SEA realism: It's about time

YOUR COMMENTS

The voices of UnionLeader.com readers: To join UnionLeader.com's discussion of the news, use the form below.

NOTE: If you have read this article before, you may not be seeing the newest comments. Press F5. Or click "Refresh" or "Reload" at the top of this page while holding down Ctrl. All approved postings will appear. (Another option for Firefox users is the Clear Cache add-on.)

It's interesting to see so many taxpayers who don't mind the government wasting their tax dollars.
- Helen, Bow

Deb from Derry, I couldn't have said it better myself.
The violins are strumming for those SEA workers. Sniffle, sniffle.
I've had to work temp two jobs with crappy hours and my fiancee has had to work fifty hours a week just so we can pay our condo mortgage on time, as opposed to collecting unemployment. Our reward for playing by the rules?? Tax hikes!! Paying two hundred more dollars to register our beater vehicles, having to sell off our camper (our only source of fun) because of the obscene registration taxes and campground fees, and oh - let's not forget: a hike in the meals tax!
You would think that, if anything, those burecrats would be THANKFUL and APPRECIATIVE for what we taxpayers have taken from us. And that they would manage the money better. But NO!
Well, too bad. I have to balance my checkbook and my budget every week; so shoud they!!!!
The SEA workers had a choice: accept the contract or risk getting axed! Too bad those of us in the private sector have no such choice.
So to the fat lazy burecrats up there at the plantation in Concord; put a sock on it. You're not getting ANY sympathy from me!!!!!
- Ramon H., Londonderry, N.H. 03053

Back to the negotiating table? Give me a break. Are negotiations open-ended, or is the governor allowed to find the savings he was ordered to find by the legislature someting within the year?? The SEA had unrealistsic proposals of supposed cost savings, they already stated they were going to re-hash all of those. Kudos to the governor for doing his job, and kudos to him and all of the commissioners who reduced the number of layoffs by cutting wherever else they could.
- Glen, Merrimack

Commenters here have let Governor John Lynch get out of the spotlight too easy. It takes two sides to negotiate a contract, and our governor is partially to blame for allowing this to drag down into a fight between the state and the SEA.

From the people's point of view, a majority of SEA members didn't like the proposed contract and voted it down. Governor Lynch responds by laying off 250 state workers instead of asking the SEA to return to renegotiations and, if need be, use the $76 million rainy day fund to pay the $25 million the legislature decided had to be cut from personnel costs. Although I heard Governor Lynch may have asked the SEA in recent days to renegotiate.

Blaming one side and/or the other does not alter the fact that the people of this state may have lost 250 state workers when in a still worsening recession more people (than usual) trying to survive need state services. And worse still, 250 families have lost paychecks at a bad time.
- Jonathan R. Seaver, Hinsdale

Ah, the unions at work, always watching out for the little guy. They pump your hard earned dollars into the pockets of corrupt politicians who let illegal aliens come in and take your jobs!

What a farce. If you state employees had any common sense you'd get rid of the SEA and work with your department heads to cut costs, save money and save your jobs.

I feel bad for those who lost their jobs, especially since our useless legislature voted in the last 2 budgets to continue to spend and increase spending on arts, special interest projects and welfare.
- Melvin, Keene

Now that all those people are laid off, the mob thugs are getting less money and not liking it.
Boot the unions people- they are no good for anyone.
As for the extra work load from these employees getting laid off, it will definately weed out the lazy ones from the good workers.
If they have time to peruse Craigslist and send out emails from their state accounts, then they have more time to take on more work.
Some state workers are hard working individuals that deserve to keep their jobs.
Why would you ever put your job in the hands of someone else who ultimately decides your fate?
State workers, you CAN get rid of the union.
- Pauline, Franklin

I agree with 'PM'. The economy had not tanked, when we negotiated our pay raise and our increase in health insurance payments. The state gave us a pay raise and took it back in biweekly increases to our health insurance. Most unions do support liberal, left, one-worlders with their dues money. It'll be a hoot, to see who the SEA endorses for state offices, in the next election. My money is on them supporting the dems (the party that failed them), over actually considering the republicans. The dems are always pushing welfare, illegal immigration, mandatory federal funding for unionized ARAA projects. Yeah, the same old stuff...
- Phil, Concord

Diana Lacey like all unions tied in with government does not even mention how saving all the union jobs, even those added in recent years come at a cost in the form of taxation from those of us who are not union, have taken pay cuts or have lost our own jobs at the hands of union supported government hacks.

I have little problem with unions that negotiate in the private sector with their employer. The employer will decide if it is cost effective or not for his company at a given time. But when its elected officials who get money from the unions it makes me feel as if I don't matter as an individual. When I ask for a raise I accept the decision by my employer and if I think it's wrong I am free to seek employment and take my skills elsehwere. I have yet to see a smart employer not give a raise to a good worker that makes them money. But I have seen poor workers protected by unions and the politicians who are owned by them.

There are no rewards in the private sector for bad management or performance and I see no reason why it should be any different for our elected officials or unions workers who live off our taxation. Miss Lacey in case you have not noticed we are all hurting. If you don't like the results go complain to those in Washington and the State house. Because without a strong private sector there is no money for government to take or the unions to manipulate from the pockets of working slobs like me. If union workers want their jobs they should be concerned about those of us in the private sector and ask why none of our current leaders state or federal are doing anything to help this area and everything to ensure the unions survive. Even to the point of using tax payer borrowed money to keep them afloat.
- Deb, Derry

These layoffs are in fact a result of money and budgeting. Too much money spent on unrealistic and unsustainable medical benefits, at a time when people are going without both benefits AND jobs. Had the SEA crawled out of the 1970's and been historically proactive about benefits and cost, the cuts would have been mitigated or unnecessary. That is fact. And that is not the governor's fault. Look to Maine where state and union work together to craft realistic and sustainable medical benefits, and are also blazing a trail with a system where cost and quality matter to everyone, and are worked into the benefit design. In NH SEA members do not care about cost, and know nothing about quality -- and the great disconnect in NH between the two. The SEA encourages this retro-dated mentality. As to fair share/agency fees, the legislature needs to revisit the fact that 60% membership allows the SEA to extort "fair share" fees from non-members. That is an outdated concept, and many of us who are forced to pay "fair share" and are stuck with the SEA's bumblings would rather work with the State to get real about medical benefits and costs. The numbers are public. 20k+ for familiy coverage under the SEA plan...about 6k higher than average. 250 million or so in medical costs annually last I heard. This is where the opportunities are -- to save money and redirect some of those savings to wages (when practical, and politically viable). We can wait for increased revenues or sieze the opportunity to make intelligent strategic changes to benefits. Sadly, neither is likely to happen, and the latter will never happen with the SEA's current keystone cop leadership and stranglehold over "fair share" employees who are held hostage because of some outdated rule. The givernor and legislature need ot change this dynamic, it is not serving the state well.
- Dorothy, Epsom

The public should be made aware that many, many state workers are not members of the union but are still forced to pay a fee which binds them to the contract that the full membership is allowed to vote on.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a state employee but a non-union member and therefore, cannot vote on the contract. I have considered joining the union, but I cannot in good conscious allow a portion of the dues to fund political campaigns that support government run healthcare, illegal immigration, gay marriage, and abortion. It's my choice, and I have to deal with it, good or bad. If I were a member, I would have voted against the contract.

The reality is, the union leadership, members, non-members, and pay raises did NOT cause the layoffs; the Governor’s unwillingness to reject his party’s smoke and mirrors budgeting is the reason that layoffs occurred, period.

For close to a year, it was the union that repeatedly asked the Governor to take a closer look at the budgeting that was under consideration for approval; it was the union that developed “outside –the-box” saving mechanisms during negotiations that would benefit our citizens, the State, and public servants, too. In fact, the Union Leader printed articles of a well respected columnist that recommended a closer look at the ideas offered by the union.

The Governor’s Office handling of the state’s negotiations has been nothing less than disastrous; the union's response has been two unfair labor practice complaints and a lawsuit filed in superior court. The union should not be attacked for protecting its members; that’s what unions do. If any blame is to be placed, it must be placed where it is deserved; the Governor’s Office and his Party.

I know of not a single person that believes that no waste exists in NH state government, but the reality is, the union represents public servants, not budgets. The Governor had the choice to exercise disciplined budgeting that would have reduced operating costs, increased efficiency, and still kept people employed. Despite concerns expressed again and again by the union, the Governor chose to ignore the wiser alternatives and instead, went forward with the layoffs of lower wage public servants, during which he continued to hire new management positions that pay excessive wages and benefits.
There is a story, but the Governor is only telling part of it.

These layoffs are not about the union’s ability to provide effective representation to its membership rather, these layoffs are only about the Governor’s failure to lead the government thru the aftermath of his Party’s smoke and mirrors approach to budgeting.
- PM, Milford,NH

This ed and FIR's and Serg's posts are right on. Unions fight for lazy incompetents and ridiculous benefits. Good workers are not represented by unions. Manchester's tax cap stands up to unions.
- Becca, Manchester

As an SEA member I could not agree more. The so-called leadership is dominated by contrarian self-serving small minded individuals who do not understand the climate in which they are negotiating. They are too busy protecting the militant couch potatos that make up their core base and who need cadillac sickness care coverage because they refuse to live healthy lifestyles or act proactively about their health. Those of us who are healthy and pragmatic and realistic about how insane our medical beenfits are, and wish to make changes, are not at all welcome to speak our mind...quite the contrary. The key to protecting jobs and wages is to allow changes to the medical benefits, and the SEA uses rhetoric and scare tactics to prevent this at all costs...especially the individual cited in this spot-on editorial. Change in coverage does not mean reduction in coverage, as many people are truly ill and have little to no control over that to be sure, but it means changes that encourage people and reward people for engaging in managing their care, getting or staying healthy, and following recommended preventive guidelines.
- Serg, Concord

The current state of affairs should really come as no surprise. Union President Gary Smith and his little band of SEA leadership misfits have successfully turned the SEA into the "Sleaze-E-A." In addition to their unrealistic demands and expectations, thousands of membership dues dollars have been spent supporting and protecting do-little malcontented problem employees who represent nothing more than a substantial liability to the State. This has opened the door for the unfair public bashing that the majority of our hard working State employees have had to recently endure. No wonder Smith's own Correction Officer coworkers voted to leave SEA. Hopefully, a majority of the union membership has finally woken up and will vote Smith and other wastrels out of office during the upcoming union elections. Perhaps then, competent State employees can look forward to being represented in a professional, productive and positive manner.
- FIR, Concord