Full Version: Transit worker strike in NYC-TUESDAY
12:01 a.m. tuesday is the line drawn in the sand for the Transit Worker's Union employees. 7 million commuters could be facing delays as 33,000 employees are threatening to join the picket lines. What are the issues of contention? A plan to raise the retirement age from 55 to 62, as well as a disagreement over wages. It is estimated that a strike would cost the city $400 milllion a day. -source.
Some snippets:
"Enough is enough," said Craig DeRosa, who relies on the subway to get to work. "Their benefits are as rich as you see anywhere in this country and they are still complaining. I don't get it."(from above cited source)
Links:
Transit Workers Union Local 100
Metropolitican Transporting Authority
NYC contingency plans
Questions for debate:
1.)should the workers accept the 55 to 62 age increase for a full pension? Why or why not?
2.)Do you believe the union is out of line for this strike?
3.)If you are a commuter-whose side are you on regarding this potential event?
4.)Are transit workers struggling to get by in NYC??
Some snippets:
"Enough is enough," said Craig DeRosa, who relies on the subway to get to work. "Their benefits are as rich as you see anywhere in this country and they are still complaining. I don't get it."(from above cited source)
Links:
Transit Workers Union Local 100
Metropolitican Transporting Authority
NYC contingency plans
Questions for debate:
1.)should the workers accept the 55 to 62 age increase for a full pension? Why or why not?
2.)Do you believe the union is out of line for this strike?
3.)If you are a commuter-whose side are you on regarding this potential event?
4.)Are transit workers struggling to get by in NYC??
I'd like to offer up some additional sources on the issues here. I'm not a New Yorker so I won't claim to understand it fully. I do know a great deal about the transit industry and these are legit issues. An article in the NY Times has a good write-up.
Based on this article and a few others this appears to be about a little bit more than wages an pensions. In fact they are willing to reduce demand for raises according to the union's president:
1.)should the workers accept the 55 to 62 age increase for a full pension? Why or why not?
I don't think this is what the strike is about, see NY Times articles above.
2.)Do you believe the union is out of line for this strike?
I don't think they are based on my understanding of their greivances. I also think that you can't really paint this in the same light as other union strikes because NY State has the taylor law in effect.
In other words the union stands to lose big financially from this, so financial gains are not likely to be the motivation behind this.
QUOTE
Regardless of whether a strike is called or a settlement is reached, the protracted labor negotiations over a contract for 33,700 subway and bus workers have highlighted one fact: Many workers feel they lack dignity and respect on the job.
In a survey of 792 bus drivers, station agents, subway conductors and train operators released last week, Cornell University's School of Industrial and Labor Relations provided considerable evidence that many workers feel mistreated and undervalued - which could push them toward greater militancy.
The survey, which was conducted in the spring and summer, found that 24 percent of bus and subway workers said they faced serious hazards more than once a month, including smoke, dangerous chemicals and extreme temperatures. It also found that 70 percent felt that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's policies and procedures were unfair.
Many workers said their jobs failed to provide for essential needs. For example, 78 percent said they lacked access to bathroom facilities at least once a month; 51 percent of bus drivers said they had problems finding a bathroom one or more times a day.
New York City Transit, the authority subsidiary that runs subways and buses, issued 15,200 disciplinary violations last year, but workers said they felt they were often blamed while supervisors and passengers were not held accountable. In the survey, 13 percent said they faced abuse from supervisors regularly, while 74 percent said they faced a verbal or physical threat from passengers at least once a year.
In a survey of 792 bus drivers, station agents, subway conductors and train operators released last week, Cornell University's School of Industrial and Labor Relations provided considerable evidence that many workers feel mistreated and undervalued - which could push them toward greater militancy.
The survey, which was conducted in the spring and summer, found that 24 percent of bus and subway workers said they faced serious hazards more than once a month, including smoke, dangerous chemicals and extreme temperatures. It also found that 70 percent felt that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's policies and procedures were unfair.
Many workers said their jobs failed to provide for essential needs. For example, 78 percent said they lacked access to bathroom facilities at least once a month; 51 percent of bus drivers said they had problems finding a bathroom one or more times a day.
New York City Transit, the authority subsidiary that runs subways and buses, issued 15,200 disciplinary violations last year, but workers said they felt they were often blamed while supervisors and passengers were not held accountable. In the survey, 13 percent said they faced abuse from supervisors regularly, while 74 percent said they faced a verbal or physical threat from passengers at least once a year.
Based on this article and a few others this appears to be about a little bit more than wages an pensions. In fact they are willing to reduce demand for raises according to the union's president:
QUOTE
Mr. Toussaint also said the union would agree to reduce its demand for raises from 8 percent to 6 percent annually over three years, in exchange for fewer disciplinary actions. He also said transit employees needed better training and security.
"We need better treatment for workers," he said, calling the proposal the union's "dignity and respect package."
"We need better treatment for workers," he said, calling the proposal the union's "dignity and respect package."
1.)should the workers accept the 55 to 62 age increase for a full pension? Why or why not?
I don't think this is what the strike is about, see NY Times articles above.
2.)Do you believe the union is out of line for this strike?
I don't think they are based on my understanding of their greivances. I also think that you can't really paint this in the same light as other union strikes because NY State has the taylor law in effect.
QUOTE
The elephant is the state Taylor Law, which prohibits strikes by public employees and carries penalties that could cripple unions and their members who violate its no-strike provision.
Passed in 1967 in response to the 1966 transit strike, it nonetheless did not prevent another transit strike in 1980 and it is anyone's guess whether it can prevent one this week.
Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union was fined $1 million and its members were fined two days' pay for every day of the 11-day strike in 1980. The 22 days of lost pay, 10 percent of the average worker's annual salary, amounted to about $18 million.
On top of that, the union was penalized by having its automatic payroll deduction for dues revoked, forcing shop stewards to try to collect dues from individual members before the shattered union finally had the checkoff restored.
~snip~
"It is difficult to think of Mayor Wagner imposing huge penalties on a union," Snyder said. "It is easy to see Bloomberg doing it, with relish."
Passed in 1967 in response to the 1966 transit strike, it nonetheless did not prevent another transit strike in 1980 and it is anyone's guess whether it can prevent one this week.
Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union was fined $1 million and its members were fined two days' pay for every day of the 11-day strike in 1980. The 22 days of lost pay, 10 percent of the average worker's annual salary, amounted to about $18 million.
On top of that, the union was penalized by having its automatic payroll deduction for dues revoked, forcing shop stewards to try to collect dues from individual members before the shattered union finally had the checkoff restored.
~snip~
"It is difficult to think of Mayor Wagner imposing huge penalties on a union," Snyder said. "It is easy to see Bloomberg doing it, with relish."
In other words the union stands to lose big financially from this, so financial gains are not likely to be the motivation behind this.
QUOTE(Cube Jockey @ Dec 20 2005, 02:45 AM)
In other words the union stands to lose big financially from this, so financial gains are not likely to be the motivation behind this.
While I appreciate that many employees in thousands of industries in the United States feel under-appreciated, frankly, that's not what the strike is about.
MSNBC's website states that the strike revolves around Pensions, Wages, the cost of health insurance, getting MLK day off, and disaster preparedness training.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10544673/
How on earth is that not about money???
None of the Union grievances even mentioned working conditions. I did read your post from the NY Times, but vehemently disagree.
I believe that in private industry, the workers should have the ability to collectively bargain, but in this case the transit authority affects a large portion of the NY economy and this is simply out of line. They're holding the city hostage based upon a few bargaining points. It's unionized terrorism in many ways...
What if terrorists waited until there weren't any people on the subways and blew them up, stranding passengers for subsequent days until the repairs could be made?
In this case, the NYC economy will suffer from expansive lost productivity, as the Subway system (for anyone that's ever even stepped foot into Manhattan) is the lifeline of the city. It transcends income levels, race, creed, gender, and national origin.
Looking at the current economic climate in industries that revolve around unions, it's hard to see where the value is in today's economy. Just take a look at the negative financial impact on companies like General Motors... The transit authority is just another example of "a good idea gone bad"...
http://www.nysun.com/article/24597
John Avlon has a great article on this whole disgusting affair. I also have to agree with Aevans--this is a sick and twisted attempt by the Union to force their demands through by threat. holding the safety and even lives of their fellow New yorkers hostage to meet desires that quite frankly are just plain selfish. As i look at what these guys already make I actually have a hard time believing they are paid as much as they get.
from Avlon's article
No offense
but a trained monkey with a computer could replace many members of the Union. In many other countries the trains are actually run by computers, have been for years and have done so safely and quite efficiently.
The union members should remember this before they try to use extortion tactics demanding what amounts to protection money from the citizens of NY.
John Avlon has a great article on this whole disgusting affair. I also have to agree with Aevans--this is a sick and twisted attempt by the Union to force their demands through by threat. holding the safety and even lives of their fellow New yorkers hostage to meet desires that quite frankly are just plain selfish. As i look at what these guys already make I actually have a hard time believing they are paid as much as they get.
from Avlon's article
QUOTE
The average annual salary for a transit worker is well over
$50,000 – for a 7 ½ hour workday before overtime. Bus maintenance workers
receive an average salary of $68,000 a year; train operators make $62,000 a
year; station agents over $50,000 a year and conductors over $53,000 a year.
Add to this generous public subsidy the fact that transit workers take an
average of 13 days sick leave a year and you have a picture of a classic
overfed, me-first, feather-bedding local union of the past.
$50,000 – for a 7 ½ hour workday before overtime. Bus maintenance workers
receive an average salary of $68,000 a year; train operators make $62,000 a
year; station agents over $50,000 a year and conductors over $53,000 a year.
Add to this generous public subsidy the fact that transit workers take an
average of 13 days sick leave a year and you have a picture of a classic
overfed, me-first, feather-bedding local union of the past.
No offense
but a trained monkey with a computer could replace many members of the Union. In many other countries the trains are actually run by computers, have been for years and have done so safely and quite efficiently.QUOTE
But before transit workers get too arrogant even as they look at their next
prospective strike three years down the line, they should realize that
technology already exists that would make them irrelevant. Already, trains
in Paris, Cairo, and Calcutta operate with computerized or automated
systems. In Paris, the Meteor Project was launched in 1998, with an
automatic piloting system that controls the train line's traffic, regulates
speed, manages alarm devices, and allows for traffic of automatic and
traditional conductor trains on the same line. There have been no serious
accidents reported since this system deployed in the late 1990s, and more
than a billion people have been transported. Computers make the trains run
on time and they don't threaten to walk off the job.
prospective strike three years down the line, they should realize that
technology already exists that would make them irrelevant. Already, trains
in Paris, Cairo, and Calcutta operate with computerized or automated
systems. In Paris, the Meteor Project was launched in 1998, with an
automatic piloting system that controls the train line's traffic, regulates
speed, manages alarm devices, and allows for traffic of automatic and
traditional conductor trains on the same line. There have been no serious
accidents reported since this system deployed in the late 1990s, and more
than a billion people have been transported. Computers make the trains run
on time and they don't threaten to walk off the job.
The union members should remember this before they try to use extortion tactics demanding what amounts to protection money from the citizens of NY.
1.)should the workers accept the 55 to 62 age increase for a full pension? Why or why not?
Awwww ... can't retire at 55 w/a full pension. Boo frickin' hoo. Welcome to the real world. The rest of us got here years ago.
2.)Do you believe the union is out of line for this strike?
WAY out of line.
3.)If you are a commuter-whose side are you on regarding this potential event?
I don't live in New York, so I will abstain here.
4.)Are transit workers struggling to get by in NYC??
Same as #3.
Awwww ... can't retire at 55 w/a full pension. Boo frickin' hoo. Welcome to the real world. The rest of us got here years ago.
2.)Do you believe the union is out of line for this strike?
WAY out of line.
3.)If you are a commuter-whose side are you on regarding this potential event?
I don't live in New York, so I will abstain here.
4.)Are transit workers struggling to get by in NYC??
Same as #3.
QUOTE
1.)should the workers accept the 55 to 62 age increase for a full pension? Why or why not?
I read they can retire at 55 but with only half their pension and this was one of the main disputes and that the union countered MTA's offering by asking for the age of retirement to be dropped down to 50! I think this is without question an excessive benefit. Who gets to retire at 50?! and still receive a pension? This is what the public funded unrealistic world brings.
MTA officials want to raise the minimum retirement age from 55 to 62. The union has responded by seeking to lower the minimum to 50.
source
[quote=Vibiana,Dec 20 2005, 10:09 AM]
1.)should the workers accept the 55 to 62 age increase for a full pension? Why or why not?
Awwww ... can't retire at 55 w/a full pension. Boo frickin' hoo. Welcome to the real world. The rest of us got here years ago.
That's just the thing. The age of working and productive adults is increasing, not decreasing. If it was the latter, I could understand their point, but this is just beyond absurd. As a matter of fact, usually older workers are the ones with the most seniority and know what they are doing, why in the world would anyone want them to retire at 55 and sit on their duffer? Heck, they still have another ten productive years to go.
1.)should the workers accept the 55 to 62 age increase for a full pension? Why or why not?
Awwww ... can't retire at 55 w/a full pension. Boo frickin' hoo. Welcome to the real world. The rest of us got here years ago.
That's just the thing. The age of working and productive adults is increasing, not decreasing. If it was the latter, I could understand their point, but this is just beyond absurd. As a matter of fact, usually older workers are the ones with the most seniority and know what they are doing, why in the world would anyone want them to retire at 55 and sit on their duffer? Heck, they still have another ten productive years to go.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.