HA, 6/4/06: AAUP opposes [OUTSOURCING] physical plant workers - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jun 5, 2006

RE: HA, 6/4/06: AAUP opposes [OUTSOURCING] physical plant workers

Date: Jun 5, 2006

Joker (No Eskimo) wrote:

SS#123-45-6789?? wrote:
... I simply argued that big government is bad. ...
Oh, you are one of those conservatives that memorized, "big government is bad". Where did you find this, in the Bible? O.K. if you want smaller government why don't you push for doing away with the military? Most of their present work is very far away from our shores. Bring them home and put them on our borders to stop illegal entry to the USA. Why are you against socialized medicine? After all most of the big discoveries in medicine were paid for by our tax dollars. Then the private medical industry sells the medical discoveries back to us when we are ill. Why are you not complaining about "big government" helping out "big business"? Oh, that's right, you invested in "big business" that is why you want the S.S. to invest. You must get ill when you heard about our government helping the Katrina victims.

This liberal tripe grows old. The discussion on this thread turned to Social Security, not Katrina, the military, illegal immigration, or even big business. As such, I discussed Social Security and not the other issues you brought forth, since they were not under discussion at the time. Nonetheless, your striking lack of ability to actually discuss the topic at hand leads me to believe that you are simply a knee-jerk lib and not capable of actual discussion. Why don't you and your buddies simply volley a few more jabs my way and then go have lunch and feel a little more smug?

Date: Jun 5, 2006

SS#123-45-6789?? wrote:

This liberal tripe grows old.

Actually, your fake conservative "tripe" is what's getting old. As far as knee-jerk goes, you seem to be flexing your own patellar ligament a good bit. What you are is a radical.

At first I was going to accuse you of a lack of consistency in attacking SS as "bad big gummint" while ignoring the military or the no-bid excesses of the Katrina "recovery," but I re-read Joker (No Eskimo)'s reply & now see that you are very consistent. What you're after isn't a reduction in government per se but an increase in the amount of tax money that can be funnelled by government to big business. That's not necessarily "conservative," but it has been a major tenet of republicanism since before the Great Depression.

But hey, Rush will be on WWL in just a few minutes, so go enjoy your own dose of smugness.

Date: Jun 5, 2006

Since social security will be going bankrupt before too long, this entire discussion is somewhat academic. Does anyone have a practical, workable plan for fixing (or replacing) social security? While you're at it, any ideas for fixing or replacing medicaid, which will also be going bankrupt before too long?

Date: Jun 5, 2006

SS#123-45-6789?? wrote:

This liberal tripe grows old. The discussion on this thread turned to Social Security, not Katrina, the military, illegal immigration, or even big business. As such, I discussed Social Security and not the other issues you brought forth, since they were not under discussion at the time. Nonetheless, your striking lack of ability to actually discuss the topic at hand leads me to believe that you are simply a knee-jerk lib and not capable of actual discussion. Why don't you and your buddies simply volley a few more jabs my way and then go have lunch and feel a little more smug?

Wow! I must surrender to the superior arguments you present in this post.

Date: Jun 5, 2006

Moot Point wrote:

Since social security will be going bankrupt before too long, this entire discussion is somewhat academic. Does anyone have a practical, workable plan for fixing (or replacing) social security? While you're at it, any ideas for fixing or replacing medicaid, which will also be going bankrupt before too long?

Here's a possibility:

In Our Hands

function printThis()
{
if (navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase().indexOf('firefox') > -1) {
popupBar('/include/book_print.asp?bookID=846' + "&url=" + self.location, 700, 500);
}
else {
popupBar('/include/book_print.asp?bookID=846', 700, 500);
}
}

function emailThis()
{
popup('/include/book_email.asp?bookID=846', 500, 450);
}

Print

Mail

A Plan to Replace the Welfare State

By Charles Murray

Posted: Thursday, January 19, 2006

230 pages

AEI Press (Washington)

Publication Date: March 2006

Hardcover

ISBN: 0-8447-4223-6

Price: $ 20

Add to Cart

Examination Copies

View the press release/summary, a video of the book forum, and the author's Wall Street Journal op-ed.

America's population is wealthier than any in history. Every year, the American government redistributes more than a trillion dollars of that wealth to provide for retirement, health care, and the alleviation of poverty. We still have millions of people without comfortable retirements, without adequate health care, and living in poverty. Only a government can spend so much money so ineffectually. The solution is to give the money to the people.

This is the Plan, a radical new approach to social policy that defies any partisan label. Murray suggests eliminating all welfare transfer programs at the federal, state, and local levels and substituting an annual $10,000 cash grant to everyone age twenty-one or older. In Our Hands describes the financial feasibility of the Plan and its effects on retirement, health care, poverty, marriage and family, work, neighborhoods and civil society. [more about the book]

Date: Jun 6, 2006

You can't make this stuff up. On WDAM tonight they did a piece on the outsourcing of the Physical Plant operation. A university spokesman was explaining how the Aramark 3% retirement match was really better than the state 10.75% match.

Date: Jun 6, 2006

WDAM at 6 is reporting that talks between USM Physical Plant and Aramark reached a "boiling point" yesterday when several employees walked out of a meeting. Two representatives from PP describe loss of benefits. Several dozen PP employees shown on screen. Joe Morgan (in dark sunglasses) defends the deal, talks of average 5% salary increase and advantage of 401(k). His door is open. Reporter speaks from below the "Freeing the Power of the Individual" banner on JST.

Date: Jun 7, 2006

What we are witnessing is a real tragedy. These people have given a large part of their adult life to the university in return for economic security and health insurance for their families and a small pension in old age that they can not outlive. Many of them have sent their children to USM. Now they are about to be cast aside in a part of the country where working people have few protections. For people of limited resources, the promise of a dignified retirement in which one can be independent and not be a burden on children is of great importance.

Date: Jun 7, 2006

Dearie, don't you know that people are furniture? People don't even exist in the Shelby Universe. They're just pawns. In the meantime, buckle up for the year of Thames' grab-all-you-can that's ahead for us.

I thought Joe Morgan looked miserably uncomfortable as he tried to explain away something he surely knows is wrong.

Date: Jun 7, 2006

In all of this talk of outsourcing (Food Service to Physical Plant and beyond); what about the REAL bottom line? Will this lower or stabilize the cost of going to USM? Will this help take away some of the burden on USM's customers, THE STUDENTS? I am not seeing this dialogue brought up by either side?

Date: Jun 7, 2006

lostsight? wrote:

USM's customers, THE STUDENTS?

Students are not customers.

Date: Jun 7, 2006

If the university has any customers, it is the citizens of Mississippi.

Date: Jun 7, 2006

lostsight? wrote:

In all of this talk of outsourcing (Food Service to Physical Plant and beyond); what about the REAL bottom line? Will this lower or stabilize the cost of going to USM? Will this help take away some of the burden on USM's customers, THE STUDENTS? I am not seeing this dialogue brought up by either side?

I too hate to describe students as customers, but when it comes to outsourcing the Bookstore and Food Services they are indeed the major customers base for Aramark. To make a profit Aramark can raise the prices the students have to pay for food and books. But now with Physical Plant being outsourced to Aramark, the USM departments will be the customers. Aramark could raise the price for its services and the departments would have to pay from their "state funded budgets". The next President and USM will have to live with this mess created by SFT for years to come.

Date: Jun 7, 2006

Good point, Left. The students can eat somewhere else and buy books somewhere else, if they choose to. There will be zero competitive pressure on the PP services.

Date: Jun 7, 2006

LVN wrote:

Good point, Left. The students can eat somewhere else and buy books somewhere else, if they choose to. There will be zero competitive pressure on the PP services.

Perhaps not. As I understand it, certain types of financial aid require that books be bought at the university bookstore.

Date: Jun 7, 2006

LeftASAP wrote:

The next President and USM will have to live with this mess created by SFT for years to come.

This pretty much sums up the whole reign of Shelby Thames.

Date: Jun 7, 2006

astonished wrote:

Perhaps not. As I understand it, certain types of financial aid require that books be bought at the university bookstore.

Quite correct, astonished. I suggest Amazon (or the like) to my students, and many of them have to buy their books at the bookstore because of scholarship requirements. It's a nasty racket.

Date: Jun 8, 2006

Emma wrote:

astonished wrote:
Perhaps not. As I understand it, certain types of financial aid require that books be bought at the university bookstore.
Quite correct, astonished. I suggest Amazon (or the like) to my students, and many of them have to buy their books at the bookstore because of scholarship requirements. It's a nasty racket.

This is not true.

The only way for a student to charge his or her books to his or her USM account is to purchase through the bookstore. However, whatever money remains in the student's account after the bills are paid gets refunded to the student by USM -- that is a requirement of the federal financial aid setup. If a student were to not purchase books, the money that would have gone to buy books would be refunded to them by USM anyway.

So, a student can purchase his or her books on a credit card and can pay off the card in full when he or she gets his or her refund from USM. It may take a little engineering, but students can save $$ by putting a little thought into the process.

Is USM taking advantage of the unsophisticated nature of USM students? Of course it is. However, to paint students as captives is incorrect.