Previous  1 ... 6  7  8  9  10

whaaaat??? Public schools and hospitals don't make profits! They are given a budget within which they must fit all their expenses. If they have $ left over, its clawed back from next years budget. Why do you think they have to host all those bake sales, car washes and fundraisers? Or are those the "profits" you're talking about? You want a tax refund for the 50 bucks little johnny got for the soccer team selling chocolate bars door-to-door?



Nobody is saying screw the non-union guy who is only making 30k and if he's in Toronto he ain't got no property to tax with that income, the real estate speculators saw to that a few decades ago. Most jobs in the 40-50k range Toronto have a retirement bonus and short-term disability programs that don't require you to not get sick for ten years. The sick bank is a perk to employers, not to workers. It gives them what other workers get but only if they decide not to get sick, and if they do use it for disability, it wont be there for retirement. The city employers liked it because workers came in. Yah, day care workers and public health nurses going to work sick because they might need to use those sick days for retirement or disability some day. Sounds like a sweet deal

Of course, now that the average age of that Toronto union is 50 (ie near retirement, kids in college, etc) the city wants to change all the rules and take away everything those workers thought would be there for them over the years. In the years of bargaining, they accepted lower hourly wages in exchange for this modest benefit being available when they retire IF they didn't get sick. Now that they're near retirement and nearing eligiblity to actually use it, the city tried to say "psych! gotcha!" right before the council gave itself a pay raise in these "tough times of austerity". God forbid a councilor who takes in a salary of 96k plus whatever they have on the side doesn't get a raise, eh? Those hourly workers don't need one though, only upper incomes do right?

The real problem with city finance is all the new funding burdens imposed upon them by Mike Harris and his fascist shake down of the province. Yeah, I can balance budgets too by writing somebody else's name on my bills when they come. Its not magic. Still left us with a hidden $5 bn deficit.

BTW, you know when workers vote go on strike they don't get paid, right? It's not an easy decision for them.

   

"whaaaat??? Public schools and hospitals don't make profits! They are given a budget within which they must fit all their expenses. If they have $ left over, its clawed back from next years budget. Why do you think they have to host all those bake sales, car washes and fundraisers? Or are those the "profits" you're talking about? You want a tax refund for the 50 bucks little johnny got for the soccer team selling chocolate bars door-to-door?"

Obviously you're not familiar with irony or sarcasm. This entire thread you've been ranting about corporate profits this and corproate profits that. I posed a pretty basic question, obviously sarcastically to point out that schools and hospitals DON'T make profits, and still no real answer. Instead, you play dumb, unless yer not playing.

"The real problem with city finance is all the new funding burdens imposed upon them by Mike Harris and his fascist shake down of the province. Yeah, I can balance budgets too by writing somebody else's name on my bills when they come. Its not magic. Still left us with a hidden $5 bn deficit"

Uh huh, that same logic applies to the Federal Libs that LEFT Harris in the pinch, forcing him to pinch on the cities. But that's a different topic, so lets stay on this one shall we? City workers across Canada have been going on strike looooong before Mike Harris ran Ontario

"BTW, you know when workers vote go on strike they don't get paid, right? It's not an easy decision for them."

Ever heard of strike pay? Yer either ignorant or a liar.
Once again you miss the point so I'll slow it down for ya. WHAT.. DOES.. THE.. UNION.. DO.. WITH.. ALL.. THAT.. CASH.. THEY.. HAUL.. IN.. THROUGHOUT.. THE.. YEAR?.
You still haven't given a reasonable justification for public service unions. You just excused the action in TO even though I specifically stated that was just ONE example. You can't justify why the guy making $30K/yr should pay more taxes so the $50K/yr guy can keep his perks or get a raise. So you resort to try and "teach" me about what the strike in TO was about. The 18 sick days a year, I really don't have an issue with, banking them and getting paid for them if you don't use 'em, I have a REAL issue with when it's taxpayer money. But of course, it's the poor union guy that's being victimized isn't it If they were reasonable, they could have agreed to keep banking sick days as insurance against short term illness or injury. But to strike because they wanted that "early retirement option" showed nothing but plain greed. You also don't mention that those that will be retiring soon will be getting their "sick pay" at a higher dollar value than what those days were worth in cash when they were banked.
And you compare that to $96K/yr to RUN a city??? Not that I'm thrilled government meatheads can just vote themselves a raise either. But you're using the old "they did so why can't I?", argument. Which devolves your whole argument to the level of a 6 yr old.

   

You see Beaver, my whole point was schools and hospitals DON'T make profits.
However, based on a reasonable average of $20/hr(some OPSEU members make more, some make less), 115,000 members, paying dues at 1.37% of their salary, works out to around $67 million/yr OPSEU rakes in, give or take. The average union worker will never see a penny of it.
In October 2008, OPSEU Pension Trust was named one of "Canada's Top 100 Employers" by Mediacorp Canada Inc.
That's an interesting statement cuz the last time I checked, an employer was the one that paid you. So, is OPSEU a union or an employer? IF they are an employer, then paying union dues for the priviledge of working for them is highly unethical.
Just imagine your boss telling you that you have to start paying him 1.37% of your yearly income, just to work for him.

Then it finally comes down to, you sticking up for the middle class over the rich when it comes to corporations. But you seem to have no problem with the middle class that work in public sector unions, sticking it to the taxpayer. Many of whom make less then they do. So it's not cool for the rich to do it to the middle class, but it's perfectly ok for the middle class to have more at the expense of the working poor, who ALSO get to pay for 96K/yr politicians that are worse than useless.
And all the while OPSEU's Pension Fund was one of the driving forces behind the TSE. But guess what? The guys that run OPSEU don't want to give a tiny portion of that up to help pay their workers because it'll deprive them of nice cushy retirements with summer and winter homes. Just like those greedy corporate owners you have constantly castigated in this thread. So fuck the taxpayer and make them pay.

But, I'm sure you'll find something else to take out of context or pretend to mistake my meaning so you can justify the purpose for unions continuing to operate as profit making businesses

   

Ok, didn't catch your point. The point about corporate profits is simply to deflate the argument that corporations can no longer afford to pay their workers properly and so must take back from them. The same point can be used for provincial and fedaral governments, I don't let the Libs off the hook either, they've bought into this new reaganomics economic model too. That doesn't mean I think Harris's hand was forced, however. There are tough choices and then there's eager cooperation. Harris was the later.



Strike pay is nothing. OPSEU strike pay is $125 A WEEK for the first 3 weeks and $200 per week ONLY AFTER 4 weeks on strike. CUPE pay is similar. I make more than that IN A DAY.

He shouldn't have to pay MORE taxes if someone is simply KEEPING an existing benefit. But workers shouldnt have to earn LESS just because somebody foolishly thinks they're going get lower taxes (which they won't). The reality is somebody who makes $30k a year in Toronto probably is paying little to nothing in municipla Taxes, most of the people who own property in this city make double that. So this really about people who make $80-100k a year wanting more for themselves at someone else's expense (the city workers). Property taxes aren't ever going to go DOWN, even with a pay freeze. The 'best' possible outcome for taxpayers would be that taxes would stay the same for slightly longer than normal, but that probably wouldn't even happen because theres a good chance any 'savings' would just be allocated elsewhere or to some new project in the city's budget.





Look, there were over 100 pages of concession demands including the termination of post-retirement health care benefits among other things. The sick days was highlighted by the media because it sounds 'outrageous' and sensational. Second, the city didn't even honour the bargaining process for it at the beginning of the strike, they dropped their demands on the unions' desks back in January and walked away, refused to bargain or acknowledge the unions' reply for six months before the strike. These take-backs were presented as non-negotiable pre-conditions that to which the unions would have to accept BEFORE they even sat down and negotiated for anything else! If they city tried a different tact instead of trying to circumvent and undermine the traditional negotiation and bargaining process, they might not have faced a strike. Remember, these same unions agreed to and underwent EIGHT YEARS of no raises during the last recession in the early 90's so its not like they're some mililtant brigade and they never got that lost money back so they're still earning less today relative to today's economy and inflation.


No, its just hypocritical of them since they can pad their own wallets at the same time the tell everyone else to tighten their belts, and they are among the citizens who are least affected by this recession with their stable employment and high incomes.

   

Well like most unions, in addition to the strike fund, they have their own union-funded benefits, and their own payroll for lawyers and accountants and policy researchers, lobbyists, they have advertising and marketing budgets, their own newspaper/magazines, they sponsor events and support causes and other organizations related to social and workplace issues.

Both, but you misunderstand. OPSEU members are not OPSEU employees, and people who work for OPSEU directly are not necessarily OPSEU members. OPSEU, like any union, needs to employ its own accountants, lawyers, public relations personnel, etc in order to perform its functions just like any organization does. Those people who work for OPSEU directly are generally not OPSEU members, but the site does say if you ARE an OPSEU member due to having a job in the public sector and are qualified you can also work for OPSEU directly.



I don't think they're "sticking it" to the taxpayer. I think the taxpayer gets fair value for their dollar but most people these days are just socially conditioned to always think their tax dollars are wasted, no matter how little they pay or how much they get in return. In a broader sense, I think we're all conditioned to think "less for that person means more for me" which is why whether we're talking about public sector or elsewhere, whenever one group is singled out for scrutiny in the media, everyone else just gangs up and piles on.

Most of the tax dollars come from the wealthy and big business. Poor people pay almost nothing in municipal taxes, if they pay anything at all, since they almost never own any property in a city like Toronto. Big corporations and the rich always try to dress up as middle-class or poor or mom-and-pop businesses when they want to agitate the masses, but this is really about them. It's not a coincedence that the leader and organizer of the anti-strike protests of supposed "toronto residents" is the CEO of a financial firm and lives in Prince Edward Country. And why do you think the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses was putting out all those anti-CUPE ads and writing all those anti-CUPE op-eds in the papers for?

I think you misundertand, a pension is a fixed benefit, or "Defined Benefit" plan, to use the proper term, not like an RRSP (which is a "Defined Contribution" plan). It doesn't pay out more to an individual if its assets grow, it is invested in the market like any pension, so that the contributions made by membesr and by OPSEU/employers will grow the fund to sufficient size so that it will be able to pay out to its members a fixed amount based on their years of service when they retire. Yes, OPSEU, Ontario Teachers Pension Plan and even Canada Pension Plan are very large as they have alot of participants and therefore are a significant presence in the market. If the plan is managed and invested properly, there will be fewer contributions that will have to be made to the plan by the employer, which in this case is the province of Ontario, as well as the employee and union. You see, the plan acutary calculates the plan growth and its yearly payout obligations, and estimates how much the plan needs to grow per year. If the plans' market investments dont' grow in the market to meet those targets, then the employer, union, and/or employee all have to make additional contributions to 'top up' the plan. So the plan's growth is actually a BENEFIT to the taxpayer.

The OPSEU Pension Plan anual benefit formula, if you're interested, is 2% of the average of your best five years' salary, multiplied by the number of years you have participated in the plan. It is then reduced by whatever you get from CPP (clawback). So lets say you worked for 30 years, your 5 highest-earning years average salary was $65,000. Your monthly benefit would be 0.02 x 30 x 65000 = $39,000 per year MINUS whatever you're getting from CPP. Hardly summer and winter home money. And thats for someone who basically worked their whole career in OPSEU and elected to participate in the plan from day 1.

   

Yes, it comes from a strike fund which is topped up by worker's paycheques in between labor disputes.

If this is morally wrong, then I suggest that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. ie Companies should not be allowed to save or plan for labour disputes either.

   

And that sits OK with you?

Sounds awfully similar to a corporation, yet the corporation gets it's revenues from sales, not from it's own people.

   

Sounds awfully similar to a professional association, yet the professional association gets all of its revenues from its own people and doesn't offer as many benefits.

   

Yeah, but corp's revenues are for private profit, the union's go to administrative overhead and not-for-profit activity. Its not as if there are investors who own stock in a union and get dividends from union dues paid.

And when the corp is "lowering labour costs" though pay cuts, line speed-ups and benefit take-backs, then they're getting them from their own people too.

   

Do you actually read anything before you post? Beaver said when they go on strike they don't get paid. I then asked if he ever heard of strike pay.
Try to keep up.

Beaver: Ok let's move away from the homeowner making 30K/yr, since you want to center on Toronto. Small business are taxed quite heavily. Those taxes then go to pay for salaries and perks to city employees in amounts those same small businesses can't even afford to pay their own employees.
There is still no justification for claiming that it's wrong for corporations to benefit from the middle class, while the middle class does the same thing to small business owners. And homeowners OUTSIDE of Toronto that make less than 40K/yr.

OTI: Exactly my point.
I also find it curious that guys like Smokey(president of OPSEU) and Paul Moist(president of CUPE National) are quite quick to point out what others make in the upper echelons of salaries but their own salaries are next to impossible to find. Hmmm I wonder why?
Not to mention that CUPE has been demanding member concessions for 2-3 years now.
And I always thought unions were against concessions. I guess that only applies to employer demanded concessions. Nice double standard there

   

Actually, I've been reading everything you write. Thank you for returning the courtesy.

   

Really, so the CAW hauls in approx $100 million a year in union dues and ALL of it goes to overhead and non profit activity? I call bullshit. Unions make profits, and those profits are NOT redistributed to the membership. But the guys that run the union sure get to enjoy them. They regard their membership in much the same way the government regards taxpyers. Free money.
CUPE hauls in a shitload too and they don't even offer any real representation.
If you doubt that, read up on Paul Moist and CUPE.
Various locals throughout Canada have tried to separate from CUPE to join other PSU's because they were getting next to nothing for representation, and were threatened if they tried. Again, one has to wonder if it just came down to CUPE's bottom line being affected.

   

when you write; 'they dont even offer any real representation'

What is real representation?

   

You know, of all the things the city spends money on - from utilities to property development to tourism marketing to BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES etc etc. You single out workers wages as the one that has to be cut.



What are you saying, that you suspect the union leaders have some secret multi-million dollar salary? I'm sure there are some perks to the job, but most of the money:

a)is often collected and spent by the "local" (ie CAW London local 27) and not by the national orgnization and thus is not this exravagant amount you imagine; (42% of CAW dues is spent by the local and under their consution)
b)aside from administative costs and its the local often "cost shares" benefits with the employer or provides benefits that are fully union-funded, sponsor little league teams, media advertising, etc. Promote and sponsor local social/labour issues, distribute news letters, publications, etc. maintains "hardship funds" and loans for individual members,


c)donates to their national organization (e.g. CAW Canada)which does some or all of the above but acts on a national level plus may offers scholarships, donates to national charities, etc. and in turn;

d)donates to the Canadian Labour Congress, which is the national organization representing all national labour unions which does the same as above but speaks on behalf all unionized labour rather than industry-specific or regional/local issues.

Although whether the dues money flows from local-to-national or national-to-local seems to vary.
From the CAW Constitution: http://www.caw.ca/en/about-the-caw-caw-constitution-english-version-pdf.htm




For CUPE, finances are applied accordingly:


If you want to read CUPES latest financial report, its here:
http://cupe4879.ca/assets/docs/nat-sectreasurer-report-mar-2009.pdf

Second, I don't see anything that suggests small business is struggling (they actually just got a rate cut!) due to municipal taxes or that Toronto is high compared to other cities. And besides, growing cities where developers are always putting up new high rises and big commercial developments, property values -and therefore taxes- will eventually increase over time. Look around, this city is full of small busineses! Its the large businesses that need massive tracts of land and huge amounts of utilities that are moving to the 905, and thats mostly because of the market.

   

based on a 40 hour week, that doesn't even add up to $77/hr.

   

Previous  1 ... 6  7  8  9  10