Walking the Picket Line

[lehighguy]

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.

[MMMMMM]

[ 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.

[lehighguy]

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.

[ 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?

[lehighguy]

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?

[ 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.

[lehighguy]

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?

[lehighguy]

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.

[benfranklin]

[ 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.

[lehighguy]

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.