Detroit's Mayor on Unions: Can't read, Can't add, Can't Comprehend

Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100225/METRO/2250445

Bing on unions: 'Either they can't read, they can't add or they can't comprehend'
Christine MacDonald / The Detroit News

Detroit --Mayor Dave Bing today criticized leaders of the city's largest union for foot-dragging on contract negotiations, saying it's costing the financially strapped city $500,000 a month and could result in more layoffs.

"Either they can't read, they can't add or they can't comprehend," Bing said at a press conference this morning in his office at City Hall. "It has to be one of the three.

"Everyone is running with a deficit in their budgets. It's leadership or a lack of leadership that has got us to where we are."

Advertisement

Bing said he's ready to impose a contract on the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 25 but said the city must follow the law. Both parties are now in fact-finding, a process which could last until July.

More layoffs may be necessary in the meantime to help shore up the city's estimated $325 million deficit, although Bing didn't give any numbers.

Bing has been at odds for months with AFSCME leaders over calls for concessions, including 10 percent pay cuts through 26 furlough days and fringe benefit cuts. The union represents about 3,600 workers such as landscapers, street pavers and crossing guards.

But union leaders shot back at Bing this morning. They said the irony was that Bing's 10 a.m. press conference to introduce his new human resources and labor relations staff was the same time both parties were supposed to be at AFSCME offices on Lafayette Boulevard for the fact-finding hearings.

"They have dragged their feet," said Richard Mack, an AFSCME attorney. "They are late every day."

The mayor's staff said in a written statement that the appropriate city officials were at the fact finding this morning and said it was AFSCME representatives who requested a delay because of the press conference.

Union officials say they understand the city's precarious finances and are willing to commit to the furlough days. But they say the city hasn't made a case for many of the fringe benefit changes they want, including changes to vacation, sick time and health care. And they have criticized Bing for not being sincere about making tough budget cuts elsewhere, including his own staff.

"The union has not run from the financial situation the city of Detroit is in," said Catherine Phillips, AFSCME's lead city negotiator. "Let's end this. We are costing the city's millions."

Bing has ratified deals with 26 of the city's 49 unions, one union vote is pending, and he has imposed contract conditions on three others, staffers said.

He blamed union officials, who he said have repeatedly tried to delay negotiations in court unsuccessfully, including asking a judge at one point to jail Bing for contempt. Bing said he is sensitive to the rank-and-file city employees but said the city is in a "financial crisis".

"It's not the rank and file," Bing said. "The (union) leadership will still have their jobs."

The City Council recently approved fringe benefits reductions that Bing negotiated with about 25 unions representing nearly 1,400 staffers and another 1,300 non-union workers. They include:

• Suspending tuition reimbursement until 2012 to save $520,000 a year.

• Reducing vacation and sick days for new hires, including eliminating up to six bonus vacation days if they don't call in sick.

• Dropping coverage for fertility and impotence drugs such as Viagra to save $1.6 million a year.

• Stopping employees from being able to add adult dependents -- parents or adult children -- to their insurance as long as they pay the monthly premiums.

These are in addition to a 10 percent pay cut in the form of 26 furlough days.

In August, Bing vowed to lay off 1,000 workers if unions didn't agree to new contracts. He backed down, but noted the city's work force has fallen to 11,800 from 13,200 when he took office in May.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detnews.com/article/20100225/METRO/2250445#ixzz0gb4vnZY1

Good for him, about time he stood up and started dealing with the real problem in this city.
Unfortunately his recommendations don't go near far enough. He needs to privatize everything.

I think this solves the Union vs. Private debate once and for all. I fully expect all Liberal posters to stop supporting unions and unionization after this post.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
Something has to give, and I for one don't understand why the unions can't accept a 10% pay cut and 26 days off. I'd love to make 10% less in exchange for 5 weeks vacation.... Where did this extreme aversion to working less in our culture come from?

If people weren't so bullheaded with the "I have to make every dollar I can potentially make, even if it means someone has to be laid off" attitude maybe we could have a more sustainable, stable economy.
 
Last edited:
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
Something has to give, and I for one don't understand why the unions can't accept a 10% pay cut and 26 days off. I'd love to make 10% less in exchange for 5 weeks vacation.... Where did this extreme aversion to working less in our culture come from?

this is unions we're talking about, they more or less don't work to begin with, just show up at work, surf net, hang out with friends, go home. IMO. The kind of stuff that goes on in Corporate America and people get away with, I can't imagine what it's like at Unions.

Unions at place like UPS I don't mind so much. I don't like that they never deliver my package faster than 3 days, but there's manual labor involved and they're providing health insurance.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Sweet lord, the city has 49 unions?

They could have a union for union leadership. Might as well hit an even half-hundred.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
Im a liberal but I don't think unions in general are a good idea. Trade groups that set minimum wages and things can be good in some industries but a city bus driver isn't going to have a producer looking down from on high wanting 72 hours of straight work because visual effects were late.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
Im a liberal but I don't think unions in general are a good idea. Trade groups that set minimum wages and things can be good in some industries but a city bus driver isn't going to have a producer looking down from on high wanting 72 hours of straight work because visual effects were late.

It's my understanding Liberals overwhelmingly tend to support them though?
They donate tons and tons to the liberal campaigns.
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
Im a liberal but I don't think unions in general are a good idea. Trade groups that set minimum wages and things can be good in some industries but a city bus driver isn't going to have a producer looking down from on high wanting 72 hours of straight work because visual effects were late.

It seems to me that the problem comes in when either the company wants to increase its profit margins by screwing the union, or the union wants to increase its power/dues by screwing the company. They just seem unable to maintain that happy balance in the middle.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
It seems to me that the problem comes in when either the company wants to increase its profit margins by screwing the union, or the union wants to increase its power/dues by screwing the company. They just seem unable to maintain that happy balance in the middle.

usually it's more like "the company needs to screw the union to stay alive" because the companies usually cede to the union's demands if they can afford it.
 

KB

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 1999
5,406
389
126
Sweet lord, the city has 49 unions?

They could have a union for union leadership. Might as well hit an even half-hundred.

The funny thing is union employees are not allowed to unionize. This is information from a union rep I know. Can you believe it, unions are good for you, but not for us? Hypocrits.
 

Deudalus

Golden Member
Jan 16, 2005
1,090
0
0
The amazing thing is both the NBA and NFL are about to have lockouts.

Ironic that these athletes making 1-20 million a year can't seem to get by.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Im a liberal but I don't think unions in general are a good idea. Trade groups that set minimum wages and things can be good in some industries but a city bus driver isn't going to have a producer looking down from on high wanting 72 hours of straight work because visual effects were late.

Unions are a great idea in theory, because management usually has too much power in the traditional management-worker relationship, and unions are a greater counter-balance to that. However, as they've gained more power, they've become corrupted by it (power does that to all - look at most career politicians), and ceased to be a benefit to their members or their industries.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
The amazing thing is both the NBA and NFL are about to have lockouts.

Ironic that these athletes making 1-20 million a year can't seem to get by.

You'd be surprised how fast 1 million goes away, especially for the typical NFL player who isn't a mega-star and only has a 4-year career (average), frequently sacrificing his body in the process. I don't envy THOSE guys at all.
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,137
225
106
The amazing thing is both the NBA and NFL are about to have lockouts.

Ironic that these athletes making 1-20 million a year can't seem to get by.

A fine example on how stupid the average American is that go to the games to support these assholes (the players). Just like the senators or house members that they go out of their way to keep supporting that are making millions off lobbyist each year.

Oh but they are looking out for your best interest. hahahaha
 

Deudalus

Golden Member
Jan 16, 2005
1,090
0
0
You'd be surprised how fast 1 million goes away, especially for the typical NFL player who isn't a mega-star and only has a 4-year career (average), frequently sacrificing his body in the process. I don't envy THOSE guys at all.

Really?

The average American makes less than 40,000 per year. Over a 30 year career they have made 1.4 million dollars.

The bare minimum NBA salary for a rookie is 500k per year. For a veteran its over 1 million.

Pardon me if I don't feel sympathy.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
The amazing thing is both the NBA and NFL are about to have lockouts.

Ironic that these athletes making 1-20 million a year can't seem to get by.

It's not about getting by, but getting their fair share. The NFL and NBA are private corporations that make a TON of money from them. It's too bad the average worker doesn't realize how much his employer makes from his work.
 

Deudalus

Golden Member
Jan 16, 2005
1,090
0
0
It's not about getting by, but getting their fair share. The NFL and NBA are private corporations that make a TON of money from them. It's too bad the average worker doesn't realize how much his employer makes from his work.

Many franchises in the NBA have been losing money for quite some time now.

See this headline of:

"Stern projects 400 million in losses for the NBA this year"
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-all-star-stern&prov=ap&type=lgns

On top of that players get 57% of all revenue while owners who take all the risk get 43% of all revenue.

Add in to that players cannot be let go or fired. Everyone else in American can be fired, but not Union members apparently and not millionaire union members. So Gilbert Arenas' contract, for example, can't be terminated despite the fact that he brought a gun to his locker.

Feel free to quote this post a year from now that both the NFL and NBA will have lockouts due to not being able to come to a collective bargaining agreement.

Fans can't afford tickets, are charged high rates for pre-season tickets which we are forced to buy, are charged 8 dollars or more per beer, and players need more guaranteed money and 60% of revenue rather than 57%.

The NFL is profitable but fans get gouged so players can get pair more and in the NFL players get 60% of all revenue while owners get 100% of the risk and cost.

Pardon me while I say fuck unions.
 
Last edited:

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
It's my understanding Liberals overwhelmingly tend to support them though?
They donate tons and tons to the liberal campaigns.

Many liberal politicians do. The unions donate more money to them because they are willing to take it and use it. I disagree wholeheartedly with that even though I wouldn't classify myself as a liberal, I know many who do and they agree with me. Most of the liberals I know really don't like the way current unions run and do business. More are being swayed to the idea that they are past their time and need to go as they cause more harm than good today. But true liberals say they shouldn't be gone for good because the idea of a union may need to come back when Corporate America starts trouncing on the liberties of the working class again.

To reiterate, while I am not a liberal, I and many liberals I know dislike the current union structure right now and would happy see them abolished for the time being. I personally wouldn't mind if they didn't come back and government actually did the job unions do in their place.




But working for a union to get $35-$40 an hour to screw in a light bulb or sweep a floor, get mandatory breaks and lunches, get benefits that include at least 5 paid weeks off per year with many sick days, great healthcare benefits that cover damn near everything for very little co-pay for myself and any family member I want to include does seem very compelling for your average American worker.
 
Last edited:

Deudalus

Golden Member
Jan 16, 2005
1,090
0
0
But true liberals say they shouldn't be gone for good because the idea of a union may need to come back when Corporate America starts trouncing on the liberties of the working class again.

That will never happen.

Even if we do get back to the point where the supply of workers is very high and the demand is very low, there is far too many checks in place that the federal government makes against businesses.

All of the old union causes like safer work places, working less stressful schedules, working less hours, getting paid for overtime hours, and whatnot are all government mandated now.

Now unions fight fore retiring in 18 years, 4 weeks paid vacation, and insurance that pays for their penis pills.

But working for a union to get $35-$40 an hour to screw in a light bulb or sweep a floor, get mandatory breaks and lunches, get benefits that include at least 5 paid weeks off per year with many sick days, great healthcare benefits that cover damn near everything for very little co-pay for myself and any family member I want to include does seem very compelling for your average American worker.

Which goes a long way to explain outsourcing doesn't it?
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Really?

The average American makes less than 40,000 per year. Over a 30 year career they have made 1.4 million dollars.

The bare minimum NBA salary for a rookie is 500k per year. For a veteran its over 1 million.

Pardon me if I don't feel sympathy.

But in the NFL, the base was only $295K in 2009. Sure, that's still a lot, but after taxes, union dues, agent fees, etc., the player is netting ~50% of that. OK, that's still a LOT of money, more than ~90% of all Americans, but he's also putting his body through a TON of abuse - many of these guys leave the game nearly crippled, dealing with severe joint pain and possible brain trauma for the rest of their years. That's why the average career is only 4 years. Sure, you could say the same about construction workers, miners, farmers, and others who do actual hard work for not much pay, and I'm sympathetic to them too. All of that makes working at a desk seem not so bad.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
But in the NFL, the base was only $295K in 2009. Sure, that's still a lot, but after taxes, union dues, agent fees, etc., the player is netting ~50% of that. OK, that's still a LOT of money, more than ~90% of all Americans, but he's also putting his body through a TON of abuse - many of these guys leave the game nearly crippled, dealing with severe joint pain and possible brain trauma for the rest of their years. That's why the average career is only 4 years. Sure, you could say the same about construction workers, miners, farmers, and others who do actual hard work for not much pay, and I'm sympathetic to them too. All of that makes working at a desk seem not so bad.

Sigh, not many players come out of a sports career "crippled" and those that do get injuries have the best medical care to treat that injury.

You want to talk about sacrificing your body, join the military and go into a warzone on E1-E3 pay. I'm talking about making $30K a year or less and having to get yourself maimed or killed. Please cry me a river or the poor abuses of the sport stars.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Fans can't afford tickets, are charged high rates for pre-season tickets which we are forced to buy, are charged 8 dollars or more per beer, and players need more guaranteed money and 60% of revenue rather than 57%.

The NFL is profitable but fans get gouged so players can get pair more and in the NFL players get 60% of all revenue while owners get 100% of the risk and cost.

Much of that is true, and as a huge football fan, I'd have to agree (don't care about basketball at all), but we as fans need to remember - sports are just entertainment. We don't have to go to games. If you don't like the prices, don't go! I hate when sports fans whine about ticket prices or whatever. Fan demand fuels the price increases!
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Sigh, not many players come out of a sports career "crippled" and those that do get injuries have the best medical care to treat that injury.

You want to talk about sacrificing your body, join the military and go into a warzone on E1-E3 pay. I'm talking about making $30K a year or less and having to get yourself maimed or killed. Please cry me a river or the poor abuses of the sport stars.

It's not either/or - I recognize most veterans have made huge sacrifices, and deserve the benefits (and more) we provide them.
 

Deudalus

Golden Member
Jan 16, 2005
1,090
0
0
Much of that is true, and as a huge football fan, I'd have to agree (don't care about basketball at all), but we as fans need to remember - sports are just entertainment. We don't have to go to games. If you don't like the prices, don't go! I hate when sports fans whine about ticket prices or whatever. Fan demand fuels the price increases!

I'm completely fine with that.

I'm a Hornets season ticket holder and not a Saints season ticket holder.

Doubt I will be a season ticket holder for either one next year.