Transit Strike

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.

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...)

"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?

In the case at hand New York State law forbids strikes by public employees. Do you oppose that law?

How would you feel about a simultaneous strike by the Police and Fire Departments?

I am all for protecting the workers right to refuse work. However the employer should have the same right to instantly replace them with other voluntary workers.

Blatham,

A Public executive is sworn to enforce duly constituted laws, whether he/she personally likes them or not. if he isn't willing to do that he should resign.

Unionisn is becoming an anachronism in this country. It is growing only in government service - where it is generally needed least. It resists innovation and has generally contributed to the destruction of the industries it has dominated. I agree the unfettered labor exploitation of the 19th century needed a counterforce to limit its excesses. However all that is gone now. New conditions demand new solutions. Today unions are generally the problem, not the solution.

Well, your first paragraph has convinced me on its merits and I'm forwarding it to the Bush administration for serious consideration.

I think it's possible that the union itself might be doomed, especially given the long-term ramifications of the event.

But also taking into account the problems that it creates for the city, and the money lost; I don't think they will have to keep it up for very long. It was something like 23 degrees outside today.

My cousin in Manhattan says that the opinion is pretty much split over whether the guys are bastards or crazy bastards, but it's an important distinction; the crazy bastard may be somewhat admirable for his boldness (see Woiyo's love of GWB), whereas the other, isn't.

Cycloptichorn

The MTA leadership deserves the public's support for insisting that pension reform be part of a settlement with the transit workers. The case for redesigning retirement benefits is based on two basic points:
Generous retirement benefits are no longer required to attract public-sector workers because most have higher wages than their private-sector counterparts.




The costs of continuing those benefits are growing rapidly, and the money could be better used to contain fare and tax increases or improve services.For decades the popular image of government employment included job security, wages that lag those of the private sector and relatively generous retirement benefits. But conditions have changed. Most local public employees now receive wages higher than those paid for similar work in the private sector, and they have far more generous retirement benefits.

The hourly earnings of state and local government employees exceed those of private-sector employees in the New York region by an average of 15% - $28.26 to $24.62. Blue-collar workers in the region are paid 30% more in the public sector than in the private sector. This pattern holds for the majority of jobs at the MTA.

With higher wages, the MTA and local public employees also enjoy exceptionally generous retirement benefits. With respect to pensions, most private-sector workers are part of "defined contribution" plans with pre-set employer contributions and with benefits not available until a worker is at least 59-1/2 years old. In contrast, the MTA workers and most municipal workers are guaranteed fixed benefits at age 55, with the benefits calculated under the unusual practice of including overtime in the base.

With respect to health insurance, retirees from the MTA and city (and their spouses) have the full premium cost paid by the city or the MTA; private employers rarely provide health insurance for retirees and, when they do, they typically pay only a fraction of the premium.

Generous pay and retirement benefits are no longer necessary to secure a qualified workforce. In the case of MTA car cleaners, for example, the MTA hires about 200 people per year; more than 28,000 individuals passed the exam - yielding about 140 qualified candidates for each opening.

And the generous retirement benefits are expensive. Health insurance premiums have grown at double-digit rates in recent years, and the MTA's pension fund contributions are projected to grow from $480 million in 2004 to $770 million in 2008.

For the city, the stakes are even greater with pension fund contributions growing from $2.3billion to $5 billion over the same period. The strike will have been worth suffering only if changes are achieved in the retirement benefits of future workers.

The state Constitution locks in the pension benefits of current workers and permits changes only for newly hired workers, and they should be the focus of attention. The savings from modernized pension benefits would come slowly as new workers are hired. The savings in the next few years may be tens of millions, but in the longer run, recurring savings can be in the hundreds of millions annually.

The MTA leadership is right to fight for that change, and New Yorkers who are concerned about future fare increases should support them.

Brecher is research director for the Citizens Budget Commission and a professor at NYU's Wagner School.

Spoiled union sadly misses the point

So we are there, pushed into the middle of a contract dispute between city workers and their employers which results in a scramble of 7 million people trying to figure out how long they can stay at home or how they will get from one place to another in a city so dependent on mass transit. The strike does not seem to have anything to do with the usual complaint workers make when they walk off their jobs.

The striking members of the TWU are not being overworked, and when it comes to money, they have one of the sweetest deals in the entire United States. They pay only 2% of their salaries toward their pensions and cry as though they are having skin peeled from their backs because the MTA wants future workers to pay 6% - still better than the deal given to 95% of the workers in this nation.

As for pay, some transit workers, such as bus maintenance workers and train operators, make more money than many cops and teachers. If one has graduated from high school and can read, there are no barriers to competing for a transit job, whereas cops need a minimum of two years of college and teachers a full degree.

In all fairness and with all due respect, transit work requires skill, but not on the level of difficulty one faces in the job of teaching or law enforcement.

When we now watch our cops on emergency 12-hour shifts, I feel more than a bit of anger at how unfairly they are treated.

We know that the MTA's $1 billion surplus is not the result of the labors of the transit workers; it is the result of your taxes. Union members did not put in extra effort to bring about more income. In fact, 45% of that surplus is earmarked for the transit workers' pension fund. Not too shabby.

Have we gotten to the point where we should expect unions to ignore the hard facts and seek to make a frail goose into a layer of golden eggs? The troubles had by the Detroit car manufacturers and the airlines show that something new must be done because the weight of pension benefits can bankrupt a company.

In city employment that is not the problem exactly, but everybody is going to have to be ready to bite the bullet and maintain honor along the way. However it goes, you will see our ever reliable cops, who have surely accepted the bitter with the sweet, out there helping the city do the best it can as we make it through this transit mess.