Walking the Picket Line

[lehighguy]

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

[Triumph36]

[ 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.

[MMMMMM]

[ 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.

[lehighguy]

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.

[lehighguy]

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?