Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

[ QUOTE ]
How do you propose that they bargain for pay raises? If they can't strike, WHY SHOULD THE CITY PAY THEM.

[/ QUOTE ]

Guess what NON-LAZY people do, they find ANOTHER job

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

[ QUOTE ]
If they could fire them an replace them, don't you think they would have done that already.

[/ QUOTE ]

The MTA is trying to negotiate a settlement without acting as irrationally as the union. The union better hope that higher authority doesn't step in, or they are toast.

[ QUOTE ]
MTA work is [censored] [censored] work that usually causes health problems for workers. Most people don't want to do it, and certainly not for bad pay.

[/ QUOTE ]

You cite this without evidence. Another poster earlier cited 30 applicants for every MTA job opening, also without evidence. I believe him, also without evidence. Somebody is getting $50K a year for sitting in a toll booth making change and selling subway tokens. The major health threat he faces is gluteous-more-maximus. You think it would take more than a New York minute to find a replacement for him?

The TWU has gotten away with this crap before, in a time when the economy was fat and happy, and no one wanted to offend anyone. Times have changed, and the rare enlightened labor leaders are changing too. The cavemen in charge of the TWU are obsolete.

If they started firing illegal strikers, the only problem would be people getting hurt in the stampede of applicants for their jobs.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

Just because something has been a law for a long time doesn't make it a good law. Take an objective look at the law, what purpose it serves, what problems it causes.

Does the law achieve its objective? Why or why not?
Should it continue to be in existence?

Clearly, in my mind, it has failed because the law is fundamentally flawed.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

Think of the following. The city decides it isn't going to buy fire resist gear for firefighters. Its going to close down firehouses. It is going to get rid of death benefits for firefighters who die on the job.

Should they still be forced to go to work? What determines if a union is being greedy or if they are making reasonable requests? You? Or maybe the union and management should be able to negotiate since they actually have a clue about the work and conditions. Maybe we should butt out of thier business. If union demands get completely out of control, they can replace the laborers with scabs.

Meanwhile, with the law in place, why shouldn't the city do all of the above things in the first paragraph. What is the consequence if the union isn't satisfied? Nothing. Give them one reason to give up on a single point.

If my company could force me to work under penalty of huge fines and jailtime, then they would probably cut my pay in half. After all what would I do about it?

Your right, when people took the job they knew this regulation was in place. But they also had a different contract. The whole reason this is a problem is their contract is up and they have to renegotiate. I don't think anyone would have a problem if the law stated, "if you sign a five year contract you aren't allowed to strike during those five years." People have no clue what the contract will be like five years after they start work, and it is very difficult to just up and leave a job after working there for five, ten, or fifteen years. A major portion of thier compensation is retirement and medical benefits that are closely linked to years of service. If they quit, they lose everything.

Knowing this, the employer has major power over future contract negotiations. Conditions that were once acceptable can be withdrawn by management with virtual impunity. The worker is caught in a jam. The new contract is different then what he signed on for, he can't quit, and he can't strike. When you put people in a situation like that, there isn't a whole lot they can do.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

LOL are freaking kidding me, tell me lehighguy that this is bad pay and benefits....

SUBWAY-TRAIN OPERATOR starts
(yes green means go, red means stop, ok thats end of day 1 of your training)$52,644 a year,

5% RAISE EACH OF THE NEXT 2 YEARS
0000000000000 out of pocket for health insurance

and oh my god you have to wait till your 55 get your pension


these people are real freaking pathetic.....

http://www.nysun.com/article/24530

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

I don't know the specifics of thier contract or specific jobs. But I do know about my grandfather that worked for the MTA most of his life.

There is a reason they get paid more then joe blow in McDonalds. You have to go into the pit, get under some train, breath in all sorts of god awful crap that [censored] up your lungs, lie there welding some [censored] in the most awful conditions. My grandfather used to come home from work covered from head to toe in black soot. He wouldn't let anyone touch him. It was so ingrained it was impossible to get out.

The health conditions are horrible. The work is horrible. The conditions down in the tunnels are completely unsafe. A lot of these guys don't make it long after 55 because it screws up thier health. But I haven't seen any cameras going down into the pit or the tunnels.

I suspect that maybe the best people to determine if pay and benefits for the work are sufficient are the actual employees, union officials, and MTA officials. We should let them do this without interfering.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

sorry last time i was in NYC i don't remember seeing the train operators looking like they came out of a coal mine

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

You didn't see much of anything then. You really don't know what a majority of the 33,000 transit workers do. You haven't been in the pit or in the tunnels. Is the conductor job part of a rotation, is it based on senoirity, how does one get it? Do you have to do other jobs first? Is it done by lottery?

You don't have a [censored] clue do you. You've never done the work. You don't know any of the union regulations. You don't know how people get what jobs or how compensation is determined. You don't know about accident rates of health concerns.

For someone that knows jackshit about the situation, you sure think your a freaking expert. Why don't you let the actual experts, the union and the MTA, who actually know what they are talking about, come to an agreeement without interference by people without a freaking clue.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

As an aside, I think working at McDonalds most likely sucks really hard core. You'd have to pay me a ton of money to do it.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

http://members.dodo.net.au/~grindercom/NoFatChicks.jpg

Union worker having their cake and eating it [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

A major part of thier compensation is in the form of benefit and retirement packages that are based on years of service. Do you really think someone that has been working 19 years is going to walk off the job and give up thier 20 year package. In most companies, the way you handle that situation is by striking. That way you can use your bargaining leverage without forfieting your benefits package. If you quit and come back a day later you've legally given up your right to those benefits. That is why striking is a whole different legal status. It was created for that situation. A situation that comes up all the time. By outlawing the strike, they are ignoring simple facts about the workplace and how it operates.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

[ QUOTE ]

I don't know the specifics of thier contract or specific jobs. But I do know about my grandfather that worked for the MTA most of his life.

[/ QUOTE ]


Well, the specifics of their contract and their jobs are actually a lot more germane to this situation than your grandfather's job.

From fflaque's link:

(excerpt)"Consider their pay demands. The transit workers union has insisted on a 24% increase over three years, compared to the 5% over two years the MTA is offering. Union leaders claim they are only asking for pay rates commensurate with their peers in other mass transit networks in the region, like the Long Island Railroad or Metro-North, but all they have succeeded in doing is calling the public's attention to a pay scale that is already generous by the standards of many New Yorkers. A subway-train operator starts at $52,644 a year, more than double the starting salaries of police officers, fire fighters, and trash collectors. Instead of encouraging the public to ask why they should get the "meager" raise the MTA has proposed, the union actually has New Yorkers wondering why their starting salaries are so high even without the raise.

Similar questions are being raised by the fight over work rules. The union is agitated over an MTA proposal to combine the positions of train driver and conductor and to operate some trains without conductors at all. It turns out that such debate only makes New Yorkers wonder why the subway system still needs conductors. Washington's modern Metrorail system relies on computers to run the trains while a single operator makes announcements and opens and closes doors. Even that single operator looks superfluous when compared to the newest line of the Paris Metro, which will be operated entirely by computers.

Again with health care costs. The MTA hasn't even proposed changing the system for current employees; it is willing to continue paying their full premiums under a new contract. In exchange, it would ask new hires to chip in 2% of their wages for health care. While the union portrays this as an unpardonable sin - the president of the Transport Workers Union Local 100, Roger Toussaint, characterizes the MTA position on insurance premiums as "demanding that we give up our unborn" - New Yorkers are left wondering why they have to pay a portion of their own premiums, if they even have health benefits, and also subsidize a generous package for transit workers."(end excerpt)

http://www.nysun.com/article/24530

OK let's see...their starting pay is already more than twice that of firefighters, police, and trash collectors. We can presume that those jobs are at least about as hazardous and difficult as transit working, no? The 5% increase over the next 2 years they will be getting is too little; instead, they demand a 24% increase over 3 years. And for *new hires only* to begin paying 2% of their health care costs is apparently completely unacceptable to union negotiators.

My take at this point is that these guys are full of crap and that they're not negotiating in good faith or putting forth anything resembling reasonable requests or demands. They appear simply to be putting the screws to the city and all of its inhabitants.

As mentioned before, they knew that it was illegal to strike when they took the jobs. 400 million dollars a day is what their illegal strike is costing the residents of NYC. Maybe they should be sued for 400 million dollars a day, now there's an idea. If they don't like that prospect, they can either go back to work or just quit.

If the union honchos are really being as greedy, unreasonable, and *unconscionable* as it strongly appears, well all I can say is that any "scab" is better than those union leader bastards by about a million miles.

I did see your point in the other post about conditions, pay, etc...but comparing it to the NYFD and NYPD really helps put it in perspective.

If the union guys are going to put the screws to the people of NYC so unmercifully, I think the city should put the screws to them. Hard.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

How exactely is comparing them to the police the same? Certainly, being a police officer is dangerous. But you don't have to work underground, you don't have the breath in chemical you know are hazardous. They can retire at 55, but a lot of them don't live very long because thier lungs and stuff are so [censored] up from the work.

Being a cop and working down in the pit are entirely different jobs with entirely different working conditions and hazards. It would be like comparing the pay scale of a cop to a coal miner, it is meaningless. The only reasonable metric is how much are workers in other cities paid for similair work (adjusting for cost of living).

If union demands were unreasonable, it would be easy to replace the workers with scabs. They would be doing it (they may yet). If they aren't unreasonable, then they won't be able to find people to replace them, and they will have to negotiate with the strikers. It's that simple. It takes care of itself without having to involve the government, forclose on some poor stiffs house, or throw someone in jail.

There is no need for us to pretend we are experts on MTA compensation schemes or working conditions. We don't need to dictate "fairness" from afar. It will work itself out naturally.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

[ QUOTE ]
They can retire at 55, but a lot of them don't live very long because thier lungs and stuff are so [censored] up from the work.

[/ QUOTE ]

Proof? Facts? Data?

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

As I stated in my post, there are reasons why it is more complicated then, "he can quit and find a better job". The concept of a strike is based around that fact.

If things got bad enough, would police or firefighters strike too? What if the city said it was going to lay off half the force? Are you going to go neighborhood to neighboorhood trying to determine wether a cop really "needs" backup. Strikes exist for a reason. They aren't done arbitraily. Do you think the TWU, facing bankruptcy by the end of the week, its leaders facing jailtime, did this because they thought it would be fun. Most likely, they think it is important enough to risk thier very existence.

Let the union and the MTA work it out. If the union is being truly unreasonable, it should be easy to find scabs, right?

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know the specifics of thier contract or specific jobs. But I do know about my grandfather that worked for the MTA most of his life.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you don't know about your grandfather. You know what you remember him saying, which might not be what he really said, which might or might not have any bearing on reality. Nothing personal, but if you weren't there, you don't have a clue what the actual conditions and events were, or how second-hand reports were tempered by personal feelings, etc.

Have you ever worked for the MTA? If not, any statements on the working conditions, pay, etc., are highly questionable.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

I went to visit my grandfather in the pits. Saw him repairing the trains. Watched him come home at night covered in soot. I met co-workers with messed up health because of the chemicals.

Why the rush to discredit me with no real information to back up your claims?

Edit: increased length
 

I can't give you that. I'm not a union expert or an MTA official. I know from visiting my grandfather in the pits and seeing the work they do that they are constantly exposed to horrendous levels of dirt and chemicals and smoke and soot. As a union rep my grandfather dealt with tons of cases of guys that got sick or injured at work. I never saw the tunnels, but I can only imagine it is worse down there.

Can I provide you a report, no, I was ten. However, I'm sure the union would provide you with the information if you requested it (might take awhile given the current situation, but if your willing to wait). You see the MTA and the union actually have a [censored] clue on these matters, have actual data and knowledge that effect thier decision making process. They don't try to make grand sweeping judgements about the fairness of a contract based on little more then hearsay, conjecture, and emotional feelings towards the concept of unions.

So if you want to have an informed opinion, you have to do your own [censored] research. You have to the work in. That goes double time if you want to doubt what I'm telling you, because you have no other source with firsthand knowledge.

I don't have to prove my point to you. You have to prove your own opinion to yourself. If you have doubts, if you need data, you have to do that for yourself. The purpose of posting here isn't to fight, it is to learn and grow and find out about opinions and topics and facts you don't know about. You owe it to yourself to try and have an informed opinion. If your only goal is to try and increase the size of your e-penis by arguing on an internet message board, then I'm done with this thread. If you want to learn and grow, go do it yourself, I can't force you to open your eyes.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

[ QUOTE ]
Strikes exist for a reason. They aren't done arbitraily. Do you think the TWU, facing bankruptcy by the end of the week, its leaders facing jailtime, did this because they thought it would be fun. Most likely, they think it is important enough to risk thier very existence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Strikes exist for a reason: greed and power. The major remaining issues in this strike are health and pension benefits for future hires. Why would the current members care about this? They don't. Only the union leadership cares, because it gives them more control over the membership into the future.

To be blunt, this is not an issue that can be discussed, let alone understood, by anyone that has not been a union member. The agenda of many modern labor unions is not rational, and cannot be analysed or understood without experiencing it. I speak from personal experience. I have worked several union jobs and been kept in the dark, if not lied to, by my "representatives".

The leadership of some unions are aware of the current economic environment, and capable of dealing with it rationally. Others, such as the TWU, are ignorant and base their policy on testosterone. They are doomed for extinction.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

Are a lot of union leaders stupid as [censored], of course. I'd say most today are. My mother and fathers unions are completely incompetent.

Does that mean it should be against the law for them to strike? No. You and I have no way of evaluating the working conditions, compensation, or fairness of the MTA-TWU contract. We aren't equiped, and we should stop pretending we are. Unless you've actually worked for the MTA and truly understand the issues, your opinion is meaningless, as is mine and everyone else's.

If the unions demands are too aggressive the MTA will replace them with scabs. If they aren't they will have a hard time finding replacement workers, and they will have to renogotiate with the union. Some strikes are smart, some are stupid. Either way it is self-corrective, you don't need government intervention.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

I'm going to sleep. I'm going to make a summary post tommorrow. Then I'm done with the thread.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are a lot of union leaders stupid as [censored], of course. I'd say most today are. My mother and fathers unions are completely incompetent.

Does that mean it should be against the law for them to strike? No. You and I have no way of evaluating the working conditions, compensation, or fairness of the MTA-TWU contract. We aren't equiped, and we should stop pretending we are. Unless you've actually worked for the MTA and truly understand the issues, your opinion is meaningless, as is mine and everyone else's.

If the unions demands are too aggressive the MTA will replace them with scabs. If they aren't they will have a hard time finding replacement workers, and they will have to renogotiate with the union. Some strikes are smart, some are stupid. Either way it is self-corrective, you don't need government intervention.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm assuming government intervention here refers to the anti-strike laws, which I find to be helpful - it means that the strike will be short. I believe in most labor negotiations there reaches a point very quickly where either labor or management cannot possibly benefit - where the lost wages or producitivity go beyond the contract demands of either side. In this strike it will come much sooner. The law is a deterrent against strikes but not a law against striking (e.g. jail time).

I'm not quite sure about your position on this one, lehigh. You're trying to take the side of 'Well, we don't know anything about the negotiations, but the workers have dangerous conditions.' Their demands appear unreasonable - but that's the nature of a demand in a collective bargaining situation.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

[ QUOTE ]
How exactely is comparing them to the police the same? Certainly, being a police officer is dangerous. But you don't have to work underground, you don't have the breath in chemical you know are hazardous. They can retire at 55, but a lot of them don't live very long because thier lungs and stuff are so [censored] up from the work.

Being a cop and working down in the pit are entirely different jobs with entirely different working conditions and hazards. It would be like comparing the pay scale of a cop to a coal miner, it is meaningless. The only reasonable metric is how much are workers in other cities paid for similair work (adjusting for cost of living).

[/ QUOTE ]

Cops get shot at, spat upon; firefighters have to breathe very hazardous substances when putting out some fires. The firefighters at Ground Zero had to breathe extremely toxic chemical brews as well as dealing massive dust, some of it poisonous. The damage they incurred from that cannot be fully known yet. Firefighters also have to work very unnatural hours, which is bad for the health: their shifts are like 24 hours on, a day or two off. And they can't truly sleep during those 24 hours as they must be ready to jump and go at any instant.

I would seriously doubt that being a transit worker *today* is more hazardous than being a cop, or that it is worse for the health than being a firefighter.


[ QUOTE ]
If union demands were unreasonable, it would be easy to replace the workers with scabs. They would be doing it (they may yet). If they aren't unreasonable, then they won't be able to find people to replace them, and they will have to negotiate with the strikers. It's that simple. It takes care of itself without having to involve the government, forclose on some poor stiffs house, or throw someone in jail.

[/ QUOTE ]

First, they are violating the T of C of their employment in that they KNEW it was illegal to strike when they took the jobs. Second, they are causing truly immense financial damage to the city and its residents. That damage of 400 million dollars a day must FAR outweigh the difference between the contracts they are seeking.

I think the use of the term "scabs" is very low and a poor reflection on the person using it. You probably just do it because that's what you've been hearing around you. But every time I hear union people say that, I think to myself, who the hell do you think you are? What, do you think only YOU and other union members have a RIGHT to that job? You think it appropriate to denigrate someone else taking a job they obviously need and want? What the heck is with this "entitlement" and superior attitude, anyway?

I am also reminded of years ago, when a bunch of total dirtbags were picketing Binion's Horseshoe (culinary union) and screaming "Scab!" directly at anyone who dared walk through the doors. Well, I was staying there for a few weeks as a player. I certainly didn't appreciate these scumbags screaming "Scab!" right in my face everytime I went in or out of the casino to visit the Golden Nugget or buy some sundries. In fact one time a cop had to intervene as he thought we were going to come to blows: I was fed up and yelling back right in the assholes' face, as they wouldn't shut up even after I explained I was a hotel guest and not a worker. All they did was scream "Scab!" in my face even louder. I think the cop intevened as he was afraid I was about to clock the guy who was directly in my face. This guy looked like a scruffy redneck hillbilly with bad teeth, bad breath, and a nasty disposition. If somebody had shot these wastes of skin, it would have been a great favor to all of humanity.


[ QUOTE ]
There is no need for us to pretend we are experts on MTA compensation schemes or working conditions. We don't need to dictate "fairness" from afar. It will work itself out naturally.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, we're not experts, but what they are doing is illegal and in contradiction of the law when they took the jobs. In essence, they are blackmailing the city and its residents. Due to the incredible amount of damage they are inflicting, it isn't just a matter of waiting and having things "work themselves out" at their own molasses pace.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

The conditions of being a cop and being a transit worker are totally different. Do daredevils have bad working conditions, yes. Is a comparison between a daredevil and a coal miner remotely useful, no. The only useful metric in this situation would be seeing what other workers in other cities are paid for similair work, then adjust it for cost of living in NYC.

Despite your dislike of the term scab there is really no refutation of the logic here. If union demands are unreasonable they will be replaced. If they are really paid rediculous amounts then the line for new applicants will go around the block. That's how you break a strike and a union. It works, people have done it before.

Re: Walking the Picket Line
 

Think of it like poker and it all makes sense. If you opponent knows that you can't go all-in he will go all-in every hand. Even with complete crap, even when he is totally out of line. As long as he knows you won't go all the way (which is what the strike legislation says) he will bully you around all day with impunity.

You don't know if thier demands are unreasonable. You don't know thier working conditions. You don't know how long it has been since they got a pay increase. Let's break it down:
If the MTA gives you a 4%/year pay increase, but makes you start paying 6% of your income into pension, you just took a 2% paycut. Not factoring in inflation. If they haven't gotten a raise in awhile, then inflation is like getting a paycut. Maybe they switched to a new health plan that the workers don't like. Maybe they change retirement rules. Do I know the specifics of thier contracts, no. That is the whole point. None of us really know except for random excerpts we read in the paper. And have even less of a clue about working conditions. You don't deserve to have an opinion on the fairness of the contract, your just running your mouth.

Only two people deserve to have an opinion, the union and the MTA. Imposing unfathomable penalties on one side distorts the whole process. And just because you aren't throwing people in jail doesn't mean you aren't destroying thier lives. At $25,000/day, how long until those transit workers are thrown out of thier homes. When I quit my job I wasn't charged $25,000/day, why should they?