NYC transit strike

PoBoy321 · #1 12-20-2005, 09:24 PM

[ 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.

tylerdurden · #2 12-20-2005, 10:43 PM

[ 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?

Dynasty · #3 12-20-2005, 10:51 PM

[ 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.

tylerdurden · #4 12-21-2005, 12:02 AM

[ 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")?

Roman · #5 12-21-2005, 01:22 AM

[ 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.

PoBoy321 · #6 12-21-2005, 02:11 AM

[ 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.

Roman · #7 12-21-2005, 03:08 AM

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.