NYC transit strike
 

Bloomberg today said that the transit workers' strike was crippling the city's economy (which is true), and blamed the union for (I'm paraphrasing here) stealing productivity from the city's people.

Hey Bloomberg, do you think the people of NYC are *entitled* to the labor of the transit union? That they should be forced to work?

The *real* blame, of course, lies with government. Government decided to put all the eggs in one basket and have a monopoly transit system. By eliminating any alternatives, the city put itself into a position to be blackmailed by the transit workers.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
The *real* blame, of course, lies with government. Government decided to put all the eggs in one basket and have a monopoly transit system. By eliminating any alternatives, the city put itself into a position to be blackmailed by the transit workers.

[/ QUOTE ]
Strikes can't occur against private businesses?

Re: NYC transit strike
 

It's not the public/private issue he was referring to but the all the eggs in one basket issue. If there were multiple companies running various parts of the infrastructure, the strike would most likely be less encompassing.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]

Hey Bloomberg, do you think the people of NYC are *entitled* to the labor of the transit union? That they should be forced to work?


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, there is a state law in New York which does make it illegal for them to strike.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

The city just fined those lazy bastards $1 million. Hopefully, this will be a blow to all unions.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, there is a state law in New York which does make it illegal for them to strike.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. An oppressive law. How can legitimately you force someone to labor against their will?

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
Strikes can't occur against private businesses?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course they can. In a unmonopolized market, though, a strike against a single business can't cripple the entire city. Further, the threat of a competitor snatching up marketshare while the stiking workers shut the company down gives management huge incentives to get the strike overwith (and the threat that the employer won't be able to recover if the strike lasts too long gives the workers huge incentives to get to agreement as well).

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, there is a state law in New York which does make it illegal for them to strike.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. An oppressive law. How can legitimately you force someone to labor against their will?

[/ QUOTE ]

They're not being forced to work. They simply aren't being allowed to strike. They have the freedom to quite their job if they don't want it.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, there is a state law in New York which does make it illegal for them to strike.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. An oppressive law. How can legitimately you force someone to labor against their will?

[/ QUOTE ]

They're not being forced to work. They simply aren't being allowed to strike. They have the freedom to quite their job if they don't want it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there another (oppressive) law preventing them from being fired if they "strike" (as opposed to "not showing up")?

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, there is a state law in New York which does make it illegal for them to strike.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. An oppressive law. How can legitimately you force someone to labor against their will?

[/ QUOTE ]

They're not being forced to work. They simply aren't being allowed to strike. They have the freedom to quite their job if they don't want it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there another (oppressive) law preventing them from being fired if they "strike" (as opposed to "not showing up")?

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont understand how this law is oppressive. A strike would cripple the economy of the city, thus the workers are not allowed to strike.
Their salary increase demands are pretty damn steep if you ask me, they will never get what they demand.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]

I dont understand how this law is oppressive. A strike would cripple the economy of the city, thus the workers are not allowed to strike.
Their salary increase demands are pretty damn steep if you ask me, they will never get what they demand.


[/ QUOTE ]

My understanding that the strike was mainly over pension and benefits.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

Not realy, initially they wanted 8% salary increase a year for 3 years. The MTA offered 3 percent, 4 percent and 3.5 percent, considerably lower than what the union demanded. The previous proposal included 3 percent raises each year.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

The city must have thought that because there are laws against striking in New York, that they can exploit the workers forever without any consequences.

I think it is repulsive that a state can have laws that punish workers to such a high magnitude.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

It's amazing that, despite the fact that Unions are all but gone in this country, people can still find time to hate them.

Anyway...This quote clearly shows that, considered just from a practical standpoint, it is the city leadership that doing harm to the city, not the Union.

"Indeed, not just Mr. Toussaint but some other New Yorkers are questioning whether it was worthwhile for the authority to go to war over the issue when the authority's pension demands would apparently save less over the next three years than what the New York City Police Department will spend on extra overtime during the first two days of the strike."STEVEN GREENHOUSE NewYorkTimes.

And That's not even including the big loss... which is to the city economy and the loss of the citizen mobility.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

This is my response from the other thread:

It is funny how liberal media usually fails to fully report all the details in union strikes. It is not enough to say a corporation or the MTA made this much of a profit last year, but also to show what average wages at different levels are for union members including all their benefits. Only then is there enough informtion to make judgements on wage fairness. But of course the reason such things generally aren't reported is that all the other blue collar workers who make far less would have little sympathy for the union's position.

The key element in this matter though is that public employees are rightly held to a different standard regarding strikes which can imperil people's lives and cause severe economic hardship for all other workers. The union is breaking the law pure and simple and deserves to be harshly treated for that alone.

But they are also forcing workers to walk in freezing tempartures or not get to work and lose pay during the holiday season. Shame on them and their selfishness.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
The city must have thought that because there are laws against striking in New York, that they can exploit the workers forever without any consequences.

I think it is repulsive that a state can have laws that punish workers to such a high magnitude.

[/ QUOTE ]

The subway operators are being "exploited" at a current salary of $62,438 a year. Train conductors make $53,000. Subway booth clerks make $50,720. Bus drivers make $62,551.

The increase in salary being asked for would push subway operators salaries up to $78,654 a year.

Exploitation indeed. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v7.../rolleyes1.gif

Re: NYC transit strike
 

Q.E.D.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

Re: NYC transit strike
 

They should treat these strikers the way Reagan handled the Air Traffic Controllers.

We should end the Tammany-like corruption and over spending in transit system.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
The *real* blame, of course, lies with government. Government decided to put all the eggs in one basket and have a monopoly transit system. By eliminating any alternatives, the city put itself into a position to be blackmailed by the transit workers

[/ QUOTE ]

And who would operate all the unprofitable routes? at the unprofitable times?

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The city must have thought that because there are laws against striking in New York, that they can exploit the workers forever without any consequences.

I think it is repulsive that a state can have laws that punish workers to such a high magnitude.

[/ QUOTE ]

The subway operators are being "exploited" at a current salary of $62,438 a year. Train conductors make $53,000. Subway booth clerks make $50,720. Bus drivers make $62,551.

The increase in salary being asked for would push subway operators salaries up to $78,654 a year.

Exploitation indeed. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v7.../rolleyes1.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

How do these wages compare to other jobs in the NYC area? What about in relation to the cost of living in that area?

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
How do these wages compare to other jobs in the NYC area? What about in relation to the cost of living in that area

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when has that mattered when lame points are being made?

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How do these wages compare to other jobs in the NYC area? What about in relation to the cost of living in that area

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when has that mattered when lame points are being made?

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think there are lame points, other than the idiot who called the strikers lazy bastards. My conservative views tend to cause me to look with suspicion on union strikes. On the other hand, the figures Dynasty posted piqued my interest because knowing what little I do about the NYC area and the cost of living, the requested figures dont seem unreasonable on the face of it. Having grown up in a very poor family, I may have some more sensitivity to this facet of the situation than others. And before anyone tries, I am not saying the workers are entitled to a certain wage. But if what they are making isnt commensurate with the general wage level in the area and the cost of living, then they should strike.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
And who would operate all the unprofitable routes? at the unprofitable times?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody, presumably. Is that a problem? Do unprofitable riders have a right to make others subsidize their travel?

Re: NYC transit strike
 

Yeah and stop delivering the mail to remote areas of the US too. Then Ray Zee would just be SOL. Government exists to promote the common good, though it should do it as cheaply as possible.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah and stop delivering the mail to remote areas of the US too. Then Ray Zee would just be SOL. Government exists to promote the common good, though it should do it as cheaply as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

FedEx seems to be able to profitably deliver packages to "remote areas". I don't really see a problem here. Is package delievery to the yukon some sort of basic human right that I'm supposed to pay for?

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, the figures Dynasty posted piqued my interest because knowing what little I do about the NYC area and the cost of living, the requested figures dont seem unreasonable on the face of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this is exactly why Dynasty is being lame in this regard, his post is not meant to pique interest it's merely attempting to get the 'f*%# me, that's a lot for driving a train' reaction

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
FedEx seems to be able to profitably deliver packages to "remote areas".

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you'll find that even FedEx has 'loss leaders'

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, the figures Dynasty posted piqued my interest because knowing what little I do about the NYC area and the cost of living, the requested figures dont seem unreasonable on the face of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this is exactly why Dynasty is being lame in this regard, his post is not meant to pique interest it's merely attempting to get the 'f*%# me, that's a lot for driving a train' reaction

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: NYC transit strike
 

Ah, LA's answer to public transport

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FedEx seems to be able to profitably deliver packages to "remote areas".

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you'll find that even FedEx has 'loss leaders'

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably. Is this somehow *helping* your argument?

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
Probably. Is this somehow *helping* your argument?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. But it wasn't meant to. I'm just pointing out an inconsistancy as earlier you said

[ QUOTE ]
FedEx seems to be able to profitably deliver packages to "remote areas". I don't really see a problem here. Is package delievery to the yukon some sort of basic human right that I'm supposed to pay for?

[/ QUOTE ]

So quite *probably* you do accept that you are 'overcharged' by FedEx on their more profitable routes to compensate for their unprofitable ones.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Probably. Is this somehow *helping* your argument?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. But it wasn't meant to. I'm just pointing out an inconsistancy as earlier you said

[ QUOTE ]
FedEx seems to be able to profitably deliver packages to "remote areas". I don't really see a problem here. Is package delievery to the yukon some sort of basic human right that I'm supposed to pay for?

[/ QUOTE ]

So quite *probably* you do accept that you are 'overcharged' by FedEx on their more profitable routes to compensate for their unprofitable ones.

[/ QUOTE ]

FedEx may find that the loss they take on package delivery to bumblefuck, montana is more than made up for by the increased business they get from a large-scale customers who ship tons of stuff on highly profitable routes, but *require* the occaisional package deliver to the middle of nowhere, and therefore will take their entire business elsewhere if a vendor will not deliver there.

How is this inconsistent?

If I am subsidizing FedEx delivery, and I get sick of it, I can go find another delivery service that only delivers where I want it. I'm not *forced* to subsidize it.

Re: NYC transit strike
 

[ QUOTE ]
If I am subsidizing FedEx delivery, and I get sick of it, I can go find another delivery service that only delivers where I want it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, good luck with that.

Although off course, what am I thinking, you'll just use the national mail service.