No discussion yet, on the 161 million dollar cut to the MNRF, by the cons. in the budget . Gee why not?:ashamed:
Printable View
No discussion yet, on the 161 million dollar cut to the MNRF, by the cons. in the budget . Gee why not?:ashamed:
MNR has been and always will be the first gov't agency to see budget cuts. Been that way since the mid 70's so nothing new here. There'd be a huge outcry if those cuts were applied to health instead.
Got to cut somewhere sadly... Libs ran up the credit cards, time to start paying them down
I think we can see why!
As of March 31, 2018, the Ontario government's total debt is projected to be CDN$348.79 billion. The Debt-to-GDP ratio for 2017-2018 is 37.1% and interest on the debt is CDN$11.97 billion, representing 8.0% of Ontario's revenue and its fourth-largest spending area.
http://www.debtclock.ca/provincial-d...ntario-s-debt/
This Province has been living on a maxed out credit card for years. Anybody with a brain would know that is unsustainable. I also don’t want my kids and eventually thier kids paying for me.
For all intents and purposes,Ontario is functionally bankrupt. Only the country of Greece is in worse shape,financially,yet,there's a large element of "progressives" in Canada who have no problem adding debt upon debt without one shred of consideration that at some point,that debt must be repaid. Now,I suppose that shouldn't be too surprising considering that Gen X,Gen Y and milleniels have maxxed out every credit card and are holding a catastrophic amount of household debt not including mortgages.
There MUST be cuts. Socialism is great if there's an economic base that generates tax dollars to no end to pay for everything,but,Canada doesn't have that luxury,anymore. The sooner everyone gets on board with that,the better off we'll all be. It will take decades to complete,but,start we must.
Bet you didn't expect the responses that came back at you? You're out of your league fishcan, leave it to the ones who know.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
As others have stated the money is not there so cuts are inevitable. That being said I suspect your point is that many on here wail and gnash their teeth about lack of enforcement and mismanagement in setting tag quotas/numbers and that the current government will only compound this. If that is your point than i suspect you are on the money (pardon the pun) but the others when referring to the dismal fiscal state at the provincial level are not wrong either.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
BM, that is exactly what I expected , if the libs did the same thing for the same reason, the outcry on here would be overwhelming.
Your Libranos are the reason for the cuts !!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Spending both provincially and federally is/was out of control. My grandkids, grandkids will still be paying
for your Liberal’s mismanagement. It has to stop !
Ford said he would find 'efficiencies', that he would not have to cut and slash, as there was lots of wasted money in all departments, or so he said.
That's right. The water doesn't get carried by itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmoose
That's exactly what he's doing,too. People who have been living on the provincial gravy train for the last 15 years are about to get a very rude awakening. Sucking from the pig trough days are over.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Who would you say has been living on the non existent, 'gravy train'. ( proven over and over). Teachers , nurses, doctors, water plant operators, or just any member of the P.S. ?
The whole thing,from bogus "green energy" contracts to corruption in government,itself. It needs a giant enema.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
You said , 'people' who have been on the " gravy train' . Who are these 'people', you are talking about ? 'The whole thing', is not very specific, please elaborate.
Sunshine lists. Speak for themselves. Pensions twice as good as the best private sector pensions compare a UAW pension with a government pension And the UAW pensions are likely the best in the private sectorQuote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Hours of work that are better than most of the private sector workers
Much greater performance accountability in the private sector. Greater job security generally
There are many fine public servants who serve including many with the MNR and OmAFRA and police and doctors and nurses but it is a gravy train served by middle class working Joes Wages and benefits exceed the private sector in many respects
Some areas of government hinder businesses too. Is that not why Chrysler is leaving Windsor
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
As a former worker in the Ministry of Heath and Long Term Care , I can confidently say that our 'performance accountability' , is second to none, including the private sector. The sunshine list due to its age is no longer a true reflection of its intended purpose.
Do the unions not protect some workers who should not be protected I know that happens in the private sector too in union shopsQuote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
The sunshine lists show Joe public who is on the gravy train
Some deserve the $100000 plus some do not
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Let's start with education. The rot in that system is epic. Then,we can move to health systems that suck up money like a vacuum cleaner while barely maintaining the "status quo" and paying "executives" six and seven figure salaries. We could put up a flow chart of all government services and contracts,stand back blindfolded,toss a dart and hit a target. Take your pick.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Give it up, the gravy train has came to a crashing halt and the days of provincial liberal hand-outs is over.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
There's hardly an underground miner in this area who doesn't make the sunshine list once bonus and o/t is factored in. The sunshine list is obsolete when capped at $100,000. The same can be said for many police officers, railroad employees, etc once o/t is included.
Agreed! People don’t realize that police budgets have been cut to the bone, resulting in pretty much unlimited overtime.Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
What does an American union pension have to do with Ontario?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ontariofarmer
It's been almost 35 years since the UAW got kicked out of Canada with the exception of one local in the Windsor area IIRC.
UAW was replaced with CAW which is now Unifor,but,we get your point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ontariofarmer
Sorry CAW or UniforQuote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Always kills me when someone complains about another’s persons better working conditions. How about you work toward bettering your working conditions instead of trying to cut down your fellow workers!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ontariofarmer
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
UNIFOR’s compensation is not funded by tax payers. If they negotiate their contracts and the result is manufacturers decide to leave the country for more profitable places then they have shot themselves in the foot. No sympathy.
The same can’t be said of CUPE, OPSEU and OMERS. They operate in a monopoly where taxpayers are legislated into paying, no choice. You can choose not to support GM or FIAT. I noticed something interesting today. Kids weren’t in school. Teachers get both Good Friday “and” Easter Monday. The private sector don’t. It’s these entitlements that accumulate and make the civil service no longer sustainable. Every dollar civil servents get comes from somebody else’s pocket. Mostly people who worked today so they didn’t have to. Those imbalances are coming to an end.
So, if someone works for a UNIFOR shop....Ford for instance, who pays for that persons pension ?? I can tell you.....I did when I bought several trucks over the years! Every dollar in wages earned, came from the “public”, whether it be through consumer prices paid, or tax revenue.....Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
Not intending to derail this thread,but,Let me make this crystal clear. Unifor members paid for their own pension plans as negotiated as part of their pay packages and there's always been a quid pro quo during negotiations,especially,when an auto company agreed to a contribution percentage of that package. It always became a trade off somewhere else in the agreement. No auto company ever gave their employees one damn thing except the job. The very idea that the car companies were just one big benevolent enterprise is nuts. Autoworkers worked for everything they got. There was never any doubt that they worked the prescribed job and the company paid you at the end of the week. That's where the employee/employer obligation ended,pure and simple. Wages and benefits represented less than 5% of the wholesale cost of every vehicle.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
I think the main point is taxpayers are sick of funding rich salary’s and pensions for government employees
My only point was government pensions are much better than one of the better private sector pensions
I have no pension long hours and greater risk as a self employed person and have to fund these government pensions and sunshine lists
Many government employees do a fine job but the unions protect the ones that do not
The result is unsustainable debt and more taxes As far as MNFR cuts. We all like services but if we cannot afford them they need to be cut or stream lined or soon the province will be like Greece - bankrupt
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Ontario already is functionally and legally bankrupt and has been for many years thanks to McGuinty/Wynne et al. No matter which way you try,you can't get blood from a stone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ontariofarmer
It amazes me just how out of touch with reality so many people are. That, despite all that known about the “middle class”, the growing wealth gap. The stark future they face, and so much more.
Are people in PS overpaid? Quite likely yes. I don’t know how anyone can argue otherwise. However have fun trying to drill down into the finest details to answer where and who.
No matter how it’s sliced or diced, their compensation ( includes pay, benefits, vacation time etc) is paid for by tax payers. Given numbers, basic math, anyone can figure out that the burden falls on the largest group. The MC and lower Middle Class.
In effect, people who are relatively well off, are robbing those who face stark futures.
People seriously need to come to grips with income in Canada. Where the mean duo is 75k
So many must live in fantasy land thinking a big chunk of the population makes 100k or even 80k before benefits
News flash.
If you gross 87,000 your in the top 10%
i defy anyone for example to justify why someone that grosses say 80k, also has their future secured by the lower MC. People that are screwed...
On topic.
No I don’t like Fords cuts to the MNRF. Though would appear much has been spun by the left ( referring to forest fire budget).
Here’s another truth.
Cuts are needed. Have fun cutting the budgets of those with Um, militant and mercenary Unions.......
So, ultimately the low hanging fruit, defensless peons pays the prices...
Do the unions and their minions care that once again people who aren’t as well off pay the price?
Proof is in the pudding
Took me a couple minutes to find one decent report that sort of takes an “overview”.
So many gripe about the 1%...reality
It’s the top 20% that are the problem, and where the greed is
When talking heads talk about the eroding middle class ( let’s ignore that a great many people identify as MC when they aren’t). What they are really talking about is wealth accumulation ( just like griping about the 1%). But it’s the growing wealth gap between the haves and have nots
The 20%......
and that is one heck of a lot public servants. Screwing over people who...well it’s just ugly
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ticle36383159/
TrueQuote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Please define, who you are speaking about when you say relatively well off, in this statement, "In effect, people who are relatively well off, are robbing those who face stark futures." and how are they robbing people. The tax brackets are insane right now, most people making a decent income are paying 60% taxes on every extra dollar they earn. Shall we take (steal) 80%? 90%? 100%? I do not agree with taxing the wealthy a stupid amount of tax because it doesn't work ... they will simply move, or not work that extra hour. If you don't incentivize people, you end up with a social government, and ask Venezuela how that is going for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by LoR
People envisage the wealthy as some sort of brat that inherited everything ... they don't see the person that studied hard, worked day and night, paid their dues (taxes included) and just happened to make a good business or career of what they do. So, what right do we have to take (steal) money from those that worked hard to get where they are?
^^^^^^^^^THIS!!^^^^^^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoR
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
I just filed my tax return and last year I paid >160K in tax, plus I employ people, plus the company i own pays income tax on corporate profits, remits HST on everything we do, matches CPP contributions, and more than matches EI contributions. Sure I am wealthy but how exactly i am creating a stark future by employing people (who earn an average of 80K+) and contributing a whack of $$$ while i am at it? The way i see it is that i am massively subsidizing the future.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
If I did not have kids and grand children in the area I would be out of Ontario and probably out of Canada.
[emoji106] 100% agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472
^^^^^^^^ what he said^^^^^^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
If someone gets off their arse and starts a business and then becomes successful, no one has any right what-so-ever to demand a slice of that pie, regardless however much they earn.
Lmao how typical.
I suggest all of you read what was written in plain English again.
But I’ll help get you started.
1) PS servants are paid too much.
2) the MC is in trouble
Think about it, think really hard. It’s actually not.. all that hard had you bother to read.
Then think about your replies.
Let make it clear. It’s the well off in PS ( thanks to taxation) that are screwing over the lower middle class....
ffs I even defied anyone to justify why someone that grosses say 80-90k, has their pensions paid for by people who are screwed
Too funny this place
Well, just to perk up all you guys who work hard and are the backbone of the economy I just read Trudough is considering a plastic tax. Just like the carbon tax it will put money in your pocket right?
I wouldn’t be “against” that Terry. Would likely be against how the $ gets used.
In the news the past few weeks. The Philippines are threatening to declare war over tons of “our” garbage. Turns out “we” are one of the highest polluters per capita. Greed, gluttony, the Jones’s, big cities, big houses, and more.
Read something months ago that Tim’s cups, plastic water bottles, fast food wrappers etc.........
Difference between that kind of a tax, and a carbon tax is, it’s a choice for consumers. Home heating in a cold climate...not so much.
Also in the news
Fords cuts that aren’t cuts. All he’s doing is shuffling $. Cutting here, spending there. The budget still won’t be balanced until after the next election.
50million cut from a tree planting thing. The MNRF, the MoE, environmental protections, etc.
Also to be cut
10B from Toronto Public health. Good imo. They can start paying their own way. Raise land taxes, or generate revenue other ways.
We here live in the land of plenty. So much green, so much water. So much gluttony as though there’s no tomorrow.
And the elephant in the room, that too often it seems everyone forgets about.
The wall we are going to hit when millions. Millions of peons hit 65. Leave the workforce ( less tax revenue), spend less ( less tax revenue). Put one serious strain on various things ( long term care, health care, and more)...
And have nowhere, near enough $ to see them through. Was talking to my neighbor on the weekend. He just put his mom in a home. He was utterly gob smocked at the $3,200 per month. For a closet.
Stats from the past 60 years have long shown it’s the combined impact of stagnant wages ( coporate greed) and increased taxation...
All kinds of philosophical and scholarly reading “ out there” on the most important part of society.
The middle class and tax base.............
Let them eat cake I suppose.
One only has to look South of the border to see where we are heading.
I did read everything you wrote, and can say it wasn't 100% clear. If this is 100% focused on public servants, and you are saying the high income earners are screwing the middle class ... we'll maybe, I'd have to study it more to be honest. If a PS works their buTT off, then let them earn good money, as long as they add value. That's all I care about.Quote:
Originally Posted by LoR
The real question is, what % of public service is actually a waste of money ... they go into the office for 4 hours a day, pretend to work, charge 8 hours a day ... leaches. And what % of tax money is effectively returned to Canadians ... not to confuse with the waste I speak of in the previous sentence ... here I'm getting at the money that Trudope is throwing away to many other countries that we will never see
ANY benefit from. I believe in good will ... I'd MUCH rather that money go to getting OUR homeless kids off the streets, in good homes, educated ... than it going to France to fight a losing battle on the environmental initiatives because other countries just continue to pollute away.
So I apologize for misinterpreting what you wrote ... but in the end, it's about separating those that work hard and EARN their salary vs. those leaches on our economy, public services, the freeloader that is abusing our welfare systems, and Trudope alike.
Mark, this forum has a long history on this debate. And there are various “PS” here.
Sometimes mincing words, treading around the eggshells is needed.
There are those who will post about lazy PS, there are contractors here that have first hand experience with the gouging, and far far more. That’s true in any walk of life. What’s not the same is you and I have the option, of shopping somewhere else.
Imo, there no way, anyone, including some of the most highly regarded economist can drill down and say “they” are over compensated. That leaves broad brush strokes and generalities.
Consider “just” this and I will specifically name education/teachers. A good friend of mine, herself a teacher of 23 years will point out.
Most of the right forget that after Harris, a whole bunch of teachers were hired. Today, they have 20 years in and due to stupid union compensation ( salaries grids where people get nice raises just for showing up and doing their jobs). They are all “way up” there. And that’s before benefits.......
Me I don’t care much for green grass, or yellow grass arguments.
I think about millions of peons entering their 70s without anywhere near enough...being forced back into the workforce (becoming more common to see seniors working at Tim’s, Walmart, the liquor store, etc already) and the reasons why.
Stagnant wages and increasing taxation primarily. And the wall we will hit when those chickens come home to roost. I don’t know very many middle class families with $700,000 in the bank ( for 1 person).We can also see early signs of the trouble in the rise of populism.
Don’t much care what anyone makes. Be they a teacher or cab driver. If they work hard and make 100k. “Good for them”.
But anything, be it a house, a car, a widget, a person in a job.Is only “worth” what the buyer can afford. In this case, the tax base. That large percentage of the population ( pyramid).
Back to Ford and his “cuts”.
At the end of it all. We are still running deficits ( he’s spending as much as he cuts) and will. With only a typical political promise......
Meanwhile, that wall, like the climate changing is getting ever so closer.
And even when they balance the budget, if they ever do. Debt to GDP is still an albatross.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Most of the people here are against the Public Servants getting overly paid comparing to the average MC person,who is on the losing end. PS gets their high $ from tax money because they used pressure or otherwise influenced the Government in charge, to give and give.From where, may i ask?
So the controversy is-it is not OK to take(steal)from the wealthy,but it seems OK to take from the average Joe ?While Joe makes in many places 15-25 $,many PS (with little or no significant contribution )make 3-5 x more $.From everyone's taxes!
At the other hand ,it is clear the wealthy may move on,or businesses would leave if the average Joe would ask for "to much compensation",or they would be taxed above and beyond.However they are part of the society and they are taxed as such.
There is a sophisticated balance how to keep businesses to stay-while having them contribute to the tax burden.
It has nothing to do with taking from steadily "sinking" MC and give to the privileged few (PS).
It is realistic expectation to have certain fairness in taxation- taxed vs those who make their living from tax money!
I wasn't going to bother responding to the usual from JBen so I'll just remark on one of his interpretations, that of seniors needing to work after retirement to boost their pensions. I know a lot of these guys and gals personally. Most went back to work because they were simply bored sitting around the house. The thought of getting a bit of pin money sits well with them. And just maybe their pensions are not quite as lucrative as you like to make out. I'm talking about PS guys here.
So why would a Kmart or Lowes hire these guys? They have a good work ethic. They have a knowledge younger generation have yet to develop. And they'll work part time for minimum wage and not complain.
When I was in the PS I just wish I made a fair chunk of that obscene salary you keep talking about.
SB I was a PS worker for 32 years. I worked so dam hard for those years , that I never entertained any idea of working again.:shades:
Exactly , My post would almost echo yours!Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
I don't really get the argument here. How much do you expect a teacher to work for after dumping $50-100K and 4 or 5 years of their life into education?
I went to university, so did most of my friends. We all work white collar jobs and none of us work for peanuts. In general, those that I know in the public service make less money than those I know in the private sector. The public sector guys take home less pay, but they work fewer hours and have good pensions.
The guys I know who make the most coin either started a business or pull lots of OT in the trades.
If you want highschool dropouts to teach your kids or write your prescriptions, you can have them for minimum wage. If you want professionals you have to pay a professional wage.
They do not have to work for wages that they do not want, but nobody pushed them to spend all that time and money in school either. There is too much emphasis on University, right now general University degrees give you a really large debt to pay off flipping burgers.Quote:
Originally Posted by benjhind
I know a heck of a lot of people who dumped more money into school than a teacher and they are making a heck of a lot less with no benefits and no pension or job security.
Its hard to understand what you're talking about Fox. Are you arguing that the qualifications for teaching should be changed?
Nobody makes anyone invest in university, but it is a prerequisite for most of the public service. It is also a prerequisite for a lot of jobs that make decent money. My point wasn't that universities are a guaranteed pathway to riches, my point was that if you are going to require someone to have a degree, you generally have to pay them more than McDonalds pays.
What I am saying is that our requirements for degrees are stupid, if you want to make money become a plumber, everybody poops and everyone always will.Quote:
Originally Posted by benjhind
Teachers do not have to work for pay that is less than they feel they should make but also holding the children and tax payers hostage through the union for what they want is also insane. I remember when they were on strike when I was a kid, the teacher told me that they work too hard for too little money and not enough job security. At that time they were being paid almost double what my parents were being paid with more vacation and more benefits and a pension. My parents were college educated in the high tech field and getting paid an average wage for that in demand field, they could be laid off at any time and had no pension.
I can't argue with that. But how can anyone even fix it? If the government comes in and says we are going to make all these cuts ... they don't get elected, because the teachers, doctors, etc just won't vote for them ... that's the only reason Wynne won prior to Ford. Hudak tried to be honest, and it cost him the election. Ford played a clever game, knowing he would have to cut PS, but he kept his debt reduction strategy under wraps until after the election.Quote:
Originally Posted by LoR
I think to be fair on Ford though, he's just getting into it, and I'd say it'll take a year for him to really figure out how to cut operating costs. He's dealing with a lot of interest that needs to be paid which hampers the cash flow, and that is primarily the Liberal's fault (as it will be on the federal level too). I'm giving Ford a pass this year, but next year I expect real improvements, the ones that lead to tax cuts for people who actually need it.
Almost 30% of public sector employees will be ready to retire in the next three to four years. None will be replaced. That's a tactic the private sector has been using for almost 15 years and it's very effective. "Attrition" is the key word,especially,with teachers,where a large number in the profession won't be needed due to the declining birth rate. They'll kick,scream,obfuscate facts and launch union-funded smear campaigns,but,the figures don't lie.
I can tell you, without a doubt, not an ounce of doubt, I do not want a high school student being a teacher to my kids. What you are saying doesn't really make sense to me. If you want a decent teacher, they must be educated. Yes, they chose to take up that career ... but if you plan on giving them $30k a year ... you're going to have a crap hole of an education system, as is the case in many third world countries right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
It comes down to, if the person ADDS VALUE, then pay them! If they don't add value, we do not need them. Doesn't matter if it's PS or even joe blow on the street. Joe Blow may think it's okay to contribute 10% to taxes (or nothing at all, think total cash business) and then claim for welfare too ... milk the system. This is even worse than PS people who are taking tax payers for a ride ... at least we know their salaries and what taxes they should be paying.
So here's two questions:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
1) are the teachers the problem, or are the unions the problem?
2) who allows/supports the unions in Ontario, as in why are unions allowed in Ontario?
Tell your parents it's time to unionize. I'm not a fan of unions but I certainly don't trust the owner of a business to always do right by the workers. It's kind of a predator /prey relationship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
REALLY! Do some homework on the union movement. You'll soon see why your grandfather worked 6 days a week for minimum wages. I know they protect some employees that should be fired but they also improve the wages and working conditions for many others.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Absolutely! I have family members in the trades that make more than a lot of teacher. If you're a tradesmen with a skill we want you in education!!! Can't get tech teachers! Why? They'd take a huge pay cut to be a teacher. Oh they'd get the two months off in the summer but that isn't money and it doesn't pay the bills.Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
For what it's worth I do agree with the cuts to government. I don't agree with the MNR cuts. They've been cut to the bone over many years and besides what other ministry relies on the users to pay the majority of the cost (license money).
Teachers will accept the cuts because they know we need to improve this province financially. It won't be painless though. I've taught 35 hard to handle kids in a class. Lots of discipline problems followed by suspensions and increased dropout rates. Some of you guys must have teenagers..... do they have the respect and self-discipline you had in school? They don't suddenly start to listen when they walk into a classroom.
Over the years I couldn't believe the amount of high priced help and multiple layers of bureaucracy that appeared in education. Harris tried to cut some of it but he made the mistake of asking upper management to cut themselves.
Everybody is going to feel the effects of the cuts, hopefully. Don't pick on one PS group.
I'd like to see junior kindergarten gone (it's glorified free daycare).
I'd like to cancel the Northern Health Care subsidy that pays for individuals that need healthcare in Southern Ontario for their travel and living expenses when their down here. If you're sick in our area you go to London and all of the expenses are yours.
I'd say put all the Land Claims on hold until we get the province balanced.
Lets go after the OPP and ask them for some cuts. I don't hear anything about cutbacks in policing. The average cop makes as much as a teacher or more with overtime.
I'd like to see a sunshine list for the trades people in the private sector. I know it's impossible but it'd be informative to see what the top trades people make even if they just used averages.
Just to be clear,Teachers are paid for the two months off plus all the "PA" days,winter and spring breaks as part of their yearly salary. It's a damn good gig,but,it requires at least one university degree with regular upgrades. Career advancement and salary raises also require extra degrees. Dealing with children to young adults within a "politically correct" system can have a very high degree of "burnout",not to mention cases of PTSD from violence which occurs more on a regular basis,anymore. I sure know I wouldn't want the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanO
Good one trimmer, that post is one of the times I can agree with you. As the husband of a recently retired, (30 years), special ed. teacher in one of the roughest areas of the city , Malvern, I can attest to how tough a profession it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
My oldest lad teaches high school and is a department head. Some of the stuff I hear just makes you want to shake your head. He tells me that dealing with the bureaucratic political correctness within both the ministry and the school board,themselves, is harder than the job itself causing the early loss of good,dedicated people in the profession and it's only getting harder. This is starting his 27th year.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
The entire education “industry” needs to be blown up. The problem is the union which has outplayed every government. We could likely do away with half the school boards and the paper pushers employed there doing work that could be centralized. Free up all that money tied up in admin and then there’s lots of money for front line staff. This doesn’t only apply to education. Probably most ministries. I would be curious how many employees in the ministry of education actually teach or maintain schools, same with the ministry of health.
My grandfather started his own business, and was successful. So did my dad. So did all my uncles. Of all of them, only one had a high school education ... the rest didn't even finish elementary school, but they did well because they worked hard and had common sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanO
The principle of a union is good, to protect the employee ... but if you're going to sit and tell me there isn't abuse by unions ... right. I think the unions have too much power now, and so it's hard for the company owners to survive nowadays. Yes, most of my uncles decided to sell to bigger corps, and some of the reason given ... the unions are making it overly difficult for them to operate successfully. This isn't make believe stuff ... it's real information, from real people.
So, if there was a good balance of power between unions and business owners ... sure, it works. But like everything else, human nature will see that greed and power hunger work against the very principles they are created to protect.
I agree with these, and I do agree with Ford wanting to cut Out of Province health care. Travel insurance is cheap enough as it is ... the little you get from the government if/when there is a claim Out of Province really isn't worth the hassle (you need to wait until OHIP portion is settled, before private insurance portion is settled ... takes months).Quote:
Originally Posted by DanO
Not too long ago we had doctors in Sudbury who did operations to correct hearing problems. Now the closest is Markham. What you guys don't realized is someone living in Kenora or Ignace would have to travel that distance just for consultation. I absolutely detest archery hunting in any form especially for big game. So maybe I should get on the bandstand with antis. You see the same similarity of thought??
Why did those doctors leave Sudbury ? is it because they were paid better elsewhere for what they were doing ?Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
If That's the case someone should start looking into those problems of why some, not all doctors leave these more remote areas.
It just is not right in this day and age to have people drive hundreds of miles just for a consultation.
Maybe we need to setup a system where specialists travel to these cities like Sudbury and spend a week a month doing consults and treating patients? It has to be cheaper to cover travel expenses of one doctor than 100 if the patients he might treat? I know some of that did happen and may still. A friend of mine was a surgeon and he used to do exactly that. Unfortunately he’s passed away now, was a very renowned Surgeon.
Forcing people to work in a certain area........ sounds like communism to me.
If it comes to that you are correct. Far better to make it worth their while and have them chose to live in those communities. If it takes more money as an incentive than so be it. All for balancing the budget but some things should not be cut unless there is concrete evidence of "fat."Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Like the so called gravy train, that rob ford said he would find in Toronto....but never did. His bro.......same thing provincially.
If you subsidize a doctors salaries or education in any way then I can see them being forced to work in an area at least for a few years. Obviously doctors do not want to live or have a practice in the north otherwise we'd have a lot more willing to come here and stay awhile. Its probably much easier to establish a practice in the south where the bulk of the population is. Money too is an issue as doctors are getting educated in Canada then soon migrate to the States.
Well said and very accurate! TxQuote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
The trick is to treat your employees as well as those in a union shop. Most workers don't want to unionize IMO. If they are being treated fairly I think the employer can avoid unions although they certainly are aggressive in their efforts. Lindmar, Toyota, Honda, etc seem to have avoided unionizing. Not sure how though?Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
My sister comes down to London from Thunder Bay for pacemaker surgery. Her and her friend are covered for flights, meals, accomodations, taxis, etc. People from the owen sound area travel to London for the same type of treatment. NO subsidy! I realize it's expensive to travel but Southerners need to travel 3 hours for treatment as well and there's no government help.
Well, let us know when you can travel from Thunder Bay to TO in 3 hours w/o having to book a flight or having to stay over 3 nights in a hotel. That individual paid the same for hospital services during their career as did the person from the south. If government can't provide health services in the north then a patients trip should darn well be subsidized.
Probably cheaper to subsidize travel expenses than funding the necessary specialist health care providers permanently up north.Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
Just to be clear, teachers PA days, are paid, but they are at work for those days, it's not a day off for them, and the 2 months off, they get paid for those 2 months off by having their pay cut through out the year and given back to them for those 2 months while off, and when they retire, their benefits stop alsoQuote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Teachers work on a PD day? You know when there's PD day in our board because it's hard to get a seat at the local pub at lunch time. Or does PD stand for piss drunk?Quote:
Originally Posted by bdog
My teacher-wife, always got a big check at the end of June, that had to be budgeted to last till the first payday in Sept.
They already force doctors to work in certain areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
It is incorrect to say "if they are being treated fairly ... employer can avoid unions"Quote:
Originally Posted by DanO
Unions need a reason to justify themselves. No matter how good the conditions are, every so many years, they need to cause a ruckus ...
Do you know how many good employers have been painted bad by the unions ...
If all employers treated employees well, do we need unions anymore? (you might think that's not the case, but entertain me here). If that could happen, what do
you think the union bosses would do ... just go on retirement and dissolve the union ... give up his/her very case for existence in the work force? Human greed and power ... it's a really corrupt thing.
We think in ideologies ... it doesn't exist with humans ... that's why making a case based on ethics is in fact a fallacy.
Not if you're a contract teacher ... then you get nothing on days off. Not even summer ... you have to go on UI.Quote:
Originally Posted by bdog
Sure...Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Happens to CF members all the time....
Everyone has an option....take the posting, or take your resume and seek employment wherever you'd like to hang your hat.....
For all those that really believe it is greener on the other side, maybe it's a time for a career change.
Well, it goes both ways. Greed and power are the reasons unions were needed in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Try working for a global company that would love to get away with treating their employees in Canada the same way they treat them in third world countries. Then tell me unions aren't needed.
I'm guessing you've never worked for such a company, nor have most that are quick to bash unions.
I do agree with some of your points though. There's an ugly side to unions as well.
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
The companies you mention treat their employees with integrity and fairness. For the most part,they obey and actively support labor laws,safety regs and have an active employee association that meets regularly to address issues that inevitably arise. Benefit packages are excellent. It's important to note,though,the welfare of the corporate entity looms large in all aspects of the business. There is not an "us vs. them" attitude that was so prevalent with union shops of the former "Big Three". People who apply and are hired sign an acknowledgement agreement that they're being hired in a "non-union" environment as a condition of employment. Variation of any part of the agreement is grounds for dismissal without recourse.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanO
Plus teachers benefits stop the day they retire.... After the retirement date, benefits if they want them, must come out of their own pocket, a pension they get, benefits they do not...Anyway, things always look greener on the other side..............Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
...and in one clear statement, you in fact have hurt the baseline of your argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
Those companies cannot treat employees in Canada the same as other jurisdictions, because of our labour laws and standards....this applies to Union and non-union alike.....
The argument that Labour laws are there because of unions, may be somewhat truthful...however it does nothing to validate the need for Unions today....
You mean like the rest of the world?Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
Even municipal workers don't get "lifetime" benefits. They can opt to buy into them after retirement....
There are some unions (electrical and sewer/water-main I think) that do get benefits when they retire.... teachers and most of the working world don't but there are some out there... teacher are just not one of them.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
You'd think with all their relative bargaining power, and the Millions$$$ made by the teachers unions that they would have negotiated that....Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
True,but,with provincial health care a given (so far unless it collapses completely) supplemental benefit insurance isn't prohibitively expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
If you consider the bare minimum fair then I guess you're right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
Maybe where you're from it happens that way, it's not the case where I'm from, there is work to be done on PD daysQuote:
Originally Posted by Badenoch
Funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
I've worked as non-union for almost the last 20 years. Never once have I ever looked at a union members compensation, or benefits and wished I had what they had....and I've worked in a municipal environment.
Like many professionals ( particularly those who are supposedly highly educated), I never saw the need to have to negotiate my "value"...the market does that. You either employ people with what the market will value them at, or they do not stay in your employ long. So when sitting down and negotiating salary and compensation, I was able to get what was fair. I took a position in Feb this year, and my salary is above market average, and I have 5 weeks vacation......and no union negotiated that for me.
Teachers unions, and others, exist solely on the premise that the big bad capitalist want to treat them like slaves. Most employers recognize that in todays market, they have to ensure employees are treated fairly, and are valued.
As an aside...the most toxic workplaces I've ever worked in? Unionized, hands down.
Nice work in negotiating yourself a decent deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Look, you're not going to change my mind at all and I'm not going to change yours. The fact is, years ago I thought pretty much the same way. I have no doubt that if I decided to leave my current position and negotiate myself salary, benefits and vacation with another company I wouldn't have a problem. I spent 3 years in college and have worked in a technical position for over 20 years. In short, I don't NEED a union either.
When I first started with this company, the union came with the job. I didn't think too much of it one way or the other. Fast forward to 20 years later and I have negotiated multiple collective agreements and fought over 100 grievances against one of the largest, richest companies in the world. I now represent over 120 unionied workers at this site. I know EXACTLY what "value" companies like this one place upon their employees.
All that being said... does every unionized employee deserve what they have, or even appreciate it? Absolutely not. There are plenty of times where I know I could have made better arguments from the other side of the table. There are a few bad apples but 95% of the unionized workers I represent are honest and hard working people. Their "value" to the company would be as little as the company is forced to give them by law if we didn't fight to improve things for ourselves.
Everything I have said above I do on a voluntary basis. I don't get paid any more than my regular wages and I don't have any extra time set aside for me during the work week to do it. I still do my day to day job and fit the rest in where I can. Basically, I fell into my current role because I couldn't sit quietly and watch such a rich company try to nickel and dime good honest people in the name of cutting costs.
I've watched salaried employees have their retirement benefits revoked, their benefits plans reduced, their workload increased to the point of serious stress related health problems and watched 35 year olds look like they've turned 55 overnight. Some of them came from union positions and nearly every one of them regrets jumping from union to salary.
This is just my perspective, I know that you and the majority of folks on here don't agree and that's fine. I'm not 100% union either, I just sort of ended up here. Funny how life works.
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
Actually, funny enough..I was a union steward, many moons ago, and "fell" into it, in much the same way.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
Cheers.
It probably amounts to wanting to be the one who speaks for yourself and others rather than wanting someone to speak for you. At least I think that's how I ended up doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
It would be a good conversation over a pint or two!
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/blog...tpace-spending
Are “Teachers” ( note quotes) paid too much? On that specific topic not unsurprising to see the usual green and yellow grass arguments. I wonder how many “teachers” know what their salaries are when annualized...or perhaps they forget theirs isn’t the only profession that requires degrees. Especially these days.......not so special.
So are “ they” over compensated?Of coarse they are. A widget is only worth what the buyer can afford.
and there are 300 billion arguments to support that. Starting with the sorry state of the MC. The tax base. Those people Ms Wynne wanted ORPP for. The bazillions of tax credits, for them.and so very much more....
for the record
re healthcare travel expenses. We live outside Lindsay. Have to travel to the cancer centre at Lakeridge (Oshawa). We get a whopping .58 cent per kilometre credit.
not unsurprisnging the spoon fed think those in northern Ontario shouldn’t be compensated
A cut to the MNRF budget isn't bad in and of itself, so long as the remaining funds are distributed and used appropriately and efficiently. Where the problem lies is in the redundancy of programs and the ineffective policies.
A cut to the conservation authorities on top of the MNRF cht is worrisome however. Here you have organizations that do real work with little funding, but ironically don't have much authority. Instead, MNRF, Parks Canada, Environment Canada and other such departments have authority, but they misappropriate funds and cater to political needs rather than environmental.
This, at a time when Ford, Trudeau and others are showing up for photo ops in flood-ridden areas of the nation's capital.
I'm all for a Conservative government, but you're going to campaign on finding efficiencies, you better be able to show those efficiencies rather than simply cut funding. Consolidate, sure. Cut redundancy, sure. But blanket cuts without a detailed explanation, not so sure.
At the end of the day the simple fact remains that this country and province spends more money every day than it takes in. Not sure how everybody finances their lives but at some point you hit a wall.
Not if your a liberal, the budget will balance itself according to the village idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
A widget is only worth what the buyer can afford.
One of the best saying i have heard a long time............How true.Thanx LoR.
There is a lot of talks here about the earning of all the PS of Ontario compared to the "rest"of the populace.
I think we should add on top of that opportunity all the Municipal Government Servants as well(at least good portion of them).
Because it is so true:
A widget is only worth what the buyer can afford.
We as a Province are in major debt,average family earns 75 K(so it was said here)why we should afford PS earning way above and beyond ???
So the average Joe to take home even less (more tax out from our pocket )or pile up more debt (we will pay for it one way, or another).
Hope slowly common sense will prevail in this matter.
And no-i am not against high income of a highly educated persons who sells his-hers knowledge to the market economy or the income of an entrepreneur / business owner etc.As long as they are funded by their own knowledge-hard work etc ,why not earn as much as they can ?
I think we have a paradox -low wages for teachers=low quality of performance.It does not work the other way,and we all know it.How about the ppl who went in the education just because of the $$$$ and perks?And they do not know how to teach............?Being a good teacher was more then an excellent income potential in the olde days-it was also labour of love, passion and devotion.
PS is getting paid by taxpayers-and A widget is only worth what the buyer can afford.
Education is not a widget. I look at it this way. You need a pill to make you better , it cost x amount, you can't afford x amount, but if you do not buy the pill, later on down the road that same pill that you must have, will cost you 20 times x. Education is an investment in the future... pay me now or pay me 20 times that later.
FisherMc. -just read over again my post,i did not say the education is a widget-nor implied.
Used the saying since it has a very powerful and fitting meaning to this (by the way totally sidetracked)topic.
Sidetracked? If we go with the original post as to why a 161 million dollar cut to the MNR won't be discussed here the hundred odd post doing everything but, are bang on topic.
If we can't discuss massive MNRF cuts on this site, where can-should we? Perhaps on the lawn in front of Queens Park?
GBK , just read over again my post, and I did not say anywhere, that you said, or implied education was a widget. LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by gbk
Hi Kickingfrog and FisheMc-You are both right,if we look at wider picture.The MNRF are PS,and we discussed cost and PS here .Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Yet, it seems we concentrated though a lot on education part of PS-that is what i mean by sidetracked.
G “no offense” but being a public servant and your spouse a teacher, while it doesn’t discredit your thoughts, it does make them biased and subject to huge doses of salt.
No body has said or implied that teachers aren’t important. They simply aren’t as self “important” ( note quotes) as you and your unions think.
There’s more to the province than some self proclaimed all important. Servants.
And one only has to look around to see the oh so many things.
We can start with why Drummond had to be called in.
We can look at numerous reports that have measured growth vs growth elsewhere. Or simply the well established and unarguable erosion of the MC.....
We can look at the state of the lower middle class. And who have helped make your life so comfortable.
What you are so obviously blind to is that it’s “relative”...
Are “teachers” in Mexico or Uruguay paid north of 100k??
Why not.
You like to portray yourself as something of a socialist. Yet without fail, never actually think about the largest segment of society. And those who you can’t argue are in trouble.
A “widget” or house, or car, or diamond is only worth.....what the buyer, or market can afford.
With respect to the MNRF. It’s already been mentioned.
One reason, certainly not the only reason they are other areas are bearing the brunt is
They are low hanging fruit and easy targets. Unlike other ministries..........
Gee, and here I thought the left and social warriors thought the environment was the most important thing these days.
Totally agree! I've seen the behind closed doors of a working union. Not any prettier than behind the closed doors of management.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Ontario Hydro and OPP have benefits provided after retirement I think. I could stand to be corrected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Funny even though I worked in a union I always felt I could have done better with out a union. I did all the extras because frankly I enjoyed the time out side the classroom more than in. If the union would have allowed payment for the extras like coaching, outdoor ed trips, highway cleanups, winter camping etc etc, I'd have been paid better IMO. I was always told by the 3;30 track club (that's what teachers call the other teachers that frig off every day at the bell) that it was my choice to coach hockey, football, rugby etc. I know in the American system that pay a flat rate and then you're paid extra for doing extras.
Kind of like performance or merit pay Dan?
As mentioned a good friend is a teacher. She has 20+ years in. When the topic of teacher compensation she point to the salary grids...and being “top heavy”..
She can and will also point to the 7 years she spent in Sudbury on contract..........
Maybe if things were better structured young teachers wouldn’t have to struggle on contract for so long?
Few argue any more ( and this include union heads) that those is Public service earn 10-20% more than their counterparts and that’s begore benefits.
Hydro employees you mention do have benefits. And in order to get them to agree to their latest contract and reduction to 50% tax payer matches pension contribution from 70%...they got 3% of this that and the other when most working stiffs are lucky to see 1.5
Speaking of contracts
How many areas under the PS umbrella are trying to reduce cost by going contracts. My niece a nurse..6 years now and still not full time......
My fiancé was a Trent Uni. Good luck getting in Full time there. It could takes years and years. But they always seem to have $$ for labs, new buildings, ergonomic desk, hydraulic standing desk and sooooiooo much more.
Many municipalities are merging paramedics/fire. A lot of fire are going 24hr shifts......trying to save $$
We have the highest debt level...and as Ms Wynne would brag, one of the leanest PS (headcount) ....
Hmmmm
Maybe we could hire so very many more in so many areas if....
But hey “ps” isn’t overpaid relative to the working stiffs, or even often themselves.
I was an opeu member for awhile. The salary grid is stupid, and who do they sell down the river? Will just say I did not work with a single person that had anything good to say about Smokey or OPSEU
Anywho...
Not sure how people can’t see all the various signs.
Including populism, which really is classwarfare (oops news flash, identity and class politics don’t exist either)
:)
Forest for the trees imo
I've never worked under a union. My dad, brother and few uncles do. My dad had to deal with them until he sold his business. My other uncle had to deal with them until he sold his business to a large corp. I still have one uncle that is growing grey hairs dealing with unions. I have two cousins with a tiling company that is unionized. I know enough about it. They for sure have treated employees well, but still the unions make demands and make it difficult for them to stay competitive. The big housing developers don't care about what the union wants when you're in the middle of a big contract, you have to eat the cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
Anyhow, that is exactly my point ... there should be a balance of power, and given how in bed the unions are with the Liberals, it caused the power to tip to the unions, so costs go up! And then business shuts down! And then everyone loses.
That sounds just about like 99% of the jobs out there. Who gets benefits after they retire? Not me ... not my dad, uncles, friends ... I'm not sure who does get benefits after retirement.Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
Well Mark it sounds like you've heard some pretty strong anti-union stories but I'm not so sure you know exactly how it works. There's also always two sides to a story.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Without knowing the details about exactly what type of business and what union it was, a couple of things stand out to me in your post. Both your family and the union would have been working together under an agreed upon collective agreement. So maybe the "hassle" you speak of was because someone wasn't holding up their end of the deal, your family included. Maybe disagreements on language interpretation, maybe just flat out breaking the terms of the agreement. In any case, there's a process. Your family could have issued discipline to the slackers and the union could respond through the grievance and arbitration procedure. Anything that can't be settled before arbitration would be legally settled by an arbitrator.
The "demands" you speak of can generally only be made during bargaining, which the business owners had the right to refuse or renegotiate. Maybe the union would have gone on strike, maybe not.
A good question would be why did the folks who worked for your family unionize in the first place? If they were treated so well, they wouldn't have needed to right? Or so they say....
In any case, I'm more than happy to discuss this through PM if you would rather. Lots of missing details but I understand why you wouldn't want to post them.
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
So shouldn't we all fight to get them (benefits) when you most need them? or are we okay with how things are? I know I am not okay with how things are. If you don't fight for improvements, most times they won't come on their own.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Anyway, my brother the electrician and my retired dad's company (unionized, sewer and water-main) has benefits when retired, so there are some that do but my point is I want them when I retire too....don't you?
It sounds like his family is in the construction trades. That's an absolute mine field for contractors. From what I've seen of some of the antics,I don't understand how most contracting companies can function. I have two friends who started businesses in framing,drywall and electrical. They built their businesses up from nothing to hiring 10 trades people. To get contracts,they needed to join unions. Within 5 years,their labor and benefit costs caused the businesses to teeter on the edge of failure all the time. It became so nerve wracking,they both decided to close and work as independents outside of general contracting. Life has been a lot better for them both ever since.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
It's definitely a different beast than a traditional unionized manufacturing plant, which is where most of my experience is.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
In rereading MarkB's post a few times after my response (and with your added insight Trimmer), I can see why he has the opinion that he does. That being said, his opinion on unions in general is a relatively broad statement based on a somewhat narrow experience.
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
So would you rather work under poor conditions for minimum wage, no benefits or pension. Unions have their place in the workforce. But yes I to won't deny they sometimes do more harm then good in some places. What the main purpose of a union is to create a fair and equal working environment for all employees. Some places need unions while some do not.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
To think the power has shifted to unions is crap. Arbitrators are far more in favor of companies nowaday then 15+ years ago.
Personally, I think it’s important to make the clear distinction between private unions and public.
Both can and do hold guns to their respective employers heads. Difference being if a Union runs amok in private, causes overhead to escalate, consumers stop buying. A widget, or um car, is only worth what the buyer can afford......
Public. Good luck refusing to pay your taxes...
Personally, it’s my belief Unions still have their place. Public Unions need to be kicked to the curb and out of
Politics....
Arbitration
Another reason why salaries and benefits for PS have soared over the past 40 years or so.
They don’t into account what the tax base can afford. There is little grey in their decisions, black or white, yes or no. Just look at numerous police and fire contracts over the past 15-20 years
“That” force gets 90k, so we should get 87k. That force got X so we should to...who gives a rats deoppings, millions thanks to stagnant salaries.....and...increasing taxation on top of that, is kneecapping people worse off than me. It’s about me after all....
Rather than griping about green grass themselves. Perhaps all Unions, should peg their remuneration to the median...
If the lowly and hammered peons gross X. A bean counter should gross X + or - Y %
Funny, things were never this bad 40 years ago when it was understood that a life in public service meant
Better job security
Better benefits ( how much is that biting now)
Slightly less salary.
Like the quote above .Quote:
Originally Posted by LoR
Another sign that the public sector is too good. The private sector has trouble finding people presently
I doubt that is true for the public sector. Supply and demand would suggest the public sector is over paid
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Absolutely Ontfarmer. Something those in PS rarely want raised/talked about.
Turn over in PS is almost non existent relatively speaking.
Last fall college “professors” went on strike. Many students lost a year. Why?
OPSEU ( same Union I belonged to briefly) went to war to reduce the ratio of contract positions to full time.
Why does any company hire contract. No benefits, it’s cheaper, helps control overhead.
Why is the ratio of contract college professors to full timers so high ( 70%).....
Because OPSEU agreed to it years and contracts ago. What did they get in return for that?
Higher salaries, better benefits, easier lives for the full timers....and more due paying members.
Maybe if they weren’t so greedy in the first place....they wouldn’t have sold their own low hanging fruit down the river. Maybe they wouldn’t have created the mess to begin with.
Back to “teachers”.
They put 10% of their salary into their pension. The people whose backs they are breaking match that.
Is a teacher that grosses say 50k a problem? $5,000 and $5,000 from the slaves? Don’t know...
10 years or 15 years later thanks to showing up for every day and salary grids that “teacher” makes 100k
$10,000 of “their own” and $10,000 from people that can’t even find the $ for a wee contribution to a TFSA....
Nic gig. Robbing the poor to pay the well off
There are so very many ways to look at the topic. So very many “dots” if you will, that almost always paint the same picture.
Public service is over paid.
The feudal system is alive and well. Sure things are better for the peons/surfs. That’s not saying much.
I have 7 friends. From very good to “friend” that have spent their lives with OPG. That’s that better job security/low turnover thing.
One is quite literally a nuclear physicist. Sheldon.
I don’t know what he grosses, I know it’s a ton.
Why the bleep are peons who are struggling to save for their own, padding his pension......he never has an answer despite how brilliant he is....
Of those 7. 5 are now retired. Four of them are back with OPG on contract.
“Figure it out”
*******
Why is the ratio of contract to full time so bad in many areas....why did unions ever agree to that to begin with...despite their war drums and teeth gnashing today.....
Yes yes Smokey it’s so unfair to your low hanging fruit is struggling, spend years on contract, precarious......
Shame you sold them down the river years ago making your full timers happy.....
EAs
Can’t get the time of day...
Corrections officers.
Fighting for years for the time of day........
We all know the sorry state of the MNR...
Meanwhile despite it being well known that the peons are getting crushed between the two. Wages stagnating for decades, taxation increasing, for decades.
The wealth gap between the haves and have nots increasing. Specifically between the upper 20% and well to bad, so sad, thanks for playing everyone else...
Answers?
Lol have fun......
Though I do believe wages need to be pegged to the mean as stated...plus or minus. Period.
We didn’t have these problems back in the sixties, seventies. While I’m sure there was grumbling about services. Most ministries had “enough” heads.
We didn’t have to wait 6 hours for a stitch or two. 8 months for an appointment with a surgeon....4 hours in gold trying to get a live person.
And much more.
If ford wants a second term, he dare not anger the unions too much. Currently I’m betting it’s even money.
And I don’t like where a number of the cuts are.
If ford wants a second term, he dare not anger the unions too much. Currently I’m betting it’s even money.
And I don’t like where a number of the cuts are.[/QUOTE]
This is another problem. Unions influencing elections so they can elect those who will fill their pockets at my expense
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
When the public sector gets too big it will crush the private sector who pays the bills
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Complain, complain, complain..............how is that working for you............ It's like listening to CFRB 1010.......... Green grass must grow on your side of the street too.
I didn't run their business, but I know they said many times unions were being unreasonable. It seems the unions kept stepping up demands, and why did they unionize, not sure, but perhaps it was a contractual requirement for the big housing developers to only work with unionized companies? Maybe they didn't have a choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
So, yes, there's always two sides to the story, and I will repeat what we've already both agreed on ... corruption and greed will see that there is unfairness at some point in time, and I hope you aren't going to sit here and try and convince me there's no abuse by unions. I think there was a time and place for them ... we live in a first world country, with fairly decent labor laws ...
Fight to get what?? Who pays for all this stuff? You think if you are given it, it's free?? I don't get it. Why not plan properly for your retirement?Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
Your guess was way more accurate than GW11's. Seems he refuses to believe the notion that Unions can abuse companies...Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Wait, what % of the labor force is in construction trades in Ontario?Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
Why do a few people change my subject of abuse of power by unions to working for minimum wage? That is not what I'm arguing ... why would a qualified electrician need a union? To prevent him/her from getting minimum wage? That would mean they are just terrible business people if they can only sell their qualified services for minimum wage.Quote:
Originally Posted by canadaman30
Seriously Mark? You don't think companies can be unreasonable, abusive and constantly stepping up demands? Get a grip. Don't let your view of "companies" be limited to your family's construction business.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Yes, there can be abuse by unions and companies alike, but you refuse to see the other side.
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
Compared to all other unionized jobs? Public and private health care, service, retail, manufacturing, delivery and transportation services, etc., etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Construction trades make up a share but don't come anywhere near being the majority. Show me something otherwise.
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...909f1bf2fe.jpg
So the public sector unions sending me this mail box junk so the gravy train union can influence my vote and improve their pay checks and jeopardize our financial stability
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...24f8f05b3d.jpg
The flip side of the junk mail
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Just mark it as "spam" and send it to your junk file. That's what I did with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ontariofarmer
It came to my rural mail box. A Very costly use of union duesQuote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Yep,but,it's their members money,not yours.so,it's mere aggravation,but,only from your mailbox to your recycle box,right? That's what socialists do....turn money into garbage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ontariofarmer
I didn't say that ... please quote exactly where I said that, or stop putting cR@P in my mouth ... don't make stuff up! You are painting unions to be this idealogical organization ... they are not. They abuse power, I have first hand info that says so. I know companies are out there that are also not ethical, but we have labor laws. My wife was a victim to one such unethical company ... and so I am very well versed on the other side of the equation.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
Stop twisting my words.
I agree, that is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ontariofarmer
I don't have a number ... that was a legit question. What is the number, do you have it? If it's insignificant ... then you're right, but if it's anything over 10%, I'd say it's a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
Not twisting your words any more than you're twisting mine. Above you stated that I refused to believe that unions abuse companies. Read back a ways and see that I did state that there is always a percentage of members that will paint an ugly picture of the larger group. Unfortunately they are still members and they have a right to file grievances and the right to fair representation, which in some cases (as I know first hand) makes representatives feel like criminal defence lawyers. It's still part of the process.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
If I'm making unions seem like ideological organizations, you're making companies seem like charities because they're willing to provide the minimum legal requirement.
Labour laws are a bare minimum baseline. Unions help to raise workers above that baseline. As discussed way back in the thread, plenty of people don't have a problem negotiating their own salary, benefits and vacation with a reasonable employer based on their worth, but those jobs don't exist for the majority, and the majority of people aren't very good at negotiating their own terms.
You sound like a reasonable guy Mark, but I know your view won't be changed. We can agree to disagree. Your family has had some pretty negative experiences with unions and that has solidified your opinion. The fact is I see it and live it every day and my opinion won't be changed either. My employer is definitely not the same as your family business so our experiences are probably quite different.
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
I really don't know, but the number of unionized workers is a bit over 30% of the workforce and construction trades would make up a small portion of that 30%.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
" Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years. Socialism is what they called public power. Socialism is what they called Social Security. Socialism is what they called farm price supports. Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance. Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labour organizations. Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people. " Harry S. Truman. Oct. 1952....... His words still ring true today.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Here is my main point, humans are greedy, selfish ... and it effects both sides companies and employees/unions alike. There has been abuse, on both sides. My family has had a bad experience with unions. My family has also had a bad experience with companies. Both due to the same thing ... power hunger, money hunger.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
What I really wish is that there was a way to curb that very issue. When something is created for a legit reason to fight against something bad ... and then the organization created to make things good turns bad ... well, what do we do.
Look for instance at Tarion ... what a mess. It was created to do something good, and then what?
That's what I have a problem with ... abuse.
Can we agree on that?
I have worked as a member in a couple of the biggest unions in the country, and for one of the biggest companies without a union, CIBC. The working environment for the average worker in the union shop, was 10 times better than the non-union workplace.
Why put up with it?? Maybe he is better off without the union ? Sell and restart can sometimes work out much better. I see where mark is coming fromQuote:
Originally Posted by GW11
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
Yes we can agree on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Enjoy the weekend!
Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
Wasn't Harry Truman a Democrat (Liberal)? That's not surprising,at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Some socialism or government or public sector is necessary Enough to maintain order - and basic human needs however it must remain small so that the private sector which produces real wealth can carry it and compete with the rest of the world
The private sector pays the bills and if the public sector is too big it crushes the private sector until debt accumulates and bills cannot be paid
Conservation officers police even teachers and fireman are necessary. But how many do we need. How much should they be paid.
The supply of people willing to do most of those jobs is greater than the demand. So wages are too high at the private sectors expense
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
The union I'm part of had a million dollars go missing a couple years ago. President and couple business agents fired, rest swept under the rug and money never recovered. Bunch of corrupt thugs run the union, I do get better pay and benefits hence the reason I'm part of it, But them telling me how to vote and how liberal they are kinda puts a bad taste in my mouth....
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
Not surprising ,sure. BUT is there anything untrue in what he said? You say it like an insult ,I wear it as a badge of honour.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
So, when Trudough tried to destroy Vice Admiral Norman’s Career, or groped a reporter in Kokanee or tried to curcumvent the rule of law in the SNC scandal or been convicted of conflict of interest charges for accepting bribes by the Agha Kahn......you support that and consider it honorable? The last time the liberals held office before being kicked to the wilderness we had ADSCAM to deal with. Trudough managed to destroy his cridibility in his first term. Was that honorable too?Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Actually don’t answer that. Everybody here knows you do.
Do you not realise how silly your reply sounds to rational people. I could find many dishonorable things done by conservatives. Does that mean that you agree with them because you call yourself a conservative? Of course not. I hope not.
Guys,
Every time we pool our collective money (taxes) to accomplish something beneficial, (public works, roads, sewers, etc) we are practising socialism. A certain amount of it is necessary for a society to flourish. The degree of which we practice it is what we debate.
We’ve got it more right than wrong in the past, but it’s been turning the other way for the past 30 years.
Attachment 38414
That is so very true.....Quote:
Originally Posted by 73hunter
I bet that guy is a conservative voter, to keep out the immigrants that are taking his job. All he needs is a MAGA hat, but he seems to have his, 'buck a beer'. LOL.
ROFL I understand why you'd be "confused".Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Lol, I don’t imagine many that are riding the public money train are voting for government austerity.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Sorry Fisher you’re beat on this one.
So you think the cons. from Canada are much different than those conservatives in the U.S who voted for trump. Many of the same ideals, and they are the ones on the 'dole', who enabled more money to go to wall street and big business. Those who voted for trump , a conservative, are from the poorest, least educated states, who have the most to loose when the government cuts back.
I too voted for MikeHarris and his cut backs. So did most of my co-workers because we could see where the economy was headed at the time.
So did I , but then I saw what he (the party), cut , and on that we had differences. Much like ford now.
We all knew Ford was going to make lots of cuts . Why do you think he held his plans till after the election . He didn't want to tell us everything that was going to cut or he would not have made it in. But in the end we as the people put him there. Cant complain when he cuts something we dont like or didn't know was going to be cut.
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
I voted for Ford, as I did for Harris, the cuts were coming, we all knew it that's why we voted him in, it long overdue, the fat has to be cut.
FMC,
I’m conservative-minded (fiscally and moderately socially), but I’m well aware that the political right has its share of skeletons in the closet. No party has a clean slate, except perhaps the NDP because there are not YET enough people dumb enough to give them a chance at governing.
There is a happy medium somewhere but we’ve not seen it in some time. Paul Martin as MoF I think was a good example of it, others may disagree and that’s ok - I didn’t follow politics as much back then but I do remember the deficit disappearing without the country falling apart.
I think there are many more differences between the conservative voters in the two countries than you think.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
It seems like many of those who voted for Trump were completely exasperated with anyone else. Unregulated and irresponsible capitalism led to the Great Recession, not enough people were held accountable for it (watch The Big Short, fantastic movie) but the great masses paid for it. The recovery has done well for many but many more were left behind. They voted for the guy with the promises but he can’t bring those hundreds of thousands of blue collar jobs back, unless Americans are prepared to work for Third World wages. Some of his points are quite valid but mostly I think the mid-Western voters in the Rust Belt were handily fooled by a con man.
Please tell me you wrote this after drinking a couple of bottles of wine. Sorry, I don't mean to poke fun, but this doesn't make sense at all, even the MAGA hat ... we're in Canada.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
We conservative voters have zero problems with immigrants that are prepared to pick up their shovel and work for their living, educate their children and make Canada great. The problem we have is with freeloaders and that extends beyond just immigrants but anyone who lives in this country and thinks it's okay to free load on the backs of hard working individuals. Not to be mistaken by those truly in need of help, like those that are sick ... it's all about trying and having some self dignity, there's a special place in my heart for individuals that will not take when Lord knows they need help. I have ALL the time in the world for people like that. Freeloaders are on the opposite end of that spectrum.
And it is generalizations like that, that in fact put Trump in power.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Asserting ( in a passive aggressive manner) that people who voted for Trump are "poor, and uneducated".
People in the US had had enough of double talking, elitist, democrats like HRC, who alienated an entire demographic, calling them "a basket of deplorables".
The rust belt, and much of the center US, saw jobs leave in droves under Obama, and little recovery. HRC came in and basically said "we're staying the course"....so Trump was in.
Incidentally, he's attempting to deliver on what he promised, by minimizing US jobs being globalized, and minimizing China's influence on the US market.....so there are a lot of "deplorables" who will continue to vote against the Dems.
Be quite careful how dismissive you are in asserting that people with Conservative values are ignorant, or unenlightened. Many Conservative voters came to be that way by having the benefit of 30+ years of watching economies ebb and flow. Idealism is great, but knowing that the piper has to be paid at the end of the tune is a fact that many on the left seem to forget. Of course it's no wonder why.....consumer debt is at an all time high, and no one seems to be scared....
Excellent post. Although there are a couple here who won’t get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
BBD . it is not a generalization, it is easily provable that the states that voted for trump ARE the least educated, most illiterate and poorest states. The U.S government. census says so. OR are you going to argue that the 'facts' prove it are 'fake news. LOL.
No...but very typical left argument. Someone opposes your viewpoint, or way of thinking, attempt to discredit their validity by calling into question their education.....worked well for HRC, by all means, carry on.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Of course, arguing that social reforms hurts the poor, only regards those who are unemployable. The "working poor" which was a much larger demographic, were much of what put Trump in, because they regarded better jobs and American production of goods as being helpful to an economy based on a capitalist model......funny, but I guess even baseline education states must teach economics 101.....
Not trying to discredit their 'validity', just pointing out readily available facts. That the poorest and least educated voted for trump. Spin that fact anyway you want, but it won't change that provable truth..
OK....that is your "truth"...and it's not spun at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Here is the truth, and you can do whatever you like with it.
Exit polls, much like election polls, get it wrong...all the time. It was these same polls which gave HRC such a huge landslide, only to have her fall on her face.
They sample demographics, period. There are only a handful of states that have begun to weight by education...and surprise....they are in fact, ones that went to the Dems.
Let's be completely honest about these "results" as well. It's easy to dismiss those you don't like as being stupid, or unenlightened. And suffer confirmation bias by citing sources like fivethirtyeight, people-press, etc. However, this so-called investigative journalism looked at education in one standard only.....those who polled and identified as having a 4 year degree......yes...because so much of the population has that level of education.
Ironically, it's the working class ( those without a four year degree) who overwhelmingly voted for Trump....you know...those not indoctrinated by the leftist elite in what is considered the "open thinking" universities. Those who have associate degrees, those who have college diplomas, those who have trade schools.....which by the polling standard the Dems would have one believe....are uneducated, and evidently too stupid to have the vote.....
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/27/u...rst-place.html
I have a university degree So I am educated. Education is not equal to wisdom. One of the wisest men I know has grade 8 education. Two of the most foolish people I know have PhDsQuote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I never mentioned wisdom, how do you judge that? You prove my point, by pointing out the exceptions to the stats. If they were not exceptions you would not be mentioning them. You say they are 'foolish', by what standard and who's?
Good postQuote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
I'd suggest that some of you would benefit from watching The Sting. The best part of a hustle is that the hustled doesn't know they've been hustled.
So a definitionQuote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
It's being aware of something, and having information. Knowledge is really about facts and ideas that we acquire through study, research, investigation, observation, or experience. Wisdom is the ability to discern and judge which aspects of that knowledge are true, right, lasting, and applicable to your life.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
" The value of an education....is not the learning of many facts, but the training of the mind to think something that cannot be learned from books." A. Einstein
Then someone forgot to tell most teachers and professors. These days, it's indoctrinate....here's the text, memorize and regurgitate to prove you know and more importantly "accept", that which is being taught.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
The idea of critical thinking and open and factual debate has passed....sadly.
Does that mean I'm a scientist? ( only a few will catch my meaning? )Quote:
Originally Posted by Ontariofarmer
Some of the states that voted for Trump are the least educated and the poorest. Louisiana, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama all voted for Trump but have the least population. Also, many of the richest States with the most population voted for Trump
It's important to note that the 35K votes that went to HRC,but,she still lost were in those states,too,because they weren't enough to sway the Electoral College votes. Just sayin' to our elitist Liberals on this forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
So let’s agrree the uneducated ( why so so many equate education with intelligence? ) and the poor voted for Trump.
Does that not suggest that the very demographic the left claims to care about and champion are right pissed off...........
Wouldn’t an educated, supposedly smart and wise person be capable of figuring out what that suggest?
As far as MNRF cuts go I understand most of it is in forest fire fighting and it will increase if needed. Last year was a bad year for fires.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
The Ontario fire emergency budget was cut by 67% in 2019.
In bc they cut it from 801 million to just 32 million 2 years ago. Wonder if these cuts play any roll since the funding would be paid as it happens. How much prevention was cut?
Only putting the resources up after the fact can have devastating consequences.
https://oodmag.com/provincial-budget...hit-mnrf-hard/
Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk