic institutions are incredibly broken as well. The Democratic party was built on the “little people,” but when it comes down to it, we all just care about ourselves. I have no doubt that the dissolution of unions will be a tremendous blow to the Democratic party. But trust me, both the parties were shattered awhile ago; now we are starting to see the pieces fall apart.

  2. Theresa
    Theresa says:

    Are you sick of highly paid teachers?

    Teachers’ hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or10 months a year! It’s time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do – babysit!

    We can get that for less than minimum wage.

    That’s right. Let’s give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan– that equals 6 1/2 hours).

    Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now how many students do they teach in a day…maybe 30? So that’s $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day.

    However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations.

    LET’S SEE….

    That’s $585 X 180= $105,300

    per year. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries).

    What about those special

    education teachers and the ones with Master’s degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an

    hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year.

    Wait a minute — there’s

    something wrong here! There sure is!

    The average teacher’s salary

    (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days

    = $277.77/per day/30

    students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student–a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!) WHAT A DEAL!!!!

    Make a teacher smile; repost this to show appreciation for all educators.

    • Millie
      Millie says:

      Theresa: Can I get paid by the number of people I deal with at work, too? I’d be a billionaire. Get real or get a different job. I’m sick of hearing it, especially from teachers. I really am. We all go to work, and we all call it work b/c it’s a pain in the ass — not a walk in the park. (Though, you can spend all day in the park all summer.) If you don’t like it, if it doesn’t seem worth it, or if it isn’t sufficiently fulfilling, then get yourself a different job.

  3. Mark W.
    Mark W. says:

    My prayers and support are with Governor Walker.
    First, it was President Obama putting in his two cents. Something about an ‘assault’ on the unions. No way. Gov. Walker is focused on doing his job which is to cut spending and get the budget under control.
    Today, it’s Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), launching a fundraising campaign in support of the Wisconsin Democratic lawmakers. Democratic activists have donated more than $250,000 through ActBlue to those lawmakers who have relocated to Illinois. The update is here – http://tinyurl.com/64lhlo7 .
    It didn’t take long did it. All that talk about civility and civil discourse. The battleground is in Wisconsin – at least for now. It will move to other states as they grapple with their own budget and unique problems.

    • Mark
      Mark says:

      Hi Mark,

      If I am following you correctly, I’m just wondering what you do with facts not in dispute like, for instance the type of thing on the other side like the notorious Koch brothers having a great deal of business interests in Wisconsin and across the nation and have economic interest in reducing the strength of unions and are very involved in reducing that strength, and very open about it – and they are big contributors to Republicans and the governor.

      Not that I think business should go unrepresented or not have a voice in government. But you can understand people’s skepticism that the governor is just doing this because it is sound policy, and not a schill for big business, right? I mean it is well documented that big business is funding the so-called “grass roots” movements – and the outcome significantly favors big business interests more than the interests of those in the grass roots movements.

      I’m just saying, and forgive me if I’m reading you wrong, that it is hard for me to get where you are, knowing all of this, and I can’t really blame people for disbelieving the messages and the motives.

      • Mark W.
        Mark W. says:

        My understanding of the current situation is Governor Walker was elected by the people of Wisconsin to do a job which includes fiscal responsibility. He has a track record in the county of which he was county executive which included Milwaukee. He has first hand knowledge of negotiating with unions in the public sector which hold a monopoly. Unions are not doing very well in the business sector where no monopoly exists. This makes sense to me. So there are a couple of things which are going on here that I don’t like. The education system which includes unions in the public sector does not exist in a competitive environment. Also I don’t think President Obama or Sen. Schumer should be involving themselves in the fiscal problems of the state of Wisconsin. Of course they are since our education system is so intertwined with our political system and failed economic model. This whole fiasco is so political that it’s ridiculous. Sen. Schumer should be making some more trips to upstate NY where I live and an area he should be reporting more to (he is a public servant) so that he can focus his attention on similar school problems here.

  4. Rachel
    Rachel says:

    As a twenty something, I firmly believe that unions should be primarily a thing of the past. They were great for the past but we’ve seen they don’t work for our future. Schools are keeping horrible teachers who have no accountability. Car companies are financially wrecked because they have to maintain costly (and ridiculous in comparison to the average company) benefit plans. Unions are failing in the twenty first century.

    It makes me more sad that fellow Democrats are using politics as a reason to keep unions going. Who cares what’s good for the country and economy if it hurts our fund-raising. I’d like to think that most people vote with their values rather than the best campaign commercial. And don’t even get me started on the merits of lobbying.

    Unions shouldn’t be abolished completely but they should be for special cases where employees truly are getting the short end of the stick (ie. Walmart).

  5. kathy
    kathy says:

    Penelope, no doubt there’s wisdom in the observation that the “entitlement” era is changing and that people will just need to get over it and move on.
    However, that reality smack upside the head is much easier for a 29-year old to hear than a 52-year old who has contributed to the social security plan (without option to abstain) for DECADES. Boomers have been upholding their end of that contract for their entire work history, only to be told now “Well… sorry… sucks to be you. Wake up and take a look at the ’emerging jobs’ market.”
    Surely Boomers are entitled to at least one last benefit: the right to be seriously pissed off for at least twenty minutes before we “move on” and try to figure out what the hell to do now.

    • KatieN
      KatieN says:

      1. Per capita personal income, is $37,398 in 2009 http://www.bea.gov/regional/spi/drill.cfm

      2. The WI Department of Public Instruction (DPI)Average Teacher Salary for 2010 is $49,093–not including fringe benefits also paid with tax dollars.

      3. PolitiFact Wisconsin re: The claim that Walker Tax cuts cause deficit is not true. Tax cuts don’t kick in until next budget.

      • Mark
        Mark says:

        Well done on uncovering facts; there are also facts about the Koch brothers, openly union busting, how large a contributor they are to the governor and others, and facts about how that kind of work is going on in the nonunion labor market as well – so if union pay and benefits are compared to the declines in the private sector then yeah they look good now, but that is not a fair comparison of “facts.”

        Not that I found anything wrong with your post, I meant the well done, but there are people commenting that seem to select facts and ignore others, and they will jump on your choice facts.

        I’m surprised at some of the comments about the fairness of the private workplace – people don’t seem to believe that the private sector ever does anything bad and that companies don’t ever collude to game the system and knowlingly screw over the less powerful. Some people seem to not have experienced or seen any news on the manipulations that are the reality. The private sector is not interested in fairness or rewarding knowledge and hard work. If you are being rewarded for your knowledge and hardwork, you must know someone is working hard at making sure that that expense can be eliminated, and that often comes as a surprise to the otherwise successful people who are affected.

        Penelope herself has pointed out facts about those joining the workforce at boom times do better there whole lives compared to those who come in in the downturns. What does that fact say, that there are circumstances and large forces at work, or that coincidentally those joining the workforce at a downturn are all whiner losers with no work ethic?

        I wish we could get ALL the facts on the table and then we could have solutions.

  6. Kathryn
    Kathryn says:

    I don’t always agree with you Penelope and I don’t agree with most of what you wrote you here but I will keep reading your posts – they make me think.

    What bothers me about Gov. Walker’s actions are that he is throwing out something that has been a government staple for years (collective bargaining) and that he is being completely inflexible about it. I don’t want to see a precedent set for the former and the zealotry evident in the latter is distasteful at best.

    I am not a big fan of unions. They start out with good intentions (work fair hours for fair pay, value safety, etc.) and over time devolve into “us vs them” mentality. As part of that evolution though, unions will fail over time. The autoworkers’ unions have had to concede that the pay rates and benefits they demanded were no longer sustainable. Unions will have to reinvent themselves to remain current, or they will die. Walker would be smarter to push for concessions and chip away at union power over time – by the end of his term I bet he would have won much of what he’s demanding now and would have done so in a much less polarizing fashion.

    The good jobs aren’t in the public sector, haven’t been for some time. Smart people know this and pursue work elsewhere, through jobs at private companies or self employment.

    • Mark W.
      Mark W. says:

      Kathryn, did you know that collective bargaining laws vary state to state? As an example, VA doesn’t have any collective bargaining laws … and they have a balanced budget. One doesn’t necessarily follow the other but it is fact for that state. Also FDR didn’t believe in collective bargaining in the public sector. Here’s a link to a short, recent article – http://tinyurl.com/48e9zsj .

      • Mark W.
        Mark W. says:

        Kathryn, I didn’t imply that Virginia has a balanced budget because they don’t allow collective bargaining.
        I said – “One doesn’t necessarily follow the other but it is fact for that state.”
        I left it at that and went on to provide a link that mentioned FDR’s thoughts on collective bargaining and unions in the public sector. As liberal as he was in his political views, he had it right. The best part of the link which I provided is the one link within the article. The article link is http://tinyurl.com/2emx7co and the article title is ‘The Trouble with Public Sector Unions’. It mentions a few states such as NY and NJ and their histories with the public sector unions and the large bills they now have to pay into pensions and health care benefits.
        I mentioned VA because it is one of two states (the other being NC) that hasn’t allowed unions in the public sector. Consequently VA and NC don’t have these bills to worry about. Here’s a link to an article ( http://tinyurl.com/63uwk72 ) in a Richmond, VA newspaper that has details about the laws prohibiting public sector unions in that state. Also, VA is a right-to-work state (no union membership required) which they say is good for business.

  7. Melanie
    Melanie says:

    While this blog was specifically about the Union action (and, yes, I’m invested. I already gave up a measly 2% raise and took a 3% pay cut in the form of furloughs over the last two years. Now, they want 7% of my income while giving corporations huge tax breaks. How about I give up 3.5% of my income and we raise taxes on my tax bracket 3.5% to make it “even”), the bill has much deeper, scarier implications. If it passes Walker will be able to kick people off BadgerCare (for low-come kids and pregnant women), allow outside interests (read Koch brother industries) to buy/run state energy facilities (like the electricity plant on the UW campus at prices the state – e.g. Walker himself – deems reasonable; the bill will also disrupt Metro service because Madison would lose $45 million in federal funding as a result of the union-busting of the public transport system, and finally, it would spin off the flagship school, allowing differential disbursement of funds within the UW system. In a 144-page bill, it’s not just about the unions. And finally, when did stepping on each others’ faces to get “mine” become the “American Way”?

    BadgerCare: http://www.theawl.com/2011/02/burning-down-wisconsin-the-hidden-budget-bill-item-even-worse-than-union-busting

    Outside interests: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/21/947954/-The-other-part-of-the-Scott-Walker-plan:-Firesale-of-Wisconsin-state-assets

    Metro: http://www.channel3000.com/traffic/26908918/detail.html

    UW: http://www.channel3000.com/education/26889293/detail.html

  8. Millie
    Millie says:

    Woo Hoo! Go Penelope. People need to take care of themselves, work hard and work smart, and then they will be fine, and we all be better off. Thanks for not pussy footing.

  9. Lex
    Lex says:

    As a non-union member working for a private corporation that is certainly not a pleasant working environment, I fully support unions. And yes, I’m already working to remove myself from that situation. Unfortunately, this bill and others similar to it also seek to cut funding for me to obtain health care, and education, thus cutting off my path out of what I consider a hellhole. I was born into debt, and my mother’s choice to essentially steal my identity to keep electricity in our home growing up was inevitable, so please don’t bother telling me it’s because I don’t work hard enough that I am below the poverty level. My credit score was destroyed before I was supposed to have one. But I digress…

    Basically, without the right to organize ourselves, we cannot protest the things we do not agree with. Corporations are operated in a somewhat pyramidal fashion, with the few at the top making the largest salaries (The CEO and owners of course) and the largest base of employees making at least minimum wage – thanks to those who fought for their collective bargaining rights and effectively won better treatment for ALL workers. This is the natural organization for any company of a large size; of course someone has to be in charge, and someone else has to do all the work. What I find most interesting is how these sorts of corporations will cut base employee salaries and lay them off before the CEO will even consider shortening one of his vacations by a week, yet these employees are the ones carrying the bulk of the company’s load. I’m not exaggerating, the undisclosed (because they’ll fire me) company I work for spent more on the CEO’s birthday party last year than they did the entire year on badly needed maintenance and equipment. They also fired at least 5 long-term employees for no reason other then they were replacing them with newer employees (that they’d be paying less).

    We may not have children working in factories, but we have corrupt CEO’s who purposefully maintain a high-turnover rate to save their company money, and who willfully fire long-term employees without adequate reasoning and advance notice. And they get away with it, because there is no organization for the employees to turn to when they are being unfairly treated, because their company has prohibited even the organization of a simple bake sale by employees.

    Instead of conducting business in fear of employee uprisings, why don’t they just try treating their employees like they would wish to be treated themselves? That way, they needn’t fear retaliation. However, as it currently stands, employees fear retaliation from employers for disagreeing with them. Or for medical absences…For instance, at my workplace, your first day of absence is inexcusable, even with a doctors note. That makes it possible for them to fire you for becoming ill, which is technically illegal. Without an organization to turn to, however, most cannot do anything but look for another job and hope to collect unemployment – a practice which was also won by the unions in our country.

    This is just another example of someone saying that it’s the fault of an individual for staying in a situation where they are being mistreated.

    Victims of rape get the same treatment.

  10. Jocelyn
    Jocelyn says:

    “If the democrats cannot win elections without union backing, then the democrats need a new platform”

    Penelope – I felt the need to reply, although I did not manage to make it though the rest of the comments, that this comment of yours seems kind of bizarre in the face of massive corporate and religions interest groups backing the republican party. This isn’t really about a platform, but about the sources of money supporting different political goals. One side cutting off the other under the excuse of fiscal crisis seems likely to lead to a suppression of non-big-business interests. I personally found it chilling to read this interview with Scott Fitzgerald: http://www.npr.org/2011/02/21/133932040/Wisconsin-Protests/

    In other words, this is kind of like how my dad, a drilling engineer and high-level manager for a large international oil company, would donate to Greenpeace because he knew how much money was coming from the other side. I’m not a huge union person, and I no longer live in Wisconsin, but I think removing them hastily and unilaterally like this is going to hurt a lot of people. The protests are not about stopping change but about retaining a voice.

    (Also, Scott Walker really doesn’t have a track record that makes me trust his motives and abilities.)

  11. Dennis
    Dennis says:

    Bravo!…I am impressed with your Blog on this subject and I don’t get impressed very often. This is a matter that the kids need to come first and in order for that to happen the Teachers Union needs to go. For all the good teachers in Wisconsin, your jobs are safe and you will end up doing better when all the bad apples are removed and individual performance (yours) gets rewarded.

  12. Elizabeth
    Elizabeth says:

    Penelope,

    I don’t take issue with your commentary about embracing change and adapting to the changing workforce. But I would disagree with your views on the protest occurring in Madison. It’s more than just quibbling about lost wages or higher premiums. It’s about fighting for justice and not allowing corporate puppets like Governor Walker to trump all over his constituents’ rights on his way to the next political post while scapegoating working families. Ambition is fine, but in Wisconsin I like to believe we are rational people that value our neighbors. If anything, Walker should have made his wealthier allies pay more in taxes. Instead they get to keep their money.

    The most offensive statement in your piece was the bit about Wisconsin public schools being among the lowest performing. That statement is inaccurate. I have the following links to help you review and compare performance data among different states.
    http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/states/
    Here are two other links for you to review about ACT/SAT scores by state:
    http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/tables/dt08_144.asp (SAT scores breakdown by state)
    http://www.act.org/news/data/07/states.html
    (ACT score breakdown)

    Overall, I think our teachers are doing a good job in Wisconsin. They don’t deserve to be picked on. Americans need to wake up and make big businesses and the financial sector accountable for the national fiscal mess we’re in.

  13. Ben T-Moore
    Ben T-Moore says:

    Well, I don’t agree with this, to the extent of thinking you’re wrong about pretty much every point, but you’ve written well enough on other things that I’ll stick around to see what you come up with next.

    That said, there’s one thing that really stood out to me. You said:
    “Not because they are disloyal, but because they are realistic in that no job lasts forever, and few last even two years. Career changes used to be something saved for mid-life crises, but today, people can expect to change careers five times, which means that the idea of a pension is off the radar.”

    To which I’d ask — how many years of experience do you think a teacher needs to reach their best potential? I’d think at least the first two or three are spent just learning everything (not counting two+ years of schooling and practice teaching), to go through a full lesson plan more than once, to deal with students day-in and day-out in all seasons, to teach for whichever standardized tests are being judged…. Asking people to go into teaching expecting that they’ll only last even four or five years seems like an unacceptable turnover to me.

  14. Mark F
    Mark F says:

    Sadly the need for unions remains. Here in a state that is very hostile to union activity a fellow attorney makes a hefty living suing employers, most governments, because of their open and notorious violations of labor laws. He will tell you that for everyone he represents many times more refuse to come forward out of fear. Most cases he handles would never have happened had a union been in place.

    Funny thing about the end of security and benefits. Government has consistently paid below market (for comparable positions) and used security and benefits as it’s sales pitch. Is government willing to pay market or concede more attractive candidates?

  15. Anna
    Anna says:

    Naive but relevant post that touches on important aspects – developed countries’ demographic challenge and volatile, formerly stable industries competing with former developing countries.

    However, I am surprised about the one-sided negative perspective on unions; could that be due to the character of American unions?

    To be frank, it surprises me to even hear about American unions. The stereotypical ‘American model’ that I have heard of is more like:

    – No unions and no worker’s protection
    – No unemployment insurance
    – No public health care system (or a very rudimental one)
    – High crime rates and a huge gap between rich and poor areas; money extremely important to get on the right side of those ‘welfare filters’
    – Private health insurance so expensive that usually it is part of job packages, making workers dependant on keeping their job if they or their family get sick

    Conclusion: due to lack of unemployment insurance / safety net and public health insurance and due to an extremely strong focus on material wealth, Americans are more concerned with job security than most others.

    Is that conclusion off the mark?

    Now, since you tell that there are unions and they hamper job market flexibility by trying to protect incompetent workers trying to hang on to extinct careers – and that the American situation can be extrapolated to ‘the world’ – Here is my ‘world’ experience:

    In my Scandinavian home country (live in Australia today), the job market model is: high protection of workers’ rights, high minimum wages, advanced public health system, advanced public infrastructure / transport system, free quality education for everybody, many public goods, low discrepancy between rich and poor, minimal crime rates, a strong sense of safety, and obviously: high taxes.

    These aspects are supposed to make the job market more flexible; because people have less fear of loosing their job due to the strong social security, less focus on money, and because education is free and the educational system is very flexible, so it is easy to change / upgrade one’s skills.

    Obviously, high minimum wages and protection of workers’ rights don’t precisely enhance competitiveness and there is a heated debate about how to improve the flexibility of the work force in the face of the demographic challenges and competition from former developing countries; the job market is under pressure from the International competition, just like anywhere else.

    The unions, who introduced and fought for the Scandinavian job market model, did cause heaps of trouble in the past, haunted employers and slowed down job market flexibility and economic growth. They have lost much of the old kind of power though and today work more with industries than against them I think, to re-educate workers and support creation of new jobs rather than defending what can’t stand.

    Maybe the unions don’t need to be part of the problem, they can be part of the solution; part of helping the workforce to re-calibrate itself and take on the new challenges. (if Scandinavian experiences can be generalised to the US)

    However, they do need funding and support then. Just like people do need resources in order to upgrade themselves, and they do need basic safety (food, health service if required) so they can lift their focus from struggling to put food on the table and care for sick kids to make uncertain investments in future career changes.

    • Mark
      Mark says:

      Well said, I don’t know why that is lost on Americans – do we know for a fact that they are paying less in a private system than more socialist public systems? Are they sure that making things more equal means everyone will just be equally poor? I don’t understand how Americans are so convinced of what they think they know when they can just look at actual real life examples operating in other countries before making up their mind. Those countries have their problems too, their not perfect, but if a larger portion of their society is enjoying a better quality of life than Americans, why are we taught to be against the means with which they acquired that?

    • mysticaltyger
      mysticaltyger says:

      I can only base this on what I have read about Scandinavia…but there is a much less corrupt mindset on the part of government, the unions, and the citizens in Scandinavia than in the US. In the US, the mentality is to focus on very narrow, short-term interests and ignore the interests of the larger society. It’s true for business, the individual, the government, and the unions. I get the feeling that Scandinvavians understand that the benefit to the society at large is important, whereas this is ignored in the US, regardless of which person/group being referred to.

      • mysticaltyger
        mysticaltyger says:

        PS…as you point out later in your post, the unions in Scandinavia adapted to changing conditions. I belong to a union in the US public sector and I can tell you, trying to get the union to change its way of doing business is next to impossible. They are extremely inflexible and rigid in their thinking!!!!

  16. Anna
    Anna says:

    J… that’s too long for a comment. Please feel free to delete my comment above, I have saved it somewhere else and might use the topic for a blog post later.

  17. Amanda
    Amanda says:

    My mom just went through a strike in the last year. (MN Nurses v. Hospitals) When it was all said and done the Union and hospital executives went to the table and the Union came out as the “winner.” It was a bunch of bull and propaganda on the Union’s part. My mom went on strike and supported the union but in the end realized the union wasn’t working to the benefit of the nurses. It was working towards it’s own SELF SUSTAINING PLATFORM.

    I will never receive a pension in my life. I don’t trust that any SS will be left either. This is why in Finance 101 they make you calculate how much retirement savings you will have if you start saving at 25 v. 35 v. 45. It’s you’re responsibly. The world is changing and people better start changing with it. I also happen to underwrite Group Life insurance and let me tell you first hand, employers are not looking to spend their own money on employee benefits anymore. If you want to make money in group insurance these days you better figure out how to offer outstanding voluntary benefits. Here here Miss P.

    • Mark
      Mark says:

      I don’t doubt your experience with the unions, but it is also true that not that long ago “things were changing” because unions were being born in response to abuses and are the reason we now enjoy weekends and 8 hour/40 hour work limits. If you take your own point “things are changing and we better change with them” and take a little bit longer view, you’d couldn’t miss that unions were part of the upward sweep of humanity, and big business that funds phony grass root orgs to get people to vote for a candidate that works for big business, will not be doing anything for non-union people after they’re done with the unions. A further lack of group leverage does not benefit us. The rich use group leverage for their own benefit – they just don’t call it a union.

  18. Nowgirl
    Nowgirl says:

    Your mission is to write about the intersection of work and life, right?

    I agree: unions that are specific to worksites are anachronistic. But thus far, no one has come up with ways to get today’s workers what they really need: portable health care and benes.

    Until there is a way for all of us individual entreprenurial workers to (ahem) collectively figure out a way to make benes portable, we still need the dying husks of unions. As a bridge.

    Sometimes I think you ignore the benes problem for modern workers because you consider it insoluble. But it’s exactly the kind of thing we could use your/BC’s leadership on. If we can talk about miscarriages, can’t we talk about not being able to take our kids to the doctor because we can’t afford insurance, and what a drain that is for economic development?

    Want to end unions ethically? Portable, real benes for everyone would do it. Let’s talk about that.

  19. Bob
    Bob says:

    I don’t know anything about Wisconsin cheese unions or whatever, but the lesson I got out of this post is – learn to cope with change.

    Also, this is one of the most heartless blogs I’ve read, which is the reason I read it. I’m one of those strange people who would rather hear harsh truths than pretend nothing is wrong.

  20. Bob
    Bob says:

    PS. I like to compare unions with democracy or capitalism – it’s not a perfect system, but nobody’s thought of a working alternative yet.

  21. mj
    mj says:

    Great way to get your email list/subscribers cleaned up for 2011. I live in your former town (NYC) home to the largest population of union members. If it was not for unions these employees would be tripling the welfare population as they would have no other function in society. I read this post at 11 a.m. and wanted to circle back and read the comments as I knew the comments would be a great read as well. P, either you really believe this or are you just kicking up your SEO? Please reveal. Oh, and you must know The Housemartins song Me and the Farmer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLOyF50wlBU

    Yes that is Fatboy Slim (Norman Cook) playing bass.

    Stay warm – 2 more months ’til all that Wisconsin snow melts.

  22. Kaiti
    Kaiti says:

    Very interesting post, I agree with your thoughts 100%. I wonder… Would make the same suggestions for a less-stable economy (ironically BECAUSE of the strength of the unions) like Greece?

      • Mark
        Mark says:

        Unions are change. They are groups, everything is in groups, government, lobbyists, the wealthy leverage groups to get what they want, why single out “union” as the bad one causing all the problems? Should we just get rid of all groups?

        Unions brought “change” are the instigators of “change,” the kind of change that you currently now enjoy as a working person. What you are talking about “changing back.”

        If unions had just stopped at child labor laws, we should be okay with rolling those laws back because unions like those laws? Does anyone remember learning about the results of unchecked market capitalism in our history. We would not have progressed without the unions or even be having this conversation.

  23. Christine
    Christine says:

    If more people focused on #3 and #4, maybe we could improve education and quality of life, instead of “fighting” for the status quo. If there is no money in the bank, there is no way to pay for anything, not salary, not benefits, not buildings ….

  24. chris Keller
    chris Keller says:

    Penelope, your fix for these employment/job loss problems is to strike out on one’s own–finding or creating one’s next position.

    Others have pointed out that it is the highly educated, highly motivated person who reads your blog, who would be capable of this fix. Those persons probably also fearlessly welcome change as stimulating and motivating . . . These people are probably in the minority.

    Most people need the power of numbers (i.e., collective bargaining) in order to fix their job problems. And most people have at least some trepidation about change . . . IMHO.

  25. ejly
    ejly says:

    Get a better fact checker, P.

    First off, teachers are fired all the time. The difference is that they can’t be summarily walked out when they have union representation. Given how teachers have to deal with parents and politicians, I think having some due process is good. Ask any biology teacher who’s had to deal with a creationist school board how that works out in a non-union school district.

    Second, gov’t employment isn’t stable. That’s a myth, so do your research. Political change especially drives turnover in those states without unions for gov’t workers. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/04/government-jobs-no-longer_n_635015.html

    Third, the union negotiated contracts were for deferred compensation. Executives use this all the time, why do you think it is ok for a CEO but not for a teacher? (And why does Gov. Walker think unions are ok for cops but not teachers?)

    Your link regarding Wisconsin schools being worst-in-country doesn’t even substantiate that, it just links to a report of high schools. Reading that list WI schools look better than KS, ND, and others… again where are the facts I count on you to have as basis for your opinions?

    You’re there. Go do your research, maybe go talk to the folks at the capitol, then post something real. What “insane and anachronistic powers” are you possibly referring to anyway?

    • Kathryn
      Kathryn says:

      Cathy, If you look at the report the article references, you’ll find that Wisconsin is actually better than the national average (34% read at proficient level or above in WI vs 30% nationally, p. 63 of the NCES report). It’s a sad statement about the nation but not WI specifically.

  26. Paul Day
    Paul Day says:

    Right on, Penelope:

    I work for the public sector and I say it is behind in a lot of ways. You would be surprised how much control unions have over the organizational agenda beyond just pay and benefits. An example: one thing we want to do here in Baltimore is improve the bus system so it works for middle class people, but the big hangup is the unions. They won’t let us make any changes. Unions are adverse to change even when it works better for the customers.

    Aside from unions, the public sector rewards stagnation and pensions are one of those outdated policies that keep mediocre/bad employees around in an organization for 30-40 years. After 30 years in a job, you can’t possibly innovate or contribute to change. Your institutional. The public sector would be wise to look to companies like Zappos to attract and retain the right people for the right amount of time.

    The public sector could probably do more with fewer more dedicated folks who aren’t just looking to sit in their cushy jobs. Generation Y, which I’m part of, won’t stick around in the public sector for long if they are going to continue to reward stagnation and neglect talent.

    The contributions unions have made to the middle class are overstated, because most of the radical protest movements that brought new rights emerged from the unemployed, not the employed, during the great depression. Labor rights were concessions, not ultimate goals. Many groups wanted to go much further than the unions. The institutionalization of unions and collective bargaining destroyed the ability of working class folks to create grassroots change.

  27. Chris Baskind
    Chris Baskind says:

    “Maybe I could understand this if it was 1880 and we had children working in factories.”

    We do — millions of them. UNICEF estimates that there are about 158 million workers between the ages of 5 and 14. Worldwide, that’s about 1 in 6 kids.

    There aren’t many in the United States. But we’ve contributed to this number by exporting manufacturing jobs overseas, where social and environmental regulations are less stringent, and there are fewer pesky unions to insist employers act responsibly or even lawfully.

    We buy products produced overseas by child labor. Everyone knows this is going on and everyone knows this is immoral, but we love cheap electronics and shoes. So let’s not pretend that the worldwide decline of unionism is because the conditions which fostered the movement were remedied. We just pushed them into the shadows, upon people who haven’t the power to resist.

    Maybe those kids need sharper resumes and better job-hunting skills.

  28. Janet
    Janet says:

    Do you really think teaching is a dead end job? What would you do with all the kids who need educating? Do you really think it is a cushy job and does not need union protection? I’ve seen a non-tenured teacher fired because a board of ed. member did not like the grade his daughter got from that teacher. Is this right? Maybe we should require all parents to stay at home and home-school their kids and then we could reduce the number of people needing employment AND get rid of all the costs of public education. I’m sure our society would be better off.

  29. Carolyn
    Carolyn says:

    As someone who works HR in the public sector, the idea that union employees can’t be fired is complete bullshit. I have fired union employees. I’ve also fired non-union employees. The process of progressive discipline is the same either way. What we largely have issues with is management too finicky to dirty their hands with creating the documentation necessary to avoid lawsuits. Anecdotal information is not fact.

    • Mark F
      Mark F says:

      I spent years defending an employer in wrongful termination cases and lost more than I won because managers failed to document. Instead they let it all slide until they finally had it and terminated the employee who then promptly presented their great performance reviews and no disciplinary actions as evidence of the wrongful termination.

  30. Mark F
    Mark F says:

    Some other thoughts this raises.

    1. I agree completely that the defined benefit pension era is over. It was an accident created by the post-World War II era when we had little competition for goods manufactured in the US.

    2. The personal retirement account is beautiful idea with many merits, but as we saw during the heart of the downturn, people faced with losing their homes or cars and unable to maintain what they considered an acceptable lifestyle dug into that money to meet today’s needs at a time when the values were greatly dimished. That is a bill that will come due in a couple decades.

    3. While personal retirement accounts in a macro view provide greater wealth and stability, life is lived in the micro view. If on January 1, 2008 you resolved to retire on the last day of the year, your financial ability to do so relying on market based instruments was likely no longer present. If you were healthy, that meant delaying retirement. However of the five people I know who retired recently, four did so for health reasons. One died four months later from a terminal illness. One has a respiratory issue that requires frequent hospitalizations and is moving into an assisted living facility. Two retired because they required surgery that would have placed them off work for many months. One is off fishing, golfing and seeing the world. Retirement in my experience is about no longer being able to sustain your work rather than a glorious end of life holiday. A purely market driven retirement fund is an invitation to poverty if your retirement clashes with economic downturn. That’s why you better pay attention to what is happening with “entitlement” programs.

    Karma is noted to be a bitch and people who dismiss the social safety net might well find their retirement portfolio severely eroded at the instant a careless driver or an unfortunate mutation in their body ends their working career.

  31. dana
    dana says:

    “…he's smart enough to go into hedge funds instead of teaching,” talking about her brother. What, somehow being a hedge fund broker means you’re smarter than a teacher? That’s a bit presumptuous. He just makes more money; it doesn’t mean he’s smarter. Okay, I take that back: He’s smart about where you can make money.

    “… 4. Stop picking jobs based on long-term benefits.” What? The only reason public workers traditionally want good benefits is because they’re paid so shitty. I assure you if doctors and lawyers and engineers and bankers and Wall Street scum didn’t make obscene amounts of money they would want a meager pension to retire with too. And they’d be marching w/ signs too. It’s motivated self-interest. I can’t believe PT doesn’t recognize the snowball effect of taking down a public union. One little breeze will blow this little house of cards down.

    This idea PT has about adaptability is like something Gordon Gecko would say in “Wall Street.” It’s all about taking what you can now, short term profits, greed is good. And it’s the dark side of capitalism. It never wants to fess up to the bigger picture of community, environmental sustainability, worker health, abandoned communities, destroyed land, water, habitat, etc.

    PT has her points of view, and all are worth listening to. But she can be irritating and even arrogant and condescending at the same time, which I’m sure is part of her appeal and calculation as a blogger.

    Less than 7-8% of the workforce is unionized, and most of these are public employees. I know all the arguments about limited government, the obscene pay, benefits, tenure of public employees, but comparing unions w/ public unions is silly.

    It’s not about protesting change that the unions in Wisconsin are picketing. It’s being singled out, made a scapegoat for everything that’s wrong w/ America. Unions: the new villains. I don’t buy it. PT trivializes the debate by simplifying it. It may make good copy, is a good word-bite, but I think she’s just being an opportunist, much like she was w/ the veterans.

    I like muckrakers like PT, and I even like most of her suggestions, agree w/ her, think she has original ideas about the world of work. But this battle w/ the teacher’s unions has been a political battle, one that starts and ends w/ which end of the political spectrum you’re on. The Right wants to privatize education; the Left want to keep it a public trust–and more importantly, to continue funding it. I know I’m tired of weaselly politicians using education and teachers’ unions as “red meat” for their ideological base when it’s election time. I’ve seen it now for thirty years.

    Sure, the public unions in Wisconsin are screwed. She’s right about that, but it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t make a stand. Getting rid of teacher unions won’t improve education. Those with the means will still buy a good education for their kids. The operative word is BUY, as in it takes money, funding. And those without the money … well, who cares about them. Let’s just put them in jail. Now that’s a cost-effective measure, isn’t it. Pay the piper now or pay it later. There’s always a price–or better yet a required investment needed to run a family, society, civilization.

    The poor will always get screwed, and of all the professions I see teachers as the lowest rung on the Darwinian economic ladder, so I can’t help but root for them. Maybe I’m biased, but then again so is PT.

    And, hey, that’s alright. PT would be the first to challenge an assumption, a common wisdom. She’s good at it, and it’s made her successful–as a writer. As a philosopher, a historian, a sociologist, a econ. theorist, a pontiff of the American milieu I’m not as convinced.

  32. NKNBK
    NKNBK says:

    I tried to read this until I reached the part about how children don’t work in factories. Quite a lot do, in fact. And yes, slavery in America still exists. I’m not even pro-union, but I know this. How old are you, five?

  33. Doug K
    Doug K says:

    “Maybe I could understand this if it was 1880 and we had children working in factories.”

    We will soon have child labor again, thanks to the same political party that is union-busting in Wisconsin. See Missouri Senate Bill 222, details here:
    http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/475205/missouri_gop_wants_to_repeal_child_labor_laws/

    “Wisconsin public schools are among the lowest performing in the country. ”
    That link goes to the US News ranking of schools, but the US News ranking criteria are opaque and certainly not authoritative.

    Over here, a much better discussion:

    http://studentactivism.net/2011/02/21/teachers-unions-actsat-and-student-performance-is-wisconsin-out-ranking-the-non-union-states/

    Notice in particular that in ACT/SAT rankings, high school graduation rates, and NEAP ratings, Wisconsin is near the top; and all states that have made teacher’s unions illegal, are clustered at the bottom of the rankings.

    It’s not going to help anyone to destroy the teachers.

  34. Woody
    Woody says:

    Let’s just get this straight. the citizens elected the Governor to do what is best for the State, the state is broke and requires a strong person to reorganize the budget, he is attempting to do so. There will need to be sacrifices from the citizens, that involves tough decisions. Unions aren’t a sacred cow, they have to grow and flex to be relevant or they become irrelevant, the unions did some good things and now with some of the unions not taking into consideration their positions that may chase away jobs to countries that are non-unionized. Things change… they are born go though puberty and become robust and then become less and less productive and then retire and so the circle of life. Perhaps it is time!

    • Mark F
      Mark F says:

      Virtually every job that can be done for under a dollar an hour in China or Vietnam or India has already gone. That’s not union doing. Unions didn’t drive those jobs overseas, rather extremely depressed wages in those places coupled with easy transport goods and uniform trade agreements making it easy and cheap to get the goods here did it. Most manufactured goods not requiring high technical skill (and many that do) are produced by people working at a fraction of the US minimum wage, so-called union wages don’t even enter the equation.

      Pat Buchanan has said for years the great flaw in free trade policy is that we free trade as if equals with nations that don’t play by our rules.

      We have a choice. Do we play with everyone or do we just play with nations like Canada, Japan and the European Union who pay similar wages, impose similar workplace safety rules, similar environmental rules, and set minimum levels of protection for workers who become too old or too ill to work?

      Right now the answer is we treat all equally when tariffs should be reflect the rules of the game. If a nation doesn’t play by the same rules, we will raise the price of their goods until they are playing with the same rule book.

  35. Laura
    Laura says:

    AMEN!!! Couldn’t have said it better Penelope, especially the point about unions being for a day gone by. Look at what they did to the American Auto Industry. I want people to be treated fairly but I want the government to have a balanced budget too. Plus, calling in sick when you are not sick is FRAUD! What are the teachers teaching their students? If I didn’t show up for 5 days, that would be job abandonment and I would not have a job to return to. I think the message is loud and clear, we have to stand on our own to feet! It’s a cultural problem- in my mind- to some degree. Clearly teachers are not paid what they are worth, but neither are the professional athletes and actors. As a society we place a high value on these professions. Sorry for the rant, but this debate in a very liberal city is not balanced and too many people are keeping quiet about what is really wrong with our country and our values!

  36. Mark
    Mark says:

    First, those that can’t tolerate opinions that differ from their own that want to leave this blog- please GO, I will not miss you.
    Second, as a former union steward, those that equate public unions with private unions are missing the point. Private unions and companies compete in commercial marketplace for wages and benefits and public unions do not. Private unions and company representatives negotiate in a competitive market environment. Public unions and politicians don’t compete with anyone, there is no risk for either party since there is no danger of the “company” going broke or the bureaucrat losing a job for bad negotiations. Government representatives negotiate with the public union for another party- the taxpayer. The taxpayer is hostage to the agreement they have no way to agree or disagree with but though taxes are required to pay.
    The average federal salary is now $77K and the private sector is $44K since in good or bad economies federal employees always get increases since there is no market forces to compete with and taxpayers are looking 14 trillion in debt.

  37. Kelly Meeker
    Kelly Meeker says:

    Penelope, these people are not necessarily resisting to change in their jobs. They are resistant to losing their freedom of speech.

    I am by no means uncritical of unions, but collective bargaining is a human right, recognized by the United Nations through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    Unions affirm individual freedom by giving a voice to individual workers when engaging with large institutions. Not every industry needs a union, and not every person needs a union. But when a group of individuals chooses to form an organization promoting their individual rights, they're asserting their voice and their right to negotiate in their common interests.

  38. Dale
    Dale says:

    Unions are about evening out the power differential in negotiations between those with influence and those without. Nothing else. It’s business!
    It makes logical sense for individuals to participate in unions rather than to be one voice crying out in the wilderness, seeking not to have one’s services/labor/time viewed as a commodity. Not everyone is a high flyer in their field, and “the company” doesn’t want everyone to be.
    It’s a classic struggle, farmers form cooperatives for better pricing and other benefits from their produce, and people form unions for better pricing and benefits from their labor.

  39. sarah
    sarah says:

    Great post! I know this is a tough topic, but I thought you made a lot of really great points.
    Even for those who are offended or disagree, this issue is important enough for everyone to at least try to give it as much thought as possible. Penelope has simply brought a lot of concerns and great suggestions to the table

  40. Jim
    Jim says:

    In my first career I negotiated a lot of contracts. Never, in those 13+ years did I see a party agree to terms that they couldn’t afford. They may not have loved the terms (some of these contracts were settlement agreements of matters in litigation), but if financial ruin was going to be the result of the agreement, no one would enter into it.
    When it became clear to me that the economics of the practice of law was shifting in a way that made sense for me to move on, I did so. I became a teacher because teaching is a career for which my strengths are well suited. I mention all of this by way of preface because on those matters I see eye-to-eye…and I have “walked the walk”…with respect to the author of this blog. But having actually been there, I believe she is wrong on the underlying issue.
    Elimination of public employee collective bargaining rights is a simplistic, one-size-fits-all attempt to avoid facing the basic underlying dynamics of the situation. No government entity has…or ever will…agree to a contract that will lead to financial ruin, any more so than a private party would. To the extent state and local governments face financial difficulty now, that problem is not going to disappear over night by eliminating collective bargaining rights.
    This all seems like a classic case of “buyer’s remorse.” Having made deals in the past that now seem like a bad idea, there’s a desire to lash out at the “seller” for having done exactly what any rational person in an arms-length transaction would do: secure the best deal possible. Let government show restraint and wisdom in the future, like any BOD owes to its shareholders. And if the individuals responsible to act with such restraint and wisdom fail to do so, then let them lose their jobs. If they can’t cut it when negotiating a contract in a far more advantageous situation than someone in the private sector (most public employees lack the one key negotiating tool private sector employees possess…the right to strike), then get the heck out of the way and let someone who knows what they’re doing step in.

  41. Gideon Rosenblatt
    Gideon Rosenblatt says:

    What irritates me about this post is how glib it is. You’re trying to use the situation in Wisconsin as a “news wrapper” to drive some extra traffic for some simplistic “get on with it” career advice. It’s cynical and you don’t really know what you’re talking about on this issue. And, as you can see from all the thoughtful commentary here, this is something that really matters to a lot of people and to the country.

    Unsubscribed.

  42. Frank
    Frank says:

    Penelope, I love your writing. I love the crazy way you throw out a bunch of wildly disparate ideas, add in a bit of yourself, a bit about sex, and almost always manage to tie it together. But this is…not your best stuff. It’s only because of the gains of the labor movement that it appears we don’t need unions anymore. What do you think would happen if unions and the threat of unions didn’t exist anymore? My wife works in HR. I know about the conversations that go on in management about the things they need to do to keep the staff satisfied enough to not want to unionize. And that’s no secret. And “There are enough jobs. You can't get a job because you're bad at job hunting,”? Or perhaps because you don’t have the time or money to retrain, or to move your family, or you can’t because your house is underwater. I still love you, but you have to be careful of the smug sweeping statements.

  43. Caity
    Caity says:

    But tenured teachers *can* get fired. There is a whole protocol for it. I believe it needs tweaking certainly, but to just eliminate unions and collective bargaining completely seems insane to me. And I vote republican, usually.

  44. jennifer lynn
    jennifer lynn says:

    Three things:
    1) This is a problem entirely of the governor’s creation. There was a budget surplus when the governor was sworn in. He created this deficit by giving tax breaks to large companies.

    2) This is about union-busting. Walker pretty much says so to to George Will in the Washington Post.

    3) The reason this is about union-busting (as some have said and P responded) is that unions are the only big money players on the democratic side. Republicans have spent the last several decades buying off big business (even at the expense of most people and the world economy), packing the federal bench with really conservative judges, putting Alito, Roberts, and Thomas (whose wife worked for Citizens United and who is a headliner at the yearly political strategy session led by the billionaire Koch brothers) on the Supreme Court. This same Court decided (Citizens United, 2008) to allow all of those big businesses to spend any amount of money influencing elections. We all know money = power in politics. If the only money in politics is big business money, when who will have all the power?

    4) Okay, four things. That said, Penelope’s advice about individual career choices is right on. I respect the fight of the Wisconsin unions to not have their contracts defaulted on. Changes in how unions operate moving forward are past necessary (Randy Weingarten, I’m looking at you). HOWEVER. If I can’t default on my credit card bills, the state of Wisconsin shouldn’t be able to default on their contracts either. But it’s best to not be in a position to be at the mercy of union protection in this anti-union atmosphere. If a union is the only thing standing between you and vultures who think snow plow operators are attacking this country like 9/11 (Rick Santelli said this on MTP), you are in serious trouble.

« Older CommentsNewer Comments »

Comments are closed.