0
   

Transit Strike

 
 
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 02:58 am
NY transportation union has declared a strike. The subways and buses won't be moving unless Mayor Bloomberg negotiates a fair wage or obtains a court order requiring the transit workers to go back to work.

Mayor Bloomberg appeared at a press conference. He was visibly angry and was verbally attacking the union. It doesn't look like he's in a negotiating mood. If any of those "goddamned" transit workers had been standing in front of him, I'm sure he would be spitting on them. That's probably why the workers decided to strike. Bloomberg comes across as a disrepectful bulldog. He comes across as someone who would dictate at the bargaining table rather than negotiate. If the harsh demeanor he demonstrated during the press conference is any indication as to how he approached contract negotiations, then it is highly probable that he made no effort to demonstrate to the workers that he found them to be valuable contributors to the well-being of the city.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,993 • Replies: 68
No top replies

 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 03:40 am
Or it could be that the union is using the peoples need to move around during the peak of the holiday season to hold the Mayor's feet over a fire to grab more money.

Kind of a scummy thing to pull on the innocent public at this time of year.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 04:08 am
bm
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 07:15 am
Re: Transit Strike
Debra_Law wrote:
NY transportation union has declared a strike. The subways and buses won't be moving unless Mayor Bloomberg negotiates a fair wage or obtains a court order requiring the transit workers to go back to work.

Mayor Bloomberg appeared at a press conference. He was visibly angry and was verbally attacking the union. It doesn't look like he's in a negotiating mood. If any of those "goddamned" transit workers had been standing in front of him, I'm sure he would be spitting on them. That's probably why the workers decided to strike. Bloomberg comes across as a disrepectful bulldog. He comes across as someone who would dictate at the bargaining table rather than negotiate. If the harsh demeanor he demonstrated during the press conference is any indication as to how he approached contract negotiations, then it is highly probable that he made no effort to demonstrate to the workers that he found them to be valuable contributors to the well-being of the city.


They are already being paid fairly and are in violation of Taylor Laws.

Bloomberg is correct in his actions and should insist all penalties with regard to the Taylor Laws are imposed quickly and swiftly.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 08:59 pm
Re: Transit Strike
woiyo wrote:
Debra_Law wrote:
NY transportation union has declared a strike. The subways and buses won't be moving unless Mayor Bloomberg negotiates a fair wage or obtains a court order requiring the transit workers to go back to work.

Mayor Bloomberg appeared at a press conference. He was visibly angry and was verbally attacking the union. It doesn't look like he's in a negotiating mood. If any of those "goddamned" transit workers had been standing in front of him, I'm sure he would be spitting on them. That's probably why the workers decided to strike. Bloomberg comes across as a disrepectful bulldog. He comes across as someone who would dictate at the bargaining table rather than negotiate. If the harsh demeanor he demonstrated during the press conference is any indication as to how he approached contract negotiations, then it is highly probable that he made no effort to demonstrate to the workers that he found them to be valuable contributors to the well-being of the city.


They are already being paid fairly and are in violation of Taylor Laws.

Bloomberg is correct in his actions and should insist all penalties with regard to the Taylor Laws are imposed quickly and swiftly.


If Bloomberg thinks like you do, NY is going to be paralyzed for a very long time.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 09:42 pm
One could wish for a mayor as resolute as President Reagan when confronted by an equally illegal strike by an air traffic controler's union bent on holding up the public in an outrageous attempt to extort money from the public till. The quality of service provided to aircraft in flight by these FAA air controllers had been deteriorating for years, while they managed to convince the public that theirs was such a stress-inducing occupation that 60% of them had to take disability induced early retirement after 20 years' service. (I thought hard about that one dark night, alone in the cramped cockpit of an A-4 after requesting radar vectors around the thunderstorm that was banging me around, and being curtly told by an evidently overstressed controler sitting in air conditioned comfort that they don't do radar vectors anymore.) Reagan let them strike, used managers and military controllers to man the traffic centers and fired them all. A year later the system was working better than ever and with far fewer controllers. The union went bust. New York should be so lucky.


Does Deborah Law contend that the current wages of the NY transit workers are "unfair"? If so, how does she reach this conclusion?
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 10:08 pm
All I know is it took me three hours to get to work today, about half of that consisting of standing in the f*cking cold waiting for various possible modes of transport (the "green line" buses--filled and all but impossible to get on, and the LIRR--a two-hour wait in line outside) trying to figure out what my next move should be. Finally I ended up sharing a cab with two strangers for ten bucks each. That was an adventure in itself.

I usually side with the workers in issues like this, having worked at a big company and knowing what shitball tight-asses they can be, but I don't know--these transit workers make much more than a lot of other jobs with equivalent or even higher skill levels, I believe--it's tough to feel for them when I'm standing outside freezing my gonads off.

On the other hand, the MTA is very easy to hate. Last year they had some very questionable accounting come to light, after they raised the fares for all New Yorkers, and now they have a billion-dollar surplus. They are, in my opinion, gangsters and crooks.

I also think Bloomberg is being an elitist as$hole in this situation.

And one more question: If a union is prevented from striking legally, then what the hell good is a union, really? Isn't that their main trump card?

I guess in summary, I feel there is a lot of blame to go around, and I hope these ivory tower shitheads in charge get what's coming to them.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 10:13 pm
The union has a state-enforced monopoly on employment in an organization that itself is a state operated monopoly. The New York laws forbidding strikes by this union were duly constituted and are enforcable. It is the Mayor's and the Transit Authoritie's duty to enforce them.

I would generally agree with you in that unions have no legitamate role in government service. That, however, is just my opinion.

The irony is that unions of government workers (Federal, State, & Local) are the virtually the only segments of unionism that are growing today. In general unions have killed many of the industries they have dominated. The UAW working on the death of the U.S. automobile industry now.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 11:54 pm
New Yorkers walk as transit strike ruled illegal

Quote:
Judge Theodore Jones ruled Tuesday afternoon that the Transport Workers Union was in contempt of two court injunctions ordering it not to strike, and he ordered that the union be fined $1 million a day beginning Tuesday. . . .

Differing views

In announcing the work stoppage, Roger Toussaint, president of Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union, said, "Transit workers are tired of being underappreciated and disrespected."

One commuter said he sympathized with the transit workers, according to The Associated Press.

"I try to put myself in their shoes," Matthew Higgs told the AP. "The only way you can get what you want is to take a stand.

"These guys work every day. ... Why shouldn't their kids have good health care? Why shouldn't their kids be able to go to college?"

Another commuter was less generous.

"I think they all should get fired," Eddie Goncalves, a doorman trying to get home after his overnight shift, told the AP. He said he'll likely spend an extra $30 per day in cab and train fares, according to the AP....
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 07:08 am
Debra_Law wrote:
Differing views

In announcing the work stoppage, Roger Toussaint, president of Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union, said, "Transit workers are tired of being underappreciated and disrespected."



Well, if they are so tired of it, do what others would do in their situation. Find a new job!!! Oh wait, they may not be qualified to do much else. Well then, guess they have to put up with being underappreciated and disrespected, whatever the heck that means.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 07:11 am
Fedral wrote:
Or it could be that the union is using the peoples need to move around during the peak of the holiday season to hold the Mayor's feet over a fire to grab more money.

Kind of a scummy thing to pull on the innocent public at this time of year.


Fedral and I are in complete agreement.... Whaddaya know... it is the season of miracles :wink:
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 07:37 am
Debra_Law wrote:
New Yorkers walk as transit strike ruled illegal

Quote:
Judge Theodore Jones ruled Tuesday afternoon that the Transport Workers Union was in contempt of two court injunctions ordering it not to strike, and he ordered that the union be fined $1 million a day beginning Tuesday. . . .

Differing views

In announcing the work stoppage, Roger Toussaint, president of Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union, said, "Transit workers are tired of being underappreciated and disrespected."

One commuter said he sympathized with the transit workers, according to The Associated Press.

"I try to put myself in their shoes," Matthew Higgs told the AP. "The only way you can get what you want is to take a stand.

"These guys work every day. ... Why shouldn't their kids have good health care? Why shouldn't their kids be able to go to college?"

Another commuter was less generous.

"I think they all should get fired," Eddie Goncalves, a doorman trying to get home after his overnight shift, told the AP. He said he'll likely spend an extra $30 per day in cab and train fares, according to the AP....


Your post is pointless.

From what I understand, a BUS DRIVER is paid in the area of 60K/year. Has full health benefits and retirement at age 65.

The MTA has been negotiating in good faith and has givin in to certain issues of the union.

Explain to me how at 60K/yr, with limited skill sets, a bus driver is underpaid, underappreciated and unable to "feed their family, while the average NY'er is busting their gut for an average salary of 45K?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 09:26 am
Re: Transit Strike
Debra_Law wrote:
NY transportation union has declared a strike. The subways and buses won't be moving unless Mayor Bloomberg negotiates a fair wage or obtains a court order requiring the transit workers to go back to work.

Mayor Bloomberg appeared at a press conference. He was visibly angry and was verbally attacking the union. It doesn't look like he's in a negotiating mood. If any of those "goddamned" transit workers had been standing in front of him, I'm sure he would be spitting on them. That's probably why the workers decided to strike. Bloomberg comes across as a disrepectful bulldog. He comes across as someone who would dictate at the bargaining table rather than negotiate. If the harsh demeanor he demonstrated during the press conference is any indication as to how he approached contract negotiations, then it is highly probable that he made no effort to demonstrate to the workers that he found them to be valuable contributors to the well-being of the city.


That's a lot to assume based on a perception derived from a single press conference.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 09:50 am
Debra_Law wrote:
New Yorkers walk as transit strike ruled illegal

Quote:
Judge Theodore Jones ruled Tuesday afternoon that the Transport Workers Union was in contempt of two court injunctions ordering it not to strike, and he ordered that the union be fined $1 million a day beginning Tuesday. . . .

Differing views

In announcing the work stoppage, Roger Toussaint, president of Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union, said, "Transit workers are tired of being underappreciated and disrespected."

One commuter said he sympathized with the transit workers, according to The Associated Press.

"I try to put myself in their shoes," Matthew Higgs told the AP. "The only way you can get what you want is to take a stand.

"These guys work every day. ... Why shouldn't their kids have good health care? Why shouldn't their kids be able to go to college?"

Another commuter was less generous.

"I think they all should get fired," Eddie Goncalves, a doorman trying to get home after his overnight shift, told the AP. He said he'll likely spend an extra $30 per day in cab and train fares, according to the AP....


Roger Toussaint's days as the head of Local 100 are numbered.

The International TWU opposes the strike, and may very well make an effort to depose Toussaint.

With fines in excess of $1 million a day imposed on the Local, the striking members facing fines of two day's pay for every day on strike, and the real possibility that Bloomberg will eventually just fire all of the workers and replace them, the union will suffer ruination long before NYC if the strike is protracted.

The MTA offered wage increases of 3% 4% and 3.5% over the next three years. How many workers outside of the NYC transit system are likely to receive increases in excess of these percentages?

The sticking point, according to Toussaint, is the proposed pension plan changes which largely impact prospective employees (The "unborn" as Toussaint like to call them) rather than current employees. The notion that the NYC transit workers who are striking are doing so because they need to save their pensions or provide healthcare to their families is ridiculous.

Local 100 has called an illegal strike for a time intended to cause maximum pain to NYC. I'm sure it is Toussaint's strategy and hope that the real victims of the strike (residents and business owners) will put pressure on Bloomberg to settle. However, if the strike continues the pressure exerted on Bloomberg will not be to settle but to take ever more drastic countermeasures. With each day that the people of NY have to hoof it in the cold, and suffer economic losses, whatever sympathy they may have had for the workers will rapidly disappear.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 10:16 am
Interesting how many non-NYers are weighing in here. Well, bashing a striking union is always fun, I guess.

The idea that the union would strike the week before Xmas--so you think this might have been part of the strategy? Hmmm.....

(Full disclosure: My father had a career with the NYC Transit Authority--in management. He sparred with the union, especially when they struck. But he begrudgingly respected the leadership. This was many years ago.)
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 10:41 am
D'artagnan wrote:
Interesting how many non-NYers are weighing in here. Well, bashing a striking union is always fun, I guess.

The idea that the union would strike the week before Xmas--so you think this might have been part of the strategy? Hmmm.....

(Full disclosure: My father had a career with the NYC Transit Authority--in management. He sparred with the union, especially when they struck. But he begrudgingly respected the leadership. This was many years ago.)


Interesting how many non-Americans weigh in on US domestic political threads. Well, bashing a superpower is always fun, I guess.

Full disclosure: I lived in New York for 30 years and worked downtown for 10. I used the subway every day during those 10 years and hated every minute I spent on them. I think it is perfectly fine for anyone who never lived or worked in NY to comment on this strike.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 10:45 am
Of course, it is.

(Although, just to quibble, it's a bit different to compare non-Americans commented on US politics to this. Our policies affect the rest of the world significantly. The subway strike in NY doesn't really have much direct impact on the rest of us. At least, not at the moment...)
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 11:22 am
One of the transit workers explained his side of the situation to a bunch of us while we stood in the cold trying to figure out how to get into Manhattan last night. One guy mentioned that he had heard that these guys make $55k yearly, and this was the MTA worker's answer.

"That is true, but you have to remember, that is before taxes. After taxes we only make..."

Does this guy really think we didn't know he paid taxes on that? Does he think that everyone else doesn't pay taxes? Is he just a dumbass? Does he think we are? Who does he think he's kidding?

I'm trying hard to feel for these guys, but it's only been a day, and I'm already starting to get that "f*ck you, get back to work, a-hole" attitude.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 11:44 am
BBB
As a union representative for nearly 20 years, I want to add some information that will not make anyone happy.

As an employee of a union, I learned that union leadership can be noble, but can also make mistakes. They sometimes don't live up to their rhetoric when they are the employer.

That aside, I think the transit workers union leadership have made mistakes. We already know that the Mayor and his minions have made terrible mistakes and are equally responsible for the commuting mess.

Some things I learned about contract negotiating. You must know your opponent's case as well as your own. That's the only way you can complete a successful negotiation without having to strike. In all of the hundreds of contracts I negotiated, I never had to strike because I learned to achieve a win-win outcome.

I've been on both sides of the contract negotiating table. As a representative of the employer, I applied the same rules as I did when representing employees. I also perfected a relationship with both parties of trust and honesty. Everyone knew I would not lie nor cheat. I was honest about financial information as well as work environment requirements. That trust allowed compromise and agreements to be achieved.

It is obvious in NY City that no trust exists between the parties. Management is arrogant because it is illegal for these employees to strike. They use it as a weapon, which leads to frustration by employees. Management labor negotiation representatives need to be chosen with great care to overcome such obstacles. Unless the union can get the public on their side, to strike is doomed to failure. The worst thing the union can do is to cause major inconvenience to the public. The public will nearly always blame the union, not management. That is a fact that hardly ever changes.

The union really has to make a good case to the public to get its support for the impending inconvenience. In this case, the union goofed by striking just before Christmas in bitter cold weather. If there was any public support for the union it disappeared the first time they tried to get into the city. The public is impacted not only by inconvenience, but by possible loss of their own job salaries if they could not reach their workplace. If the businesses they work for were damaged by the strike re loss of business, the public's jobs might be in jeopardy.

Generally, public unions are at a great disadvantage in such situations. It takes very skillful planning and negoiation to overcome such obstacles. The planning does not start before contracts expire. It is a contant requirement all of the time.

I witnessed a very interesting event in the last local election in Albuquerque, NM. Voters were presented with a ballot measure to increase the minimum wage, which is very low in N.M. The mayor and business community was, as expected, opposed to the increase using the typical false scare tactics. Those in favor mounted a very effective campaign. It almost passed. I supported the wage increase and had to stand in a long line to vote for the first time. Working class and the poor voted in huge numbers along with middle class voters who understood the need. They supported the minimum wage increase with their votes.

The point is the public will support union actions that are in the public's interests. That takes a strong education campaign. Not living in New York, I don't know how well the union performed in this respect. I do know, however, that management didn't have to life a finger to promote their position. All they had to do was to wait for the public's reaction to the inconvenience and they won their case---backed up, of course, by the strike being illegal under law. A no win situation.

Public sector contract negotiations have to have a strong political base if they are going to suceed. Without it, they are doomed. They should study the tactics used by teacher unions. They do the research to discover where the money to pay for raises is hidden in school systems. They also usually have public support.

BBB
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Dec, 2005 11:48 am
D'artagnan wrote:
Of course, it is.

(Although, just to quibble, it's a bit different to compare non-Americans commented on US politics to this. Our policies affect the rest of the world significantly. The subway strike in NY doesn't really have much direct impact on the rest of us. At least, not at the moment...)


Let me see if I have this right. The commentary of (say) an Italian citizen on domestioc American politics is OK because of the significant effect our policies have on the rest of the workd, while those of an American citizen, living in (say) Virginia are not, presumably because that individual is not affected.

This of course presumes he has no connection whatever to U.S. financial markets or any of the myriad commercial activities that span the country and which manage central transactions in New York. I wonder if D'artagnian would permit a citizen of Buffalo who has never been to Manhattan to be concerned? It is, after all a New York State law that is being violated.

Finally, the sappy notion that "because our policies have significant effect all over the world", our domestic affairs are somehow more deserving of the concern and perhaps even meddling of people from other countries than are the aaqnalogous policies of other countries, defies the basic principals of our governance and plays to the softheaded European thinking that paralyzed them during five yeardsw of organized genocide in their very midst just over a decade ago.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Transit Strike
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/29/2024 at 12:37:29