patrick.net

Mush is paid to antagonize people.

I'm pretty sure if there were only 5 tigers left in the world, the GOP would be agitating about it.

"FINISH THEM OFF, CAN'T YOU SEE HOW DANGEROUS THEY ARE???!!?!!"

My brother is like that, the idea of a UAW outpost in the South sends him into a rant about the terrible threat that Unions pose to all life on Earth. As though the pathetic remaining shadow of union power, will make a difference in his life from a whole state away.

I don't know Mish whether the unions in this case are quite as evil as you say.

Could be they are, but I don't understand why you don't even hint at what their position is.

What ? I have to research this myself to understand what the hell is going on ? To hear you explain it, it's all about the union chiefs 145k salary.

I don't suppose it has anythnig to do with the workers who usually end up in the role that Ms Harris is providing care for such disabled people?

And the compensation that they collectively bargain for ? Is this amount, that is the compensation they receive, the same amount that "Josh receives."

Also, you didn't say how much the dues were. That's interesting.

Maybe she shouldn't have to pay the dues, since she isn't a nurse. In which case they might win the case. That doesn't prove that the unions are evil. It just proves something about the way the benefits are defined. I wouldn't be surprised at all, if the amount of the benefits received were supposed to be spent on salaries of care givers, and if it is even defined in that way.

If they lose the case, it (maybe) proves a mistake on the part of the union. Too bad you don't have the integrity to want to understand the unions position or to present it, so that we might all understand their mistake.

Unions make mistakes sometimes. And they have elections for their leadership.

Mish you should listen to the Chomsky video that's been posted on here by a couple people. He addresses the way that the plutocracy is destroying the last of the voices against the destruction you so ignorantly support.

I hope that one day you can fathom the evil that you so enthusiastically support.

It's hard to find the other side of the story. One story says that the dues paid would be a large part of the beneifits paid. I could not find out how much the dues are.

I did find this, a quote about the same issue in California and a $100/month dues. Probably less in this case, but nobody says.:

The California law even explicitly stated that these home-care providers were not state employees except for the purposes of collective bargaining; i.e.: dues collection. In some cases, the California parents paid $100 per month.

But that $1200 a year is fair, SEIU's president said.

"Just as there is no doubt that fair share fees are constitutional, it is equally as clear that they yield big benefits for the people who pay them. Since personal assistants employed by the Illinois Department of Rehabilitation Services began collective bargaining with the state in 2003, they have won a 65 percent increase in wages, their first-ever health care fund and resources that support professional training and development," Kelleher said.

Even today, these workers continue their struggle to obtain a living wage. The plaintiffs who brought the Harris case would have prolonged that hardship by weakening the mechanism that has raised wages for all home care workers, while also reducing turnover, Kelleher said.

Kelleher argues that those two important advances, along with professional training the union provides, have improved the quality of home care and helped curtail the state’s spending on more costly long-term institutional care. And in the end, people with disabilities – the consumers who rely on home care providers to live independently — have been the ultimate beneficiaries of the more economically stable and better trained workforce created by collective bargaining.

What about people who can't take care of their disbled family members, but don't want to institutionalize them ? They have to hire care workers to care for these people in home.

I'm not arguing in favor of the dues. Just trying to understand the other side of the story, that Mish so happily ignores.

again...

Since personal assistants employed by the Illinois Department of Rehabilitation Services began collective bargaining with the state in 2003, they have won a 65 percent increase in wages, their first-ever health care fund and resources that support professional training and development," Kelleher said.

Is that money that Pam Harris receives from medicare (or medicaid) defined loosely as money for Josh's care ? OR is it defined as to go toward salary for his caregiver? If it's the latter, why is this not in the story that's being reported about those union parasites.

Again, I'm only trying to understand the whole story.