Pending State Layoffs

twoplustwo · 10-14-2009, 11:47 AM

Ditto sam, ditto the phantom. Since we're pointing fingers, I'm not a native, have been here 16 years via Philly, am a bleeding heart liberal Dem, and am as anti-union as it gets. IMO, unions in this day and age exist for no other reason than self-preservation. They certainly don't represent the common employee.

Calling the Gov's bluff was one of the most phenomenal displays of dumbassery I've seen in my lifetime, and I am glad he's nailing them on it.

gravy boat · 10-14-2009, 12:42 PM

This is the most annoying news item of late, IMHO.

Somehow 59% of the union members were convinced that this was the right thing to do for the common good. High probability that there will be a bunch who voted with the majority, only to find themselves without work and on the local news complaining that they were affected.

I do feel bad for those in the minority that will lose their jobs. What did the union members expect? Lynch is a business man and has had to make difficult decisions regarding layoffs in the past. why should now be different?

Welcome the the real world.

SIKSUKR · 10-14-2009, 12:50 PM

Interestingly enough, it looks like Dems and Reps agree with the Gov on this one. I know I totally support his position here and I'm not a Dem. Besides the sadness of the people being layed off, it's nice to see the union shoot itself in the foot and lose all that union dues income.

Irish mist · 10-14-2009, 07:40 PM

There would have been no need for layoffs if the democrats had not increased spending for the last 6 years. In one two year cycle they went up on the budget over 17% all the time knowing that the economy was slowing down. This current 2 year cycle sees spending up 8%......there is no excuse for this ! This kind of mismamagement is typical of this party.....which is why they have been out of power in NH for over 100 years, and I expect will be back out of power in 2010.

The NHGOP is not innocent in this mess. The republicans had grown lazy and weak and just thought that by showing up they were going to get elected forever. Well.......it don't work that way as they found out, and we are all suffering because of their arrogence. We have had 37 tax increases in this small state in the last 6 years. This can't go on any longer.

Slickcraft · 10-14-2009, 08:34 PM

I agree with what the Gov had to do and just can’t see any logic to the union leadership’s position.

When the union management came out against the proposal; they set-up an “each person for themselves” situation in the union. I suspect that many who felt vulnerable to a layoff voted for the Gov’s proposal and that many who felt secure in their jobs voted against it. Let someone else take the hit so I don’t have to take furlough days. This looks more like survival of the fittest rather than “collective” bargaining.

Sunbeam lodge · 10-14-2009, 09:07 PM

Going back to the original post. The real reason they voted this way is because only phantom workers will go. They have already figured out how to make it look like the layoffs occurred but I guarantee they will not reduce the union membership headcount. It is all going to be done with the usual smoke and mirrors. Follow this very closely and you will see that the budget will be met by not hiring the proposed additions they put in the budget.

SteveA · 10-15-2009, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twoplustwo

Ditto sam, ditto the phantom. Since we're pointing fingers, I'm not a native, have been here 16 years via Philly, am a bleeding heart liberal Dem, and am as anti-union as it gets. IMO, unions in this day and age exist for no other reason than self-preservation. They certainly don't represent the common employee.

Calling the Gov's bluff was one of the most phenomenal displays of dumbassery I've seen in my lifetime, and I am glad he's nailing them on it.

I'm the same "bleeding heart liberal Dem", and agree that the unions simply blew this one, badly. Good for the Governor.

Unions everywhere have to remember " When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" . Times and situations have changed. They can't expect to keep doing the same thing the same way and expect different results. JMHO

10-14-2009, 11:47 AM	#1
twoplustwo Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 456 Thanks: 51 Thanked 39 Times in 21 Posts	dittos abound Ditto sam, ditto the phantom. Since we're pointing fingers, I'm not a native, have been here 16 years via Philly, am a bleeding heart liberal Dem, and am as anti-union as it gets. IMO, unions in this day and age exist for no other reason than self-preservation. They certainly don't represent the common employee. Calling the Gov's bluff was one of the most phenomenal displays of dumbassery I've seen in my lifetime, and I am glad he's nailing them on it.

10-14-2009, 12:42 PM	#2
gravy boat Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Gilford year round, West Alton summers Posts: 596 Thanks: 601 Thanked 203 Times in 102 Posts	Agree with Twoplustwo This is the most annoying news item of late, IMHO. Somehow 59% of the union members were convinced that this was the right thing to do for the common good. High probability that there will be a bunch who voted with the majority, only to find themselves without work and on the local news complaining that they were affected. I do feel bad for those in the minority that will lose their jobs. What did the union members expect? Lynch is a business man and has had to make difficult decisions regarding layoffs in the past. why should now be different? Welcome the the real world.

10-14-2009, 12:50 PM	#3
SIKSUKR Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 5,075 Thanks: 215 Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts	Interestingly enough, it looks like Dems and Reps agree with the Gov on this one. I know I totally support his position here and I'm not a Dem. Besides the sadness of the people being layed off, it's nice to see the union shoot itself in the foot and lose all that union dues income. __________________ SIKSUKR

10-14-2009, 07:40 PM	#4
Irish mist Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 686 Thanks: 128 Thanked 85 Times in 49 Posts	There would have been no need for layoffs if the democrats had not increased spending for the last 6 years. In one two year cycle they went up on the budget over 17% all the time knowing that the economy was slowing down. This current 2 year cycle sees spending up 8%......there is no excuse for this ! This kind of mismamagement is typical of this party.....which is why they have been out of power in NH for over 100 years, and I expect will be back out of power in 2010. The NHGOP is not innocent in this mess. The republicans had grown lazy and weak and just thought that by showing up they were going to get elected forever. Well.......it don't work that way as they found out, and we are all suffering because of their arrogence. We have had 37 tax increases in this small state in the last 6 years. This can't go on any longer. Last edited by Irish mist; 10-14-2009 at 08:28 PM.

10-14-2009, 09:07 PM	#6
Sunbeam lodge Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Meredith/Naples Florida Posts: 367 Thanks: 135 Thanked 50 Times in 26 Posts	Union Layoffs Going back to the original post. The real reason they voted this way is because only phantom workers will go. They have already figured out how to make it look like the layoffs occurred but I guarantee they will not reduce the union membership headcount. It is all going to be done with the usual smoke and mirrors. Follow this very closely and you will see that the budget will be met by not hiring the proposed additions they put in the budget.

10-14-2009, 08:34 PM	#5
Slickcraft Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Welch Island and The Taylor Community Posts: 3,333 Thanks: 1,243 Thanked 2,118 Times in 968 Posts	I agree with what the Gov had to do and just can’t see any logic to the union leadership’s position. When the union management came out against the proposal; they set-up an “each person for themselves” situation in the union. I suspect that many who felt vulnerable to a layoff voted for the Gov’s proposal and that many who felt secure in their jobs voted against it. Let someone else take the hit so I don’t have to take furlough days. This looks more like survival of the fittest rather than “collective” bargaining.