Friday, August 23, 2013

Unions Challenge Detroit Bankruptcy

Earlier this year, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder had his fiscal emergency manager - the modern equivalent of feudal regent - initiate the next phase of their hostile takeover of Detroit by filing for bankruptcy.  Last month, a judge called the bankruptcy filing unconstitutional.  (No wonder Republicans hate the Constitution so much and why they keep shredding it - it keeps getting in their way.)

The unions in Detroit are now standing up to the plate to fight for their homes and their livelihoods.  From Workers Independent News:
Several unions are challenging Detroit’s bankruptcy filing and the cuts in pensions sought in that bankruptcy. AFSCME Council 25 told the bankruptcy court that the city has not proven it is insolvent and has not negotiated in good faith with its creditors. Billions of dollars in pension obligations earned by workers are on the line here. The average city of Detroit worker pension is $19,000 a year, so if pensions are cut it will be a severe hardship for retirees who served Detroit well for their working careers. Governor Rick Snyder’s Detroit emergency manager, Kevyn Orr has called for “significant cuts” to the pensions. The union challenges to Detroit’s bankruptcy filing includes the legal position that the emergency manager law which enabled Detroit to file bankruptcy violates the state constitution. In addition to AFSCME, the UAW, SEIU and Operating Engineers are also challenging the bankruptcy. So are retired police and firefighters associations. The unions represent about 21,000 Detroit retirees.
It is actions like this from Snyder or those by Scott Walker and Chris Abele that we are seeing a slow but steady increase in membership again. People are catching on that these Teapublicans are only interested in the taxpayers because they want their tax money for themselves instead of letting it go to the workers.

13 comments:

  1. Recap: Public unions hate lots of other governments. Not just yours'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unions represent working people. Republican governments do not represent working people. Republicans represent the aristocracy who want to rule without questions from the "peasantry."

      Delete
  2. Go work for your next to minimum wage job, that works you without a break, time off the clock unsaid must, and poor working conditions where bosses run you into the ground physically and mentally while the OWNERS make more money that 40% of the population in your country and buy legislators to pass laws to pay the workers less and take away their rights...go buy more crap made anywhere but in America at Walmart...then call yourself a patriot.

    I ask a patriot of what, who or where?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No boss would be running me into the ground at a minimum wage job. Because I'd leave and work aomewhere else. I'm an American. And this is the free market.

      Delete
  3. At what point will all public unions move to defined contribution retirement packages? I would think every person depending on pensions from CA or Il is hoping the rest of the taxpayers will bail out Detroit's financial responsibilities only to set a precedence. Truth is the unions have backed the very same politicians who put them in this predicament, as well as vilifying politicians who won't continue making these false promises. It kind of reminds me of the whole Bernie Madoff scheme except the victims this time want everyone to feel sorry for them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IMBAR-

      If you were truly fiscally responsible, you would prefer the defined contribution plan. It gives tax payers twice the value as a defined contribution plan.

      Delete
    2. Im going to assume you meant defined benefit and I am sure you have construed some way to justify it. Instead I'll just ask you why absolutely no non public unions use defined benefit type retirement plans....if it gives twice the value. Truth is all it does is allow politicians to keep kicking that can down the road.

      Delete
  4. "I'll just ask you why absolutely no non public unions use defined benefit type retirement plans"

    Hmmmm, strange. I'm going to have to inform my non-public union that we don't really have a defined benefit pension plan because some know-nothing buffoon on the internet proclaimed it to be so.

    Have you tried actually researching the bullshit you spew before you put it out there to be mocked? http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+many+private+sector+companies+in+us+have+defined+benefit+retirement Yeah, 22,000 plus employers (with 30% of all employers using a combination of defined benefit and defined contribution retirements and unionized industries making up the majority of those) hardly seems like "absolutely no non public unions use defined benefit type retirement plans". Another blatantly erroneous IMBR statement. How utterly shocking. Well, at least you're consistent in your misconceptions. Here's a tip, and like always, feel free to ignore it as you seem keen to do. Before you make a definitive, all encompassing statement about a topic, you might want to have the slightest clue about that which you're speaking. Although if we're being honest, that would mean you'd likely have to remain perpetually silent then wouldn't it? Carry on then, keep making a public ass of yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  5. From CNN.com

    Am I eligible for a defined benefit plan?


    Sadly, if you work for anyone but the government, you probably aren't. Ever since 401(k)s and other defined contribution plans were introduced in the early 1980s, scads of employers have been nuking their traditional defined benefit plans.

    It's not hard to see why. With a traditional pension (the most common kind of defined benefit plan), the company takes on 100% of the responsibility to fund it. The employer has to set aside money - at least in theory - to make sure it can cut you your pension check when you retire.

    With a 401(k), the company puts most of the financial responsibility on you. You invest in the plan by having money taken out of your paycheck, and you have to figure out how to invest that money among the sometimes confusing array of funds offered in the plan. True, the company might throw in a matching contribution to your 401(k) - but that match amounts to a whole lot less than what your employer would be on the hook for if it were running an old-school pension.




    The only thing left to say is take it if you can get it I guess. But don't come crying when your employers bankruptcy cuts your pension down to the level that the government is willing to insure.

    And for the record Mr J's pension is a defined contribution plan, like my own. So who isn't being honest now?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "And for the record Mr J's pension is a defined contribution plan, like my own. So who isn't being honest now?"

    Thanks for the quote from CNN.com. We all know, if you're looking for accurate, impartial, unimpeachable information, look no further than CNN and their unparalleled journalistic excellence to provide it. Of course, no where in even their description did it say anything resembling, "absolutely no non public unions use defined benefit type retirement plans". But hey, that wouldn't conform to your narrative so go ahead and embellish right?

    Thank you for telling me how my pension works, even though you haven't the slightest idea. It's become glaringly obvious that you don't even grasp the basic concepts of defined contribution vs defined benefit plans. http://www.401kpsp.com/401kdbdc.php
    I assure you, our pension is a defined benefit. In addition, we also have an annuity plan which would qualify as a defined contribution. We get both, not either or. I've advised you in the past to stop making assumptions, because you absolutely suck at it. I see you decided to ignore that advice. Well played. So again, carry on demonstrating your cognitive disabilities, it's always an entertaining show when the fool dances for the court.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well then Shane, Maybe right after local 8 is done trying to represent Palermos workers they can help these big cities administrate their defined benefit pensions, because even though you insist they are still viable it looks to me like they are bankrupting many large cities due to mismanagement by the very same politicians their union leaders are funding for election, and not tea party candidates as Capper would suggest. Tell me, no tell us all, what's the answer to public pensions being underfunded by the billions?

      Delete
    2. "Well then Shane, Maybe right after local 8 is done trying to represent Palermos workers they can help these big cities administrate their defined benefit pensions,"

      WTF are you even talking about? Do you even know? Is this some sad attempt at hyperbole on your part?

      "because even though you insist they are still viable"

      Actually, I insisted that you were wrong that "absolutely no non public unions use defined benefit type retirement plans" But yeah, go ahead and strawman when you are, again, shown to be wrong. Furthermore, since when have you ever actually been intellectually honest?

      "it looks to me like they are bankrupting many large cities due to mismanagement by the very same politicians their union leaders are funding for election,"

      Do you have some actual examples of these "many large cities" that you're claiming? Then, perhaps you can demonstrate how it is that unions are bankrupting them. Baseless accusations and hyperbole may be great plays at your monthly Reagan fantasy cosplay events, but you'll have to show your work here.

      "Tell me, no tell us all, what's the answer to public pensions being underfunded by the billions?"

      Ummmmm, stop underfunding them? Good God man, do you need someone to tell you when to take a breath too?

      Delete
    3. One of my friends in local 8 stopped by the other day but I didn't get a chance talk pensions with him, though he did tell me his is defined contribution, into a general fund. But I haven't talked to him about how his payments will be ultimately figured, whether it be by a formula based on his contributions or by a formula based on his salary like a public pension is calculated. I will though, soon. I will ask him if he knows you.
      "Do you have some actual examples of these "many large cities" that you're claiming?" You don't read the news much, do you? Try this: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/21/detroit-bankruptcy-pension-obligation/2573457/

      "Ummmmm, stop underfunding them? Good God man, do you need someone to tell you when to take a breath too?"

      I would tell you to sent this bit of brilliance to your legislators right away, but it's my experience that most of these cities that are in trouble are run by the very same democrats that you seem to support. Which takes me to my original point, public union workers would be better served with a defined contribution, but we will see the outcome soon in Detroit, won't we?

      Delete