A forum was held Wednesday evening at the Greenville American Legion to discuss Issue 2 (Senate Bill 5). The format involved three advocates for each side of the argument. The "pro SB5" advocates were State Rep. Jim Buchy, along with a legislative aide, and a school board member. The "anti SB5" advocates were Jim Surber, Bob Rhoades, and a labor attorney.
Well over 100 people attended the event, with standing room only in the back of the legion hall. The audience included many individuals wearing t-shirt showing their opposition to SB5.
On the "anti SB5" side, the labor attorney argued the point that there will be no real negotiation under SB5 because management is both a party and a referee for the negotiation. Jim Surber's position was a little different in saying that there were some good parts of the bill, but those were outweighed by the bad. He urged repeal and an urgent return to the drawing board.
On the "pro SB5" side, the school board member argued that fixed labor obligations forced cuts that directly affect schoolchildren, such as funds for busing and extracurriculars. Buchy said that SB5 is part of an overall plan to bring jobs and economic prosperity back to Ohio. Buchy said that if SB5 fails layoffs would certainly follow.
Several moments drew audience reaction (event though it was forbidden by the moderator). Buchy at one point said the unions had been invited from "day one" to contribute to the SB5 negotiations. That statement drew many hoots from the crowd. At another point Buchy cited statistics indicating that Darke County's public workers earn more on average than private workers. A man in the crowd responded "bullsh**" in response. And finally, at one point a man approached the front of the room and demanded to be heard. The moderator refused to recognize the man, which prompted him on several occasions to claim he was being denied his First Amendment rights. The man made a few derogatory statements directed toward Buchy, was shouted down by other members of the audience, and then left the room.
Nothing good will come out of this either way, really. People on both sides have gotten so nasty, and maybe even out of control in some ways. Like someone else said on another comment post...it's (almost) getting funny reading and seeing people act as they do during elections.
ReplyDeleteI'll vote, always do, but some folks have forgotten all about how to be civil, how to be a good loser/winner, or how to speak/write and not sound or look like a real toad in the process.
Bottom line, get informed and vote for what is good for YOU or really good & positive for the real majority others. Just don't make a decision because someone else told you to!
Good luck in November everyone!
Unions started out as a very good thing to give workers a voice and better conditions, but over time they have become the death of many American company because of over the top demands. I can see the same coming for our public workers. I look at this way, I pay taxes which ultimetly pay the salary of police, fire, and teachers. When you all "bargain" for more, you are taking from me. Every time you want a raise or something better, why not make it a vote by the people who pay you? Now, THAT'S collective bargaining!
ReplyDeleteSo you shouldn't ever get a raise at work because they didn't take a vote of the stockholders? And every decision needs to be by a vote of the people? Do you have any idea how that would bogg things down and nothing ever get done?
ReplyDelete"Hey, should we get the firemen new safety gear, since theirs is worn out?"
"I dunno, let's wait until the next election to ask people what they think."
Just like a business, that's why you hire the boss to make educated decision. Don't blame the workers for the boss's (politicians) decisions.
Its not the pay, its the benefits for life. How many 66 1/2 year old fireman and policemen do you see working? How many teachers stick it out that long? My private sector employeer contributes to my 401K but its up to me to fund my retirement. I have been in my current job for 29 years, (age 54) Its not 30 and out for me. Its not the pay. ITS THE BENEFITS FOR LIFE thats killing the system.
ReplyDeleteBruce-- if your employer is contributing to your 401 and you will recieve SS; you are likely on the same level as public service employees. Public employees are not eligible for SS therefore it looks like apples to apples. The state actually benefits by allowing its employees to retire at 30 years to save money on the hiring of younger less expensive replacements.
ReplyDeleteSocial security is welfare for the old, Bruce you nailed it, the entitlement benefits are killing the system. I am a teacher and am tired of the short sighted views of my peers. As a mother of very young children ( not yet in school) I am fearful to think how stunted their learning will be when they do begin school. We as tax payees are not getting good service for the money we are spending.
ReplyDeleteMr. Buchy needs to surround himself with a better supporting cast.The young man from New Vienna(i think) was the same person claiming to be a teacher in favor of SB5 on TV. He stated last night that he never taught but knows or is related to quite a few. very disengenuous This certainly raises questions about the other truths that are so obvious to Ohio Republicans
ReplyDeleteBruce-- I really do not want a 66 year old fireman carrying my big butt down a ladder. Do you?
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you see 66 1/2 year old firemen working? Would you want a 66 year old man trying to carry you down a ladder? How about a 66 year old doing CPR for 15 straight minutes? Fire fighters retire early because fire fighting is a young man's game. The same goes for police officers. I have my 40 quarters in to be eligible for SSI, but can not draw any of that money because I am in the fire fighter's retirement plan. So I am paying into your pension program with NO benefit to me. Does that sound fair? My insurance after retirement for me and my wife will be $1000 per month. While I cuurently pay 10% of my gross wages toward my retirement, the City could save 1% of my wages if I took a 10% pay cut and the City "picked up" my 10%. SB5 was supposed to give governmental entities the tools to save money, but it will tie their hands on some money-saving programs.
ReplyDeleteIt is all about the benefits. We tax payers pay for the teachers, fireman, police officer etc. We pay their pay, benefits, retirement when some of us can not even pay for those things for our selves. So why should we tax payers have to pay for them for someone else? An average teacher makes $40,000 and get benefits paid for so why can they not pay some of their own benefits? You get a job at a factory makeing $40,000 and get benefits but still contribute at least at least $4,000 a year for health and dental insurance and $2,000 (5% of what you make) towards retirement and financially are doing fine. So why cant teachers, fireman, police etc. do the same?
ReplyDeleteTo anonymous@12:43, I am a teacher who has the opportunity to teach in all the other teachers classrooms so I actually see first hand what is going on in the classrooms of our school system. And let me tell you, there are some seriously entitled teachers out there that are probably fearful of this issue passing because they will become responsibly for their incompetence in the classroom.
ReplyDeleteJudging by your assuming comments you are only going to believe what you want regardless of fact. Its time those who pay taxes take a stand against the fiscal waste and entitlements while the opportunity is here. If we continue to sit passively by, our children and grandchildren will have to work until the day they die to account for the wntitlements of our current government employees. How selfish of a view!
1:55--- I assume nothing. I googled the young man and the rest is opinion. Thanks for setting me straight.
ReplyDeleteIf Issue 2 passes, the public employees have no power to negotiate (something that private sector employees do. Do as I say not as I do). So the pay, benefits, staffing levels, etc will be determined by the government.
ReplyDeleteSo when I hear Tea Partiers telling me that the government cannot run anything right, aren't they admitting that Issue 2 is flawed. After all, why would they want those inept government officials making all the decisions?
I guess they think you can have it both ways. We need to privatize everything because the government is inept, unless it's to our liking, then the bureaucrats are great.
What a great double standard! Pretty much like all the rest of their rhetoric.
Vote No on Issue 2
If the debate last night taught us anything at all, it was that the people who were there urging a NO vote clearly knew that a YES vote would be better for the state. They just were there to say that "it could be better" than it is now. Essentially, it was clear they knew this was going to happen one way or another, in one form or another. It was/is inevitable.
ReplyDeleteAnd what a joke the anti-SB5 crowd was. Pathetic! No wonder people want Issue 2 to pass with behavior like that! Neanderthals, for certain!
VOTE YES ON ISSUE 2!
8:42 PM - What color is the sky in your world?
ReplyDeleteTo 8:42
ReplyDeleteMay your house and family always be safe and secure. I don't what your definition of "state" is, but it surely does not include those who keep you safe. I bet you also believe that dinosaurs had saddles.
I heard a lot of fear mongering about safety gear.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, do any of you honestly believe that there is ANYONE involved in this in any way who does NOT want fireman and police to have proper safety equipment? Really? That right there is just garbage from start to finish, period. Anyone who is spewing that crap - accusing any other human being who actually gets off their butt and pays attention, regardless of their political affiliations, of WANTING first responders to be ill-equipped is being disengenuous and knowingly using scare tactics to get your way -- and should be ashamed of themselves! That is childish and irresponsible.
Literacy is a terrible thing to waste! Anon at 8:42 pm is spot on! Read the summation attributed to Jim Surber! There are obviously things he sees as necessary, but believes the things that he sees as bad need to be re-worked in the very near future! If that doesn't support 8:42 pm to you, the education system obviously failed you!
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of the education system, excerpts released from the new Steve Jobs book point to how he sees unions in schools as the biggest reason our education system is a failure! Even the liberal recently deceased former Apple CEO could see it needs reformation! SB 5 is the necessary beginning to that process.
Vote YES on Issue 2! Steve Jobs would have?
To All;
ReplyDeletePlease remember all these Police, Firefighters, Teachers and Public Works Associates are all paying taxes just like everybody else. Look and see who is really making the big bucks, it is not these people. What does Mr Buchy make a year, our Kasich (and all the stuff such as travel, food, ... that we pay for him).
10:55..... yeah, they do pay taxes just like everyone else. But have you really looked at some of the salaries and benefit packages? Better than most by far, and they will be asking YOU for more if the opposition gets their way.
ReplyDelete10:55am is a simpleton who has fallen for the class-warfare rhetoric. America is a free country.....people here CHOOSE their own careers! Get a grip you whiny little entitled babies!
ReplyDelete10:45, I've been a teacher for 15 years. I know my profession pretty well, but I don't know a thing about inventing or designing computers. If you wouldn't trust me to build a computer, why are you listening to a computer guy talk about ed reform? Why is it that everyone who has an opinion about education thinks they're an expert?
ReplyDeleteDo some research. There is no correlation between unionization and the quality of student education. This is the most exhaustive report on the issue:
http://shankerblog.org/?p=3509
As others have pointed out, this is all about politics. I'd respect the pro-SB5 folks if they'd stop masquerading as the saviors of education and just come clean about their true motive: to eliminate unions.
There was a paper circulating Wednesday evening that said Buchy makes, with state salary, committees, etc., nearly $100,000 per year. If you use his figures, that means someone in the private sector that works 5-7 days each month makes nearly $70,000 per year (43% less). That makes as much sense as the other arguments to pass Issue 2.
ReplyDeleteNot sure what is more disturbing. Buchy's pay or the fact that someone who was barred from running due to term limits is put back into office by appointment by the same people who promoted the idea of term limits. Term limits may only say you can't be elected but the intent is that you shouldn't keep serving. I like Jim personally but he should not be in office. Of course another do as I say, not as I do moment.
ReplyDeleteHow many public employees does it take to put up a new stop sign. Such a waste of tax dollars. Vote Yes on issue 2
ReplyDelete@ 6:19 PM - take a look at this link and do the math: http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/guidebook/chapter3.pdf
ReplyDeleteIt is a stretch to get a salary of $100,000 for Jim Buchy. Base is $60,584, no per diem.
The SB 5 bill needs reform and it needs to start by eliminating political campaign contributions by unions. It also needs to limit the size of collective bargaining to smaller units within the state. This allows the big unions from controlling so much power and money that they literally have control of major elections and or political movements. Unions are Socialistic by nature, they take power away from those who have risked all the capital to employ them. In the public sector that power and capital is the people. Unfortunately I don't trust politicians AT ALL so there has to be a compromise to make sure our public servants are being paid adequately and that benefits remain competitive. I am a Non-Union Public servant and being left at the mercy of uninformed, part-time elected officials has me re-thinking this whole thing.
ReplyDeletelets see they just passed an ord in Greenville capping the police chief at $67,000 and no OT while a Sgt(union of course) with triple time holiday pay(union got it so the city can not schedule them off), Overtime (min 3hrs time and a half call in pay, Anything over 8 hrs in a day is OT ?? when private sector is anything over 40hrs in week.So within last couple years Sgts pay have been around 65,000.00 70,000. a year. Who the hell would want to advance to be a LT or the chief??
ReplyDeleteThe union got it so they could not be tracked or disciplined by work activity (calling it a "quota") Basically if you wanna ride around all night and do absolutely nothing and not be held accountable for 50,000.00 a year, great gig if you can swing it.
We can not continue to let the chickens tell us working farmers how much they "deserve" for laying eggs. If you aren't happy with what we supply, Campbell's soup is an option
I concur with Mr. Surber that there are several good points in SB5: however, overall, the other (bad) points outweigh the good and should not stay as a law or be voted in as a law . Thus, I too, will vote "NO". It is a shame the Ohio Republicans, flush with the gubernatorial victory with Kasich and their gerrymandering redistrictering absurdity THEN go for total control over Democratic voters by attacking public workers. They attacked public workers to divert attention away from their (and Kasich's) promise to bring JOBS to Ohio. They haven't done much in that area to date!!! They need to explain why the jobs left when Gov. Taft was in office and when the Republicans controlled the Ohio Congress! Gov. Kasich already balanced the Budget without SB5. He wants SB5 merely to destroy the unions who usually vote for the Democrats. He wants to destroy any opposition. Don't let them do it. We need 2 political parties!
ReplyDeleteThe 9:55 comment is correct. Yes, there are several things wrong in the public employee area and Ohio Retirement funds (eg) why are ELECTED OFFICIALS in the Public Employees Retirement System? This is the same retirement plan they say has TOO MANY BENEFITS. Do we Ohio voters want CAREER POLITICANS? Do politicians consider their public "service" as publi "employment". Who voted them into the Public Employees Retirement System? Why, of course.......THEY DID.
ReplyDeleteTo 9:55, Hear, Hear. You have just made the most thoughtful and logical observation on this whole Issue 2 confusing mess. I would encourage all to read his comment and think long and hard on it.
ReplyDeleteI have not decided which way to vote on issue 2, but I wonder why SN 5 did not exclude elected and appointed officials from the state retirement fund and any government medical insurance program. If they have enough resources to politic for an office, they should have enough resources to pay for their own retirement fund and their own medical insurance.
ReplyDelete"Basically if you wanna ride around all night and do absolutely nothing and not be held accountable for 50,000.00 a year"
ReplyDeleteThat may be the dumbest thing I have read on Darke Journal, Obviously you have never listened to a scanner on the overnight shifts, I have heard them go from call to call for hours on end, dealing with all kinds of people with all kinds of problems or issues.
Some are drunk, drugged, or just plain violent, and sometimes all three at once.
If you are going to post an argument here try to use facts and not make such stupid, outlandish remarks.
Bruce,I am 66.5 years old and retired getting a pension from Police and Fireman's Pension fund.
ReplyDeleteMy Gross benefits per month are $2,427.30
Federal Withholding Tax $136.42
State Withholding Tax $46.65
Health Care/AARP Contribution $409.59
Prescription Drug Contribution $248.09
Dental Contribution $29.24
Vision Contribution $10.29
Net Benefits $1,547.02
Can you make it on $1500 a month. If you think I'm lying, send me an email and I'll send you the complete statement. It usually looks pretty good froM the outside. I'm in the process right now of figuring out what not to have on my insurance next year. When my wife turns 65 i'll be rolling in dough wont't I.
By the way, I'm not complaining!
ReplyDelete11:44 No, I repeat no elected officials have any retirement paid by taxpayers. All recipients are non-elected.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of the funniest set of comments I have ever read! Thanks for the laughs, folks!
ReplyDeleteIt is clear from reading through the information who will be voting no that they know a yes vote is better for the state, but creating a culture of fear is the only way their own greedy desires can be met. Pretty funny stuff! I sent a guy away from a table over the weekend pretty pissed when he couldn't come up with any reason other than his own greedy self-interests and fear-mongering as to why he was voting no on issue 2. He had nothing and just resorted to what all anti-issue 2 people resort to when they realize they don't have a common sense leg to stand on - name calling! The rest of our table got a laugh out of it because the guy is a pompous blowhard who whines incessantly about how everyone owes him something.
YES ON ISSUE 2! It is the common sense option, folks!
Response to 11:44.........your elected officials can and do participate in the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (www.opers.org). I am an OPERS retiree and I know. They also can and do receive, if elgible with 10 years service the health insurance coverage. Go ask one of your Township Trustees, County Commissioners or State Representative if they pay into OPERS. Also ask how much they pay into their retirement (10%) and how much the Township or County or State pays in for THEIR retirement and it will be 14%. Oh....the taxpayers are their "employer". Also, these elected officials enjoy the same health insurance coverage as "their employees". This is the main reason people want to be Township Trustees.
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous, Oct. 22 9:55 AM
ReplyDeleteInstead of trying to portray Gov. Kasich as some sort of fascist, maybe you could explain why you support public employees not having to contribute to their healthcare and retirement programs like a private sector employee would. Numbers don't lie, no matter how often big govt. liberals like yourself would rather ignore them and instead resort to personal attacks. Your comments on here are reflective of the 'classy' people that attacked Buchy at the meeting or of the Occupy Wall St. protesters.
In response to 1:22, you better do some fact checking, elected officials and appointed officials sure do participate in the Ohio Public Employees Retirement fund and also get medical insurance coverage. I wonder why you are lying, or were you just ignorant of the facts, or do you have some ulterior motive?
ReplyDelete"maybe you could explain why you support public employees not having to contribute to their healthcare and retirement programs like a private sector employee would"
ReplyDeleteWhy do people keep repeating this? only 6% have some type of pension pick up, but someone like this keeps repeating it like it's everyone?
Probably less have "free" healthcare.
I don't of any union workers that are rich or live extravagantly, good grief.
I don't think anyone here really "hates" public employees or those in unions. They just hate the fact that they are lying and promoting such toxicity within the state because of the lies and greed.
ReplyDeleteEmbarrassing stuff. Simply embarrassing.
OK Badge 1, since you choose to show yourself as a poor victim of the Police and Fireman's Pension fund I do not assume you saved anything on your own towards your retirement. That would be the same as me saving nothing for my retirement and expecting SS to cover my retirement expenses. Yes there will always be a difference between gross and take home pay. My estimated SS at 64 is $1500 a month, so I guess we are in the same boat, if Obama lets me have any when I retire. There are two major differences between you and I. My wife and I have contributed regularly to our 401k,s and I spent 22 1/2 years in the Army and Army Reserves. Yes I planned well and look foward to retirement, but the big deal here is I funded the majority of my retirement, not the taxpayers.
ReplyDeleteTo Nomad:
ReplyDeleteThe 'pension pick up' is small potatoes. The Ohio PERS has a defined benefit plan with a guaranteed annual return of 8% and the employee contributes 10%, not counting the lucky few with pension pickups. For an average private sector employee to achieve those gains they would have to sock 45% of their annual salaries into their defined contribution plan. If you'd like to wade into healthcare costs, I'm sure you'll find the same thing. It's not about anyone living extravagantly, it's about bringing things more in line between tax payer funded employees and the tax payers who pay those relatively extravagant benefits.
Bruce,
ReplyDeleteThe point of Badge's comments is likely to prove that public employees, such as he, did not "make a killing" as some in Columbus and some on DJ would have you to believe. You pointing out that your SS is about the same proves Badge's point. And congrats that you saved in your 401K, something that Badge, as a public employee, was not given the opportunity to do. And I notice that you mentioned you spent over 22 years in the army and reserves. How would you feel if now, after being promised a pension, you had people saying you don't deserve it? After all, we are in a recession. Doesn't that allow for negating any commitment? I guess to some it does.
To 10:38, I paid about the same amount percentage wise into SS in the private sector, my employers also paid roughly the same percent as my public employer, I don't have the exact percents now though.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what point you are trying to make, my retirement is not going to be "extravagant" by any means, not with a salary of 40K, probably about the same as I would have gotten if I stayed in SS.
To Anoy 11:36, I take nothing for granted at my age. Yes I expect SS but will I get any? I expect an Army pension but will I get any? My 401k has always been my stepping stone, I joined as soon as they started it. Did Badge have an IRA? He was certainly allowed to participate in that. Your all right that none of us will ever be rich, my point is simple. YOUR not paying for me if SS and my Army pension are taken away and I can still feel good about that. Badge I dont need to see your statement, I believe you!
ReplyDeleteThis is response to "bean_counter" and his October 23 comment at 8:12 PM saying public employees don't contribute to their healthcare and retirement programs like a private sector employee would.
ReplyDeleteAND THEN SAID "no matter how often big govt. liberals like yourself would rather ignore them and instead resort to personal attacks. Your comments on here are reflective of the 'classy' people that attacked Buchy at the meeting or of the Occupy Wall St. protesters.
Well, "bean_counter", your comments are offensive to me and should have been edited out by Darke-Journal!!!!!
Understand this "bean_counter" parts of SB5 are good, but overall, it would be a bad law to have. You are wrong saying (implying that all) public workers don't contribute to their retirement plan. Also you are wrong about their FREE health insurance. ASK any public worker you know!!
Also.......I know there some governmental organizations have done some poor, bad, and stupid negotiating. Even the good parts of SB5 won't make them "smart negotiators".
If you would like to direct me to where I said they received free pensions or healthcare I'd like to see it. In fact, I pointed out that they did contribute when I compared it to a private sector employee. Politicians are politicians, their incentives will not have changed with this law. I've never claimed this bill would turn them into Donald Trump at the bargaining table, just that these are reasonable reforms.
ReplyDelete