Loretta Weinberg calls for disclosure by pro-union Working Families United for New Jersey

Kudos to the Senator (0.00 / 0)

Wasn't she working on a bill for force disclosure of these groups? Did that get to the governor yet? Where is that bill?

But the Senator should be commended for calling a spade a spade. There are not many that would consider criticizing their own side.

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Tue Mar 29, 2011 at 21:00:01 PM UTC

Get a Life (1.00 / 1)

Maybe if Loretta Weinberg would get enough guts to stand up for the working people of this state as ALL Democrats should be doing instead of pandering to the whims of our Hot and Sexy Governor, then maybe the working class wouldn't have to band together to do the work that we elected others to do.

---

by: nkromann @ Tue Mar 29, 2011 at 21:38:29 PM UTC

Wow (4.00 / 1)

Dear "Get a Life":  Do you have me confused with someone else?  Me, pander to the "hot and sexy Governor"?  

---

by: Senator Loretta Weinberg @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 02:08:58 AM UTC

Senator, likely the position attributed to you (0.00 / 0)

by the Star Ledger, stating you may have signed the pledge to support public workers right to bargain their benefitds but you haven't discounted Sweeney's position to legislate that right away is drawing the ire you read from nkromann.

I asked you for clarification on this myself and would llike to know your position, without dodge and distraction. Will you support the workers right to bargain or Sweeney's grap for political glory by denying workers rights to negotiate in good faith?

If we don't stand together, we fall alone
That didn't last long.

---

by: Couch Potato Politics @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 02:38:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

A First (0.00 / 0)

Thank you for responding to my comment.  You're the first, I thought the rest of the Senators had dropped dead or are too doped up on drugs to respond or stand up to anyone.

---

by: nkromann @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 23:53:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I signed "The Pledge" (0.00 / 0)

And will absolutely support the worker's right to collective bargaining as I have said publicly and privately on many occasions.  Am not known for "dodging" or "distracting", but I am respectful of our leadership!

---

by: Senator Loretta Weinberg @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 02:49:25 AM UTC

Thank You, Senator! (4.00 / 1)

But please remember, respecting leadership isn't as important as respecting constituency.

Mr. Sweeney is spending far more time at Mr. Christie's side than Mrs. Guadagno is and labor membership sees it and makes what are turning into accurate assumptions when Sweeney's ideas are more alike than not to the Governor's.

Legislating collective bargaining whether by piece or whole parcel is still collective bargaining denied.

I know the hope and expectation is that you stand with labor and oppose any "Wisconsin" like denial of hard fought for and earned rights.

If we don't stand together, we fall alone
That didn't last long.

---

by: Couch Potato Politics @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 04:00:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thank You, Senator! (0.00 / 0)

But please remember, respecting leadership isn't as important as respecting constituency.

Mr. Sweeney is spending far more time at Mr. Christie's side than Mrs. Guadagno is and labor membership sees it and makes what are turning into accurate assumptions when Sweeney's ideas are more alike than not to the Governor's.

Legislating collective bargaining whether by piece or whole parcel is still collective bargaining denied.

I know the hope and expectation is that you stand with labor and oppose any "Wisconsin" like denial of hard fought for and earned rights.

If we don't stand together, we fall alone
That didn't last long.

---

by: Couch Potato Politics @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 04:00:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Would you consider an amendment... (0.00 / 0)

...to any legislation of health benefits, which would require that the legislation be applied to the Governor, his staff, the legislature, and their staffs as public employees in their own rights?

It seems logical to me that the only way to ensure that elected officials treat public employees fairly is to have a personal stake in any legislation that concerns public employees.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 04:59:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Please Senator Do not forget (0.00 / 0)

The consequence of collective bargaining a multi-union benefit plan is that the union who makes the deal becomes the only union who is paying.

CWA members got screwed in 2006 when they agreed to pay for health care and it will happen again unless this plan is legislated.

Legislation is the only fair way to charge more for a multi-union fund like the SHBP.

All this talk about individual collective bargaining rights for each union makes no sense when it comes to a multi-union plan.

Principles are good,fairness and shared sacrafice are better.  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 10:07:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Governor Won't Bargain if the Dems Give him cover (0.00 / 0)

The problem we have is that the Governor has been direct and clear - he will not bargain as long as he has the possibility to legislation.  He'll just wait it out.  
So when the Dems say they want collective bargaining but they won't eliminate the possibility of legislation - the response AT THE TABLE is that they don't want to bargain.
BTW - Firstamend still doesn't understand the concept of negotiations.  Unlike everyone else who ended up with 1.5% to pay for healthcare - CWA (AFSCME, AFT, and IFPTE) negotiated it and got about 4% more in pay for it.  

---

by: Hetty Rosenstein @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 12:08:23 PM UTC

Sorry,but CWA broke its promise in 2006 (0.00 / 0)

CWA sold the health care giveback in 2006 by telling its members that Governor Corzine would also make the NJEA and the other BIG unions ,FOP and PBA, also pay into the Multi-union fund.

THAT DID NOT HAPPEN! THEY GOT OFF FREE FOR YEARS!

When CWA can GUARANTEE that ALL unions who participate in the SHBP are going to pay their fair share then I will support them . Otherwise 2006 is just repeating itself and the only FAIR way to fund the SHBP is to legislate it with the Sweeney Fair Share Plan .  

Apparently CWA leadership does not care if their members bear the brunt of the cost for the SHBP.

Do the right thing. Accept the Sweeney plan and then try to negotiate a raise that will cover that plan. DO NOT HANG YOUR MEMBERS OUT TO DRY AGAIN!!    

---

by: firstamend07 @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 20:12:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Believe me (0.00 / 0)

I know how one can "respect leadership" and still fight for our common goals. I have been about as unambiguous as I can be about this subject! And yes, all elected officials should be (and currently are) covered by the same requirements as other public employees when required to shoulder a fair portion of health benefits, etc.

---

by: Senator Loretta Weinberg @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 15:08:34 PM UTC

Sweeney's plan. (0.00 / 0)

Senator Weinberg, thank you for reiterating your stance supporting collective bargaining, but, i believe that a public clarificaton is needed, stating that you will not sign the Sweeney plan or any other legislation, for that matter.  As long as Christie/Sweeney believe you might agree to legislation, then it will undermine the union's position that any legislation is an attack on collective bargaining rights and render your pledge to support those rights as meaningless.

---

by: krugman4prez @ Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:26:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

N2N (0.00 / 0)

Just got off the phone with a lifelong resident of my town. We talked. We talked about the history of our town and its educational system. When it came to health care benefit packages, I explained my understanding of the Christie Plan, the Sweeney Plan and the CWA Plan. Hands downs, Sweeney Plan made the most sense! It made the most sense as a tax-payer in desperate need of creative solutions and a neighbor expressing their neighbors deepest concern; the disproportionate effect in the Christie Plan on lower income earners.

"Call your Senator and Assembly Persons" is what I said to my recently reacquainted neighbor.

Because unfortunately one the FEWER voices being heard by our legislators are conversations like ours. Citizens are being drown out by Union lobbyists and Astro-Turf like this that parade as citizens expressing "the public" mood.

---

by: Got Kids @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 16:52:07 PM UTC

When you give away your rights... (0.00 / 0)

You have nothing left to bargain with.

Sweeney's plan is a theft of rights, plain and simple.

And if you think his plan will "Fix the problems" you don't know anything about the PROBLEMS.

The GOP screams and yells about "Free Market" pressures but in the end they place no pressure on the free marketeers in insurance, investments and corporate contractors and instead eat the costs and blame the workers for them.

If there was a large enough groundswell to demand REAL market competition in health coverage instead of this OPEC-like price-fixing that goes on now, it would be a different and more cost effective world.  We could have had that competition if the PUBLIC OPTION were made available. But this is a rift for another day.

Senator Weinberg, thanks for your honesty and your support of the working and middle class public sector workers.

If we don't stand together, we fall alone
That didn't last long.

---

by: Couch Potato Politics @ Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 18:34:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

got kids (0.00 / 0)

I have a feeling that, like me, you're not rich.  If that's the case then you're energies against working people, like myself, are misguided.  CWA's offer would save NJ 22 percent in costs and preserves collective bargaining rights for working class NJ residents, who also happen to be taxpayers.   Sweeney has yet to explain how his plan would save a significant amount of money compared to CWA'S extremely fair offer that could truly be equated to a targeted tax increase on a specific segment of the middle class.  
If you're so worried about your taxes, then you should be calling your legislators to collect tax money from those who can actually afford it.  For example there are many companies, such as GE, who are paying nothing and are actually receiving tax credits, despite the fact that they are making billions of dollars in profits.  Or, how about super-wealthy hedge fund managers who can claim their income as capitol gains and only have to pay 15%, and use tax loopholes on top of that?  

---

by: krugman4prez @ Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 06:37:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

correction (0.00 / 0)

I meant to say Sweeney's plan equates to a targeted tax on one segment of the middle class, in that it's being unilaterally imposed by the lawmakers.  

---

by: krugman4prez @ Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 06:43:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Freudian Slip (0.00 / 0)

it occurs to that the CWA plan actually DOES target a specific segment of the middle class, CWA members. Out west we call that small bore.

---

by: Got Kids @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 11:14:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

FIX SOMETHING! (0.00 / 0)

At Blue Jersey "our chief interests have always been progressive policy and honest governance." My energies are directed at finding solutions; FIXING A PROBLEM.

I am not advocating for an attack on or the destruction of organized labor. I agree that there exists a contractual "right" to collectively bargain. I also understand that a provision in that contract allows for legislative action apparently without violating the sanctity of collective bargaining.

Sweeney's Fair Share Plan (that's the title) graduates health care contribution based on income. To your point it does not "target a tax increase on a specific segment of the middle class." Someone earning $30K/yr does not have the the same contribution level as someone earning $100K. It it does create a uniform contribution scheme, alleviating one of the biggest hurdles of municipal consolidation, and prevents reform from being stymied at the local level.

This has the Democrats fingerprints all over it. It is a solution which by its very nature is salient. If the Democrats want to throw this in the trash, go ahead. If they want to a follow the drumbeat of "Remember Wisconsin" writ large and made louder by Astro-Turf like Working Families and OTHERS be my guest. I just don't think that many working families are going to follow.

---

by: Got Kids @ Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 10:40:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It Still LEGISLATES (0.00 / 0)

I don't really care if it has the Dalai Lama's fingerprints all over it,
IT STILL LEGISLATES
That is NOT FAIR BARGAINING.

There are a few of you who really miss that ENTIRE point!
What part of that isn't clear? If you let the state TAKE your right to negotiate your working conditons, salary, pension plan or benefits away, you are GIVING UP YOUR VOICE.
And, as we have seen in Wisconsin, it isn't about the budget, really. t's about power , control and silencing the democrats, once and for all. The only difference here is that Christie is playing Sweeney like a chump... And Sweeney is LOVING IT.

If we don't stand together, we fall alone
That didn't last long.

---

by: Couch Potato Politics @ Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 13:18:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]